Some Difficulties Understanding

[saved by grace 101]

"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge"

Absolutely, however, it is sad you wrote that after highlighting my words Jesus spoke in the parable of the sower. Sadly, I must assume you believe Jesus was also destroyed for a lack of knowledge, hence I would not consider it worthwhile to write anymore in response to your post

 

[XtraPercept]

For me, the teaching tells us thatall whom God gives to understanding the teachings of Jesus will not ever be.lost to him.

I concur with this, as the presence of the truth within is the assurance of never going back against it. What asininity would it be to possess the greatest of all treasures and then toss it for dirty rags?

But those who cherish dirty rags cannot perceive the value of genuine truth because of where they place their faith.

 

[Davy]

The reply addressed user @bdavidc, so idk why you would make yourself the center of the matter.

Yes, you are right. My bad. I apologize.

Empty allegations.

You're still trying to take control of the thread / change the topic--and I'm still not going to let that happen. You're off topic.

Not really, I simply addressed the main topic of this thread, which is about difficulties in understanding, is it not? Yes, it is, as that is what you have as the title of the thread. So get off your high horse.

 

[bdavidc]

No, life is contingent upon abiding

@GracePeace, this has already been answered from the text itself, and I am not going to keep running the same circle.

You are stitching together passages that are addressing different issues and forcing them to say what they do not say. Ezekiel 18: 24 is about covenant righteousness under the law, not new birth in Christ. “When the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity… in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die.” It never says a word about regeneration, eternal life, being born of God. Scripture interprets Scripture. Jesus then comes and spells out the issue plainly: “I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand” ~John 10:28. Eternal life that can be lost is not eternal.

John 15 does not teach regenerate life being lost. Jesus Himself defines the categories. “Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away… If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered” ~John 15:2,6. Withering precedes burning. The branch is exposed as fruitless before judgment. Judas was “in” Christ externally as a disciple, yet Jesus said, “Ye are clean, but not all” ~John 13:10. Proximity is not life. Union is not assumed. The fire proves the absence of life, not the loss of it.

1 John 2:19 settles your claim directly. “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us” ~1 John 2:19. John does not say they lost life. He says their departure revealed what they always were. That is not Gnosticism talk. That is pastoral discernment rooted in new birth. Likewise, “Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin… and he cannot sin, because he is born of God” ~1 John 3:9. God’s seed remaining is the reason perseverance happens, not the reward for maintaining it.

You keep asserting that life is contingent on abiding, yet Scripture states the opposite. “He that hath the Son hath life” ~1 John 5:12. Abiding is the evidence of possessing the Son, not the mechanism that keeps Him. Scripture never says life is stored outside the believer on probation. It says believers are “kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation” ~1 Peter 1:5.

At this point the biblical answer has been given repeatedly and clearly. Continuing to assert that regenerate people lose eternal life directly contradicts Jesus’ own words and John’s plain statements. This teaching needs to stop on this forum, or you need to move on. Scripture is not unclear here, and we are not going to keep re-litigating what the text already settles.

 

[bdavidc]

Anyway, I don't want to get off topic. If you want to discuss OSAS / NOSAS, please join another thread--maybe

I did not start this thread, and I did not introduce OSAS or any system debate. I responded to claims made here by quoting Scripture and addressing what the text itself says.

Appealing to 1 John 2:19, John 5:24, and 1 John 3:9 is not shifting topics. It is answering the thread from the passages under discussion. Reframing a text-based response as “OSAS vs NOSAS” is an attempt to dodge the Scriptures already addressed.

This thread was started on these texts. They have been answered from Scripture. If you want to debate theological systems, that belongs in a different thread. This one is about what the Bible says, and that has already been made clear.

 

[GracePeace]

@GracePeace, this has already been answered from the text itself, and I am not going to keep running the same circle.

No, no answer has been given to the answer already furnished to your "answer"--ie, 1 John 5 says "the eternal life is in His Son", and this shows that the branch that does not abide in Him will not have the life that is only "in His Son".

You are stitching together passages that are addressing different issues and forcing them to say what they do not say.

We differ.

Ezekiel 18: 24 is about covenant righteousness under the law, not new birth in Christ. “When the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity… in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die.” It never says a word about regeneration, eternal life, being born of God. Scripture interprets Scripture.

I'm finding it difficult to believe that you don't actually understand the issue--ie, God is "the same yesterday, today, and forever", and you agree that He STILL forgets sin (as Ez 18 also states), yet you, arbitrarily, want to deny the other attribute of God, that He STILL forgets righteousness. When did God change? How is your belief reasonable?

Jesus then comes and spells out the issue plainly: “I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand” ~John 10:28. Eternal life that can be lost is not eternal.

This has already been addressed.

John 15 does not teach regenerate life being lost. Jesus Himself defines the categories. “Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away… If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered” ~John 15:2,6. Withering precedes burning. The branch is exposed as fruitless before judgment. Judas was “in” Christ externally as a disciple, yet Jesus said, “Ye are clean, but not all” ~John 13:10. Proximity is not life. Union is not assumed. The fire proves the absence of life, not the loss of it.

If your "take" were true and valid, why would John apply this to "little children" (1 Jn 2:28)?

1 John 2:19 settles your claim directly. “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us” ~1 John 2:19. John does not say they lost life. He says their departure revealed what they always were.

God forgets righteousness, so it becomes as if they had never believed.

That is not Gnosticism talk. That is pastoral discernment rooted in new birth. Likewise, “Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin… and he cannot sin, because he is born of God” ~1 John 3:9. God’s seed remaining is the reason perseverance happens, not the reward for maintaining it.

That is about Gnostics.

At this point the biblical answer has been given repeatedly and clearly. Continuing to assert that regenerate people lose eternal life directly contradicts Jesus’ own words and John’s plain statements. This teaching needs to stop on this forum, or you need to move on. Scripture is not unclear here, and we are not going to keep re-litigating what the text already settles.

I'm not sure how you have concluded that you have given satisfactory answers, but, no, you haven't.

 

[quietthinker]

You guys struggle inn your debates of this that and the other. Could the reason be that you have not factored the reality of Jesus? Yes yes, I know you use his name but it is only to underscore what you have already concluded.

My question is, is the statement 'factoring the reality of Jesus' even understood or is it just one of those pious throw away lines?

 

[XtraPercept]

My question is, is the statement 'factoring the reality of Jesus' even understood or is it just one of those pious throw away lines?

Perhaps 'accounting for the existence of Jesus, which implies the truth of Him being who He says' is another way to say it?

In both cases I would consider it valid and applicable in every conversation; even to every thought, as Paul suggested.

Cliche is just a word people use to dismiss consideration of a deeper truth as if to suggest they already possess a fullness of understanding of the expression they declare to be such.

 

[quietthinker]

Perhaps 'accounting for the existence of Jesus, which implies the truth of Him being who He says' is another way to say it?

In both cases I would consider it valid and applicable in every conversation; even to every thought, as Paul suggested.

Even believing Jesus is who he said he is, is a long way from factoring the reality of Jesus into a healthy understanding of scripture.
The devils 'believe' in Jesus and tremble.

 

[XtraPercept]

Even believing Jesus is who he said he is, is a long way from factoring the reality of Jesus into a healthy understanding of scripture.
The devils 'believe' in Jesus and tremble.

I was just having fun because I enjoy rephrasing things.

God did it quite frequently through the Prophets and Psalmists; express the same idea through different words and phrases.

But a scoffer says, "cliche! I already know it!"

 

[bdavidc]

I'm not sure how you have concluded that you have given satisfactory answers, but, no, you haven't.

You have been shown the answer from Scripture itself. Not once, but repeatedly. What you are doing now is not raising something new. It is rejecting what the text plainly says.

Jesus says, “I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish” ~John 10:28. John says, “If they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us” ~1 John 2:19. He says this life “is in his Son” ~1 John 5:11. Those statements are not vague. They do not leave room for eternal life that later becomes non-eternal.

When Scripture answers a matter and someone keeps pressing against it, the problem is no longer clarity. It is belief. This is not new. Peter warned that “the unlearned and unstable wrest… the scriptures, unto their own destruction” ~2 Peter 3:16. Twisting the Word to make a position feel workable does not change what God has said. It only leads away from truth.

The biblical answer has been given. Continuing to deny it does not expose a weakness in Scripture. It exposes a refusal to submit to it.

 

[GracePeace]

You have been shown the answer from Scripture itself. Not once, but repeatedly. What you are doing now is not raising something new. It is rejecting what the text plainly says.

Jesus says, “I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish” ~John 10:28. John says, “If they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us” ~1 John 2:19. He says this life “is in his Son” ~1 John 5:11. Those statements are not vague. They do not leave room for eternal life that later becomes non-eternal.

When Scripture answers a matter and someone keeps pressing against it, the problem is no longer clarity. It is belief. This is not new. Peter warned that “the unlearned and unstable wrest… the scriptures, unto their own destruction” ~2 Peter 3:16. Twisting the Word to make a position feel workable does not change what God has said. It only leads away from truth.

The biblical answer has been given. Continuing to deny it does not expose a weakness in Scripture. It exposes a refusal to submit to it.

Answered.

 

[ShineTheLight]

You guys struggle inn your debates of this that and the other. Could the reason be that you have not factored the reality of Jesus? Yes yes, I know you use his name but it is only to underscore what you have already concluded.

My question is, is the statement 'factoring the reality of Jesus' even understood or is it just one of those pious throw away lines?

Even believing Jesus is who he said he is, is a long way from factoring the reality of Jesus into a healthy understanding of scripture.
The devils 'believe' in Jesus and tremble.

What is "the reality of Jesus"?

 

[quietthinker]

What is "the reality of Jesus"?

It is letting Jesus' behaviour towards men inform all 'theological' conclusions, not letting 'theological' conclusions inform you about Jesus.
It means a new look or way of seeing the accounts we have in the OT re the barbarity attributed to God, whether its the flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, the fall of Jerrico and various other stories of similar nature.

None of these accounts reflect the character of Jesus. Can you imagine Jesus ordering the slaughter of men, women and children, including all the animals? Of course not.

The question now arising is how are we to understand these accounts seeing many have believed the Bible is inerrant?