POTS is Perseverance of the Saints.
1Jo 2:17, And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.
to be compared to:
1Jo 3:6, Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.
Agreed.
He that DOETH the will of the Father Abideth forever.
I hope you realize that this means that IF YOU DO THE WILL of the Father....
THEN you abide forever.
And re 1 John 3:6 we know it means that if we abide in Him we will not live a life of sin.
And, if my "theory" is based in scripture, then I didn't make it up.
Oh JBF,,,you're a smart guy.
You know anything can be proven by scripture.
Have you ever wondered why?
Here, doing the will of God is not defined as doing good works. Rather, it is defined by
Jhn 6:40,
And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.
Yes sir.
And I trust you know what BELIEVE meant back then...
If you believed you also obeyed.
If you did not believe you did not obey.
Oh. You think I'M confused?
Because I say we should obey God?
And DO His will?
And BELIEVE in HIM?
And ABIDE IN HIM?
That's confusion??
John 15:4
It would seem that we need to abide in Jesus so we could BEAR GOOD FRUIT.
This bearing good fruit does keep coming up.
And doing good deeds.
And BELIEVING in HIM.
And ABIDING in Him.
I don't think I'm confused.
Whether the latter phrase is included in Romans 8:1 does have a bearing on the meaning of the entire text. In one case, there is no condemnation even if you walk according to the flesh (which is denied elsewhere; but you can get the wrong impression from this text if the phrase is missing). In the other, one must walk according to the Spirit in order to be free of condemnation.
Yes. You're right, and it seems like we might agree.
NOT doing good is walking in the flesh.
I agree with you that it is stated in other places, so if the person truly wants to serve God, he will still get the correct message.
I was going to list some verses but since we agree I don't think it's necessary.
This is why I stress that the N.T. is a complete thought and cannot really be cut down into veses. But alas, this is how we learn and make theology.
If the latter meaning is true, then someone could miss out on salvation itself if they put their trust in the former meaning and presumptuously walk according to the flesh thinking that there is no condemnation for them.
Well AMEN and praise the Lord!
This is why I stress obedience and good deeds, be it in behavior or acts or omissions. Many times I've hard that one can do as he pleases and STILL BE SAVED. This would be OSAS which I understand to be different from PotS.
But, unfortunately, not everyone does. So language is all-important to me.
And the issue that I have is with the faulty manuscripts themselves: which take out specific words and phrases so that the potency of the scriptural message is lost.
If the manuscripts that lack information are correct, then the manuscripts that do not lack information were added to. Why then were not the plagues of the book of Revelation added to the people who translated them? But if the manuscripts that do not lack information are correct, then the manuscripts that lack it were taken away from. And the only evidence of that is that the translators will have their names taken out of the book of life and their part in the holy city is no longer secure.
I hesitate to say anything because you'll label me liberal again and I'm the farthest you'll see from liberal.
However, that does not mean I lack knowledge in church history or bible history.
Very little I admit...but enough to understand better.
You do know there was no printing press in the year 45 AD and onward.....
How were letters copied?
Who put them into a book?
Do you think there might have been one book with ALL the letters in it?
Imagine having to try to copy THAT!
Do you think mistakes ever happened?
We have one manuscript and bible that states we are to commit adultery because the word NOT was left out.
Think about this.
No plagues.
Now the latter thing is invisible; but we can determine by the former thing that those who used the textus receptus did not add to the word of the Lord when they translated such versions as the kjv. It only follows that those who translated the texts that lack information took away from the word of the Lord; and also that, if a person holds the translations that are lacking to be authoritative over and above the translations that include the information, that they also are taking away from the word of the Lord.
Not so. Perhaps those that have MORE information are the incorrect ones.
Perhaps someone thought to add the extra information so that the concept
would be better understood....Like Romans 8:1 ....... see.
Consider my Bible text for this reasoning:
Rev 22:18, For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
Rev 22:19, And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
I brought this up a couple of days ago and was advised it's only for the book of Revelation. Of course, it's for all of the letters of John and the others too. It was important to them that words be copied precisely...but it was also beyond their
capability to stop this.