Some Difficulties Understanding

[GracePeace]

John teaches "if they were of us, they would have continued with us", which someone could argue necessarily follows from, "I will lose none, but will raise them up on the last day", but, also, Jesus says disciples who do not abide (by faith in the Name of God's Son and by walking in love 1 John 3:23,24) are cut off, dry up, and are thrown in the fire, and John says this teaching applies to God's children (1 John 2:28), warning them that if they do not abide in Christ they will draw back in shame at His return.

So, on one hand, John seemingly allows for the possibility that the children might not remain, warning them of the consequences of not remaining, but, on the other hand, John seemingly disallows that anyone who is born of God might not remain, because if they are of "us", they will remain, and not "went out from among us" (1 John 2:19). (I'm not sure if this might be related to "I will in no wise cast them out.")

 

[Davy]

You may not agree with what I'm going to say. It requires a lot of Bible study.

There's this matter called predestination that comes around with a lot of speculation at times. In Ephesians and Romans, Apostle Paul says those called was from the foundation of the world, and are elect. But in Matthew 24:24 Jesus specifies a deeper elect group He calls the "very elect". And Jesus shows those "very elect" cannot be deceived.

In Matthew 22:14 Lord Jesus makes a distinction among believers, saying many are 'called', but few are 'chosen'. In John 17, Lord Jesus reveals that His 'chosen' sent ones, His Apostles, were owned by The Father originally, and The Father gave them to Jesus, and He sent them into the world, which is the meaning of the word for apostle, to be sent. This makes a distinction between those 'called' only, compared with those who are 'chosen'. Per Acts 9, Jesus said that Saul (became Paul) was His "chosen vessel", making Paul His Apostle.

When Jesus first met His Apostles and commanded them to follow Him, they left off what they were doing and immediately followed Jesus. That shows ownership. Because Paul was actually hunting down Christians on the road to Damascus when Jesus struck Paul blind and spoke to him, that means Jesus directly intervened with Paul, removing his doubt about Him and Christians. That does not happen for every believer. It mostly happens only with those who are 'chosen'.

Yet in Apostle Paul's Epistles, he is constantly reminding those in the Church to remain focused on Christ, and don't become apostates by falling away. Paul would not preach that falling away warning if those could not fall away. So if those believers can still fall away from Jesus, then it means those are not... 'chosen', but 'called' only. One who is called only can... still fall away from Christ, is what that means. It strongly suggests that Christ's "very elect" represent His chosen ones that cannot fall away.

In Revelation 13:4-8, we are shown the "dragon" (devil) will have power over all nations and peoples at the end of this world for 42 months, and the whole... world will worship him, EXCEPT those who names were written in the book of life from the foundation of the world. Which believers would that be, the called and the chosen, or just the chosen of His "very elect" that can never fall away? It is the latter, Christ's "very elect" that cannot fall away. They are chosen, He already owns them, which is why He can directly intervene in their lives.

This is why there is confusion in The New Testament about the predestined elect and the called elect. It's a matter of one is innocent until proven guilty; those called only are deemed elect until or if they fall away. And per Paul in 2 Thess.2, there will be many believers that will fall away once the coming "man of sin" shows up in Jerusalem exalting himself as God in the Jew's new 3rd temple.

This is why it will only be the "very elect" that will reject the coming false-Messiah who will play Jesus at the end. They already know who that coming "man of sin" will be (he ain't here yet today either).

 

[GracePeace]

You may not agree with what I'm going to say. It requires a lot of Bible study.

There's this matter called predestination that comes around with a lot of speculation at times. In Ephesians and Romans, Apostle Paul says those called was from the foundation of the world, and are elect. But in Matthew 24:24 Jesus specifies a deeper elect group He calls the "very elect". And Jesus shows those "very elect" cannot be deceived.

In Matthew 22:14 Lord Jesus makes a distinction among believers, saying many are 'called', but few are 'chosen'. In John 17, Lord Jesus reveals that His 'chosen' sent ones, His Apostles, were owned by The Father originally, and The Father gave them to Jesus, and He sent them into the world, which is the meaning of the word for apostle, to be sent. This makes a distinction between those 'called' only, compared with those who are 'chosen'. Per Acts 9, Jesus said that Saul (became Paul) was His "chosen vessel", making Paul His Apostle.

When Jesus first met His Apostles and commanded them to follow Him, they left off what they were doing and immediately followed Jesus. That shows ownership. Because Paul was actually hunting down Christians on the road to Damascus when Jesus struck Paul blind and spoke to him, that means Jesus directly intervened with Paul, removing his doubt about Him and Christians. That does not happen for every believer. It mostly happens only with those who are 'chosen'.

Yet in Apostle Paul's Epistles, he is constantly reminding those in the Church to remain focused on Christ, and don't become apostates by falling away. Paul would not preach that falling away warning if those could not fall away. So if those believers can still fall away from Jesus, then it means those are not... 'chosen', but 'called' only. One who is called only can... still fall away from Christ, is what that means. It strongly suggests that Christ's "very elect" represent His chosen ones that cannot fall away.

In Revelation 13:4-8, we are shown the "dragon" (devil) will have power over all nations and peoples at the end of this world for 42 months, and the whole... world will worship him, EXCEPT those who names were written in the book of life from the foundation of the world. Which believers would that be, the called and the chosen, or just the chosen of His "very elect" that can never fall away? It is the latter, Christ's "very elect" that cannot fall away. They are chosen, He already owns them, which is why He can directly intervene in their lives.

This is why there is confusion in The New Testament about the predestined elect and the called elect. It's a matter of one is innocent until proven guilty; those called only are deemed elect until or if they fall away. And per Paul in 2 Thess.2, there will be many believers that will fall away once the coming "man of sin" shows up in Jerusalem exalting himself as God in the Jew's new 3rd temple.

This is why it will only be the "very elect" that will reject the coming false-Messiah who will play Jesus at the end. They already know who that coming "man of sin" will be (he ain't here yet today either).

So, with respect to the verses I was asking about, when Christ says He will lose none, but, also, branches (disciples) can be cut off, how would you approach those? How can I believe that Christ will lose none when He also says branches can be cut off if THEY don't abide. This sounds more like Christ is not the one keeping them, but that they are keeping themselves. It's not passive. Yeah, you could say they are keeping themselves by God's grace that is granted to them, but, still, that is not Christ monergistically keeping them... so, then, Christ is not the one keeping them... in which case, I could say, "Yes, Christ won't lose any--because Christ is the Word (made flesh), so THE WORD cannot lose anyone who holds to the Word in their daily life (believing in it and walking in it)." I don't know any other way of reconciling those verses.

 

[GracePeace]

So, with respect to the verses I was asking about, when Christ says He will lose none, but, also, branches (disciples) can be cut off, how would you approach those? How can I believe that Christ will lose none when He also says branches can be cut off if THEY don't abide. This sounds more like Christ is not the one keeping them, but that they are keeping themselves. It's not passive. Yeah, you could say they are keeping themselves by God's grace that is granted to them, but, still, that is not Christ monergistically keeping them... so, then, Christ is not the one keeping them... in which case, I could say, "Yes, Christ won't lose any--because Christ is the Word (made flesh), so THE WORD cannot lose anyone who holds to the Word in their daily life (believing in it and walking in it)." I don't know any other way of reconciling those verses.

@Davy In other words, as Revelation 3:10 says, "Because you have kept my word about patient endurance, I will keep you..." : the Word keeps those who keep the Word.

 

[saved by grace 101]

John teaches "if they were of us, they would have continued with us", which someone could argue necessarily follows from, "I will lose none, but will raise them up on the last day", but, also, Jesus says disciples who do not abide (by faith in the Name of God's Son and by walking in love 1 John 3:23,24) are cut off, dry up, and are thrown in the fire, and John says this teaching applies to God's children (1 John 2:28), warning them that if they do not abide in Christ they will draw back in shame at His return.

So, on one hand, John seemingly allows for the possibility that the children might not remain, warning them of the consequences of not remaining, but, on the other hand, John seemingly disallows that anyone who is born of God might not remain, because if they are of "us", they will remain, and not "went out from among us" (1 John 2:19). (I'm not sure if this might be related to "I will in no wise cast them out.")

A person in sincerity accepts Christ as their saviour. They desire to surrender their life to him. God knows that, he will keep them safe, and they will not be lost

A young person is forced to go to church by their parents, they make some friends there who are all committed christians, they don't want to be the odd one out so on that basis they too make a commitment to God but it is obviously a shallow one. Will God place them 'officially' in a saved state? Yes.
But when the time of testing comes, because of their shallow commitment they stop believing and walk away(Luke8:13) Hence there are biblical assurances, and also warnings

 

[ScottA]

John teaches "if they were of us, they would have continued with us", which someone could argue necessarily follows from, "I will lose none, but will raise them up on the last day", but, also, Jesus says disciples who do not abide (by faith in the Name of God's Son and by walking in love 1 John 3:23,24) are cut off, dry up, and are thrown in the fire, and John says this teaching applies to God's children (1 John 2:28), warning them that if they do not abide in Christ they will draw back in shame at His return.

So, on one hand, John seemingly allows for the possibility that the children might not remain, warning them of the consequences of not remaining, but, on the other hand, John seemingly disallows that anyone who is born of God might not remain, because if they are of "us", they will remain, and not "went out from among us" (1 John 2:19). (I'm not sure if this might be related to "I will in no wise cast them out.")

John was an apostle (meaning: one sent) with a distinct commission to follow and serve. Therefore he expressed that focus accordingly. Which is not to say that others were not also sent and given their own commission, those of different spiritual gifts for instance.

The point being, Christ had left John in this case to a specific task, a task that would and did have opposition that he would have to endure to the end. That was his mission and it was of the utmost importance, of the kind "let not man put asunder." In other words, it was a warning against all possible assailants.

The apostle Paul also spoke in a similar way--as a defense, a warning, and a confirmation of his authority given to him by Jesus. And yet even Paul did not "continue with" John, for they each were sent a different way--but each the way of Christ, each separate but One in him.

 

[GracePeace]

A person in sincerity accepts Christ as their saviour. They desire to surrender their life to him. God knows that, he will keep them safe, and they will not be lost

A young person is forced to go to church by their parents, they make some friends there who are all committed christians, they don't want to be the odd one out so on that basis they too make a commitment to God but it is obviously a shallow one. Will God place them 'officially' in a saved state? Yes.
But when the time of testing comes, because of their shallow commitment they stop believing and walk away(Luke8:13) Hence there are biblical assurances, and also warnings

I'm not 100% sure, but maybe I got the answer while I was answering one of the previous replies. It is hard to "believe" when every word stated has another word that dissolves the previous word you were supposed to believe.

 

[GracePeace]

And yet even Paul did not "continue with" John

You may not be intentionally doing it, but, if you look at the context, you're actually calling Paul an antichrist.

1 John 2:18Children, it is the last hour; and just as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have appeared. This is how we know it is the last hour. 19They went out from us, but they did not belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us. But their departure made it clear that none of them belonged to us.

 

[saved by grace 101]

I'm not 100% sure, but maybe I got the answer while I was answering one of the previous replies. It is hard to "believe" when every word stated has another word that dissolves the previous word you were supposed to believe.

A Jewish believer once said:
''The quran can be understand simply by reading the letter of it, the bible was not meant to be understood that way''
It does take interpretation of verses, and there meaning to bring differing things into cohesion. Something Im sure we all struggle with at times

 

[Davy]

So, with respect to the verses I was asking about, when Christ says He will lose none, but, also, branches (disciples) can be cut off, how would you approach those? How can I believe that Christ will lose none when He also says branches can be cut off if THEY don't abide. This sounds more like Christ is not the one keeping them, but that they are keeping themselves. It's not passive. Yeah, you could say they are keeping themselves by God's grace that is granted to them, but, still, that is not Christ monergistically keeping them... so, then, Christ is not the one keeping them... in which case, I could say, "Yes, Christ won't lose any--because Christ is the Word (made flesh), so THE WORD cannot lose anyone who holds to the Word in their daily life (believing in it and walking in it)." I don't know any other way of reconciling those verses.

It's like what the Scriptures show; those called only can... still fall away IF... they do not remain in Christ and instead fall into deception. That does not mean all who are called only will fall away, which is what you are assuming. What you are assuming is absolutism, like either all fall away or none do.

Those who fall away will be taught at Christ's future Millennial reign. One of the jobs of His very elect will be to teach the difference between the holy and the profane, the clean and unclean. Matthew 7 and Matthew 25 reveals there will be some believers that will fall away, and Jesus will shut the door upon them when He returns. The unprofitable servant of Matthew 25 is even shown cast to the "outer darkness" where the wicked will be. But like I said, the future Millennium will be a time of teaching. In 1 Corinthians 5, there was a member in the Church at Corinth that was having sexual intercourse with his mother, and Paul told that Church to cast him out to Satan so that his 'spirit' might be saved in the "day of the Lord Jesus." That means at Christ's future Millennial reign.

Now if you want to listen to all the prosperity preachers out there that promise Salvation to those who claim to believe, but still follow wickedness, then you have not yet understood what Lord Jesus showed that He will turn those away at His future return, per Matt.7 and the five foolish virgins of Matt.25.

 

[MatthewG]

John teaches "if they were of us, they would have continued with us", which someone could argue necessarily follows from, "I will lose none, but will raise them up on the last day", but, also, Jesus says disciples who do not abide (by faith in the Name of God's Son and by walking in love 1 John 3:23,24) are cut off, dry up, and are thrown in the fire, and John says this teaching applies to God's children (1 John 2:28), warning them that if they do not abide in Christ they will draw back in shame at His return.

So, on one hand, John seemingly allows for the possibility that the children might not remain, warning them of the consequences of not remaining, but, on the other hand, John seemingly disallows that anyone who is born of God might not remain, because if they are of "us", they will remain, and not "went out from among us" (1 John 2:19). (I'm not sure if this might be related to "I will in no wise cast them out.")

I think it would be those who would renounce Jesus in that day and age. In revelation during the destruction of Jerusalem there was time people could have repented and changed their mind but they instead cursed God…

Even the elect has the possible consequences of also changing their mind in repenting to go back to Law rather than God himself.

John came baptizing for people repenting coming back to God doesn’t mean they couldn’t also change their mind and walk away from God.


The 3,000 God saved for himself I believe were people who chose to continue to remain loyal cause they chose to be so.

 

[Davy]

@Davy In other words, as Revelation 3:10 says, "Because you have kept my word about patient endurance, I will keep you..." : the Word keeps those who keep the Word.

Isn't that some kind of 'mystical' idea you are creating for yourself? What did Lord Jesus mean by those 'keeping His Word'? Jesus meant that literally, so how's that?

It means... those at the Church of Philadelphia, LITERALLY... stayed in HIS Word, and were careful to not be deceived by MAN's word. Recall in John 8 what Jesus said to those Jews who believed on Him, that if they stayed in His Word they would be His disciples indeed, and they would know the TRUTH, and the TRUTH would make them free (John 8:31:32).

How does the disciple of Christ do that keeping of His Word? By Bible study Chapter by Chapter, line upon line, verse by verse, the method which God showed in Isaiah 28 which the leaders at Jerusalem didn't like and would not do, so The Word would be to them a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense, and make them fall away, snared, and taken.

How many of today's Churches do you know of that teach all of God's Word chapter chapter, verse by verse? A few still do, and it will be those there who heed that who will know the TRUTH. It actually is that simple. The problem is that many brethren are lazy, and instead let the preacher tell them what The Bible says without checking those preachers out in God's Word for themselves. That is a sad thing to do to one's soul for those who have the ability to do their own Bible study and verify in God's Word, like those of Berea which Apostle Paul commended for doing (Acts 17:10-12).

It's kind of late in the day, for those who have yet to get into disciplined Bible study for themselves. There's been plenty of Bible study tools available, which I recommend as basic a KJV Bible and a Strong's Exhaustive Concordance.

 

[Davy]

I think it would be those who would renounce Jesus in that day and age. In revelation during the destruction of Jerusalem there was time people could have repented and changed their mind but they instead cursed God…

Even the elect has the possible consequences of also changing their mind in repenting to go back to Law rather than God himself.

John came baptizing for people repenting coming back to God doesn’t mean they couldn’t also change their mind and walk away from God.


The 3,000 God saved for himself I believe were people who chose to continue to remain loyal cause they chose to be so.

So Saul (later known as Apostle Paul) 'chose'... to let Jesus strike him down blind on the road to Damascus, which Saul was on his way to hunt down Christians, and bring them captive for trial to the Pharisees and priests in Jerusalem?

So Jonah chose... to obey God and preach to those at Nineveh right off the bat, and didn't try to kill himself with jumping out of the ship to keep from obeying that duty God gave him?

So Christ's Apostles didn't leave off what they were doing immediately, when He told them to follow Him, and they instead just 'chose' to not question Him why He wanted them to follow Him?

Those did not make a 'choice'. They were drafted, not having anything to do with their own will. And that is a sign of Christ's chosen elect. He already owned them, like He showed in John 17. The Father owned them originally, and He gave them to Christ, and Jesus 'sent' them into the world He said, which is where the idea of the word apostle comes from, to be sent.

 

[MatthewG]

It’s a matter of choi

So Saul (later known as Apostle Paul) 'chose'... to let Jesus strike him down blind on the road to Damascus, which Saul was on his way to hunt down Christians, and bring them captive for trial to the Pharisees and priests in Jerusalem?

So Jonah chose... to obey God and preach to those at Nineveh right off the bat, and didn't try to kill himself with jumping out of the ship to keep from obeying that duty God gave him?

So Christ's Apostles didn't leave off what they were doing immediately, when He told them to follow Him, and they instead just 'chose' to not question Him why He wanted them to follow Him?

Those did not make a 'choice'. They were drafted, not having anything to do with their own will. And that is a sign of Christ's chosen elect. He already owned them, like He showed in John 17. The Father owned them originally, and He gave them to Christ, and Jesus 'sent' them into the world He said, which is where the idea of the word apostle comes from, to be sent.

Hello I know we don’t really talk much but have in the past.

What is your question?

I’m not even interested in reading if you can’t like correlate and help me why it is you are saying…

Everyone in the world has chosen…

Ever since Adam and Eve… even angels in heaving leaving their prior abode ?????

So I mean to get hypercritical may just be overdrawing the line.

 

[Taken]

Some Difficulties Understanding

To understand a man’s WORD, ask the source of the speaker…the man.

To understand Gods WORD, ask the source, of the speaker…the Lord God.

Matt 7:
[7] Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:

Caveat:

Jas 4:
[3] Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts.

The Lord God IS Spirit.
A mans conversation with God must be “spirit to Spirit”…
Or the conversation IS “amiss”…. Fruitless.

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[ScottA]

You may not be intentionally doing it, but, if you look at the context, you're actually calling Paul an antichrist.

1 John 2:18Children, it is the last hour; and just as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have appeared. This is how we know it is the last hour. 19They went out from us, but they did not belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us. But their departure made it clear that none of them belonged to us.

No, I absolutely am not. Read the rest of my post...and in the future think before you speak.

 

[GracePeace]

A Jewish believer once said:
''The quran can be understand simply by reading the letter of it, the bible was not meant to be understood that way''
It does take interpretation of verses, and there meaning to bring differing things into cohesion. Something Im sure we all struggle with at times

There aren't many clear conclusions I can arrive at at all (with respect to this question), because one place says this, and another says that.

 

[GracePeace]

What you are assuming is absolutism, like either all fall away or none do.

Well, I'm saying that if Christ says He will lose none, but, also, that some branches get cut off and thrown in the fire for their own fault of not abiding in Him, then maybe the correct understanding is that those who keep the Word will be kept by the Word that they keep (as.Rev 3 says).

In 1 Corinthians 5, there was a member in the Church at Corinth that was having sexual intercourse with his mother, and Paul told that Church to cast him out to Satan so that his 'spirit' might be saved in the "day of the Lord Jesus." That means at Christ's future Millennial reign.

I understand this as meaning that by reason of his public rejection and shaming (by the Church), and the destruction of of his flesh (by satan), he MIGHT repent so that his spirit might be saved at the judgment instead of being destroyed ("Who can destroy both body and soul").

Now if you want to listen to all the prosperity preachers out there that promise Salvation to those who claim to believe, but still follow wickedness, then you have not yet understood what Lord Jesus showed that He will turn those away at His future return, per Matt.7 and the five foolish virgins of Matt.25.

I've never espoused "health and wealth" (you can check all of my posts over the years) ; I was interacting with the texts, and with Monergism, in the OP.

 

[GracePeace]

Isn't that some kind of 'mystical' idea you are creating for yourself? What did Lord Jesus mean by those 'keeping His Word'? Jesus meant that literally, so how's that?

It means... those at the Church of Philadelphia, LITERALLY... stayed in HIS Word, and were careful to not be deceived by MAN's word. Recall in John 8 what Jesus said to those Jews who believed on Him, that if they stayed in His Word they would be His disciples indeed, and they would know the TRUTH, and the TRUTH would make them free (John 8:31:32).

How does the disciple of Christ do that keeping of His Word? By Bible study Chapter by Chapter, line upon line, verse by verse, the method which God showed in Isaiah 28 which the leaders at Jerusalem didn't like and would not do, so The Word would be to them a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense, and make them fall away, snared, and taken.

How many of today's Churches do you know of that teach all of God's Word chapter chapter, verse by verse? A few still do, and it will be those there who heed that who will know the TRUTH. It actually is that simple. The problem is that many brethren are lazy, and instead let the preacher tell them what The Bible says without checking those preachers out in God's Word for themselves. That is a sad thing to do to one's soul for those who have the ability to do their own Bible study and verify in God's Word, like those of Berea which Apostle Paul commended for doing (Acts 17:10-12).

It's kind of late in the day, for those who have yet to get into disciplined Bible study for themselves. There's been plenty of Bible study tools available, which I recommend as basic a KJV Bible and a Strong's Exhaustive Concordance.

I meant that Christ says He will lose none, yet branches get cut off and thrown in the fire, so the solution to this conundrum might be that Christ (the Word) loses none who keep the Word (Christ).

 

[GracePeace]

Some Difficulties Understanding

To understand a man’s WORD, ask the source of the speaker…the man.

To understand Gods WORD, ask the source, of the speaker…the Lord God.

Matt 7:
[7] Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:

Caveat:

Jas 4:
[3] Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts.

The Lord God IS Spirit.
A mans conversation with God must be “spirit to Spirit”…
Or the conversation IS “amiss”…. Fruitless.

Glory to God,
Taken

Thanks