The Eternal Security Heresy: A Comprehensive Refutation of OSAS

[ChristisGod]

There's no smorgasbord and I don't have a Jesus. There's only One.
And the Sovereign of the universe can do whatever He pleases with His creation and therefore property, Whose we are. I can't change that. He could zap us all and start all over if He wanted to. (But He won't because of His promises.)
Sorry you can't cope.

its about time you acknowledge Jesus as the One and Only Sovereign and Lord

Jude 1:4
They are ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord.

 

[BarneyFife]

its about time you acknowledge Jesus as the One and Only Sovereign and Lord

Jude 1:4
They are ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord.

I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. I'm not aware of having ever believed or expressed anything to the contrary.

 

[BarneyFife]

Jude 1:4
They are ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord.

And wasn't it nice of you to apply this judgment to me.

 

[ChristisGod]

And wasn't it nice of you to apply this judgment to me.

You said in your previous post #1486 and I quote

"There's no smorgasbord and I don't have a Jesus. There's only One.
And the Sovereign of the universe can do whatever He pleases with His creation and therefore property, Whose we are. I can't change that. He could zap us all and start all over if He wanted to. (But He won't because of His promises.)
Sorry you can't cope."

and My response is Jesus is the One and Only Sovereign and Lord- His creation, He is the Creator.

 

[Heyzeus]

He claims that the Father is the Lord (of heaven and earth).

There is one Lord in holy scripture (Mark 12:29, 1 Corinthians 8:6, Ephesians 4:5).

No one can say that Jesus is the Lord except by the Spirit of truth (1 Corinthians 12:3 (kjv)).

You have already made the conclusion from this that I am saying that Jesus is the Father by these scriptures.

I just want to let you know that it is not me that is saying this to you; but that rather it is the testimony of holy scripture.

.

Ridiculous .. you have been quoting passages that do not back up your claim. Your claim that Matt 11:25 says that Jesus is
the Father turned out to be a complete falsehood

25 At that time Jesus said, “I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth,

How does Jesus praising the Father - equate to Jesus being the Father ?

You talk about the spirit of Truth .. this is not the spirit that has you in its grips .. quite the reverse.

 

[Heyzeus]

Speaking of hypocritical, how can you ask someone if they doubt the Bible while you pick and choose what you want to believe from it?

It is not hypocritical at all. It is called trying to see things from someone else's perspective. While I do not believe everything in the Bible is the Literal word of God - You do.

The conflicts that this creates is not my problem - as I have no such conflict - because I am not a literalist. You on the other hand need to explain these conflicts .. as this is what you need to do in order to maintain/justify/defend your perspective.

I defend my perspective - just as you defend yours.

Your "pick and choose" argument is misleading - as I do not randomly pick and choose. Logic and reason dictates that.

For example - I presented you previously with 4 versions of the same passage in Deut 32:43 - LXX, 4DeutQ, MT, Modern Translation.
The two older versions (BC) LXX-4Deut Q - talk about other divinities .. and distinguishes between these divinities and angels .. quashing the possibility that these "sons of God" were angels.

In the MT - Masoretic Text - put together 700-900AD - all mention of divinities is wiped clean from the text.

The literalist has a serious problem here - the same passage says completely different things .. Do we believe in these other divinities .. as per the two older texts .. or do we accept the MT - and say that the text does not say anything about other divinities.

The literalist has no option other than to cry "NO NO NO" and deny the existence of the LXX .. in order to maintain literalism.

Logic and reason dictates that the later transcribers of the MT - edited out the other divinities in the text 1) to make the text not conflict with monotheism or 2) Not get burned at the stake for heresy or Both.

To the question of which text is correct - does the passage mention other divinities or not - the literalist can not answer.. because as soon as he chooses one .. the other is a contradiction .. and both can not be right.. so one of the two is not the literal word of God.

When we look at the Modern Translation - things get even more horrible. Not only are the other divinities edited out - following the MT - but the last vestiges of meaning retained by the MT are changes and edited.

Is it "His Peoples Land" or is it "His land" .. Did God "Cleanse his peoples Land" and it is perfectly clear what this means from the text, and from the history of the Bible .. or did God make atonement for "his land" and People.

2 choices .. this is the hand of Man at work or God intentionally created all these different versions to confuse humans and drive them away from the Truth.

The long ending of Mark - which is not in the older texts .. Mark ending with an empty tomb. The long ending has appearances of Jesus in the Flesh .. Did Jesus return in the Flesh .. or did he not according to the first Gospel

Well .. it depends on which version you read .. once again the literalist is hooped. We even have different versions of the long ending further complicating the issue.

This is not picking and choosing willy nilly based on personal preference . Logic dictates that at least on of the two passages is "Not God's Word" - between the MT and Modern Translation. It is either Gods land .. or the peoples land.. Some scribe decided willy nilly to change ownership of the land .. transferring it from the people to God. Further God does not make atonement for the people and the land as per the modern Translation .. God "Cleanses" the peoples land .. wrecks vengeance on his enemies and avenges the blood of his servants (sons in the older Bibles)

In the case of the MT vs the older text - at minimum you have the "sin of omission" a severe editing of God's word... completely changing the meaning of the passage.

Now we're getting somewhere. We're all just free men who have the choice to believe as we see fit. Religious liberty is the greatest thing worth dying or living for. If you want to believe God is hidden somewhere in the Bible for only smart people to find, you can be sure there are many of us who would die for your right to do so.

No need to be smart to find God in the Bible .. and smart people can be deceived do it is not like the literalist is necessarily dumb.

What is necessary - to maintain the literalist perspective - is to blind oneself to passages that conflict with the literalist perspective .. so at the end .. it is you who is guilty of picking and choosing.

 

[BarneyFife]

You said in your previous post #1486 and I quote

"There's no smorgasbord and I don't have a Jesus. There's only One.
And the Sovereign of the universe can do whatever He pleases with His creation and therefore property, Whose we are. I can't change that. He could zap us all and start all over if He wanted to. (But He won't because of His promises.)
Sorry you can't cope."

and My response is Jesus is the One and Only Sovereign and Lord- His creation, He is the Creator.

Your response is redundant. Unless this is some sort of argument for Arianism, you are preaching to the choir. I make no distinction between Christ and sovereignty.

I and my Father are one. (John 10:30)

And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. (Matthew 28:18)

God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. (John 4:24)

I do not pretend to understand how the Father, Son, and Spirit are separate, yet inexorably united. I take the word of The Word.

 

[BarneyFife]

2 choices

Herein lies the root of the problem with nearly every schism that has ever entered the church--all-or-nothing thinking. There is never a third option. No room for an alternate interpretation. You can type yourself a river if you like. No amount of so-called "logic" will budge me from the belief that all scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.

I have theories about many of the questions you raise. But I will not hold them up to be ridiculed. I won't take the bait. Trolls gonna troll. Have at it.

 

[ChristisGod]

Your response is redundant. Unless this is some sort of argument for Arianism, you are preaching to the choir. I make no distinction between Christ and sovereignty.

I and my Father are one. (John 10:30)

And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. (Matthew 28:18)

God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. (John 4:24)

I do not pretend to understand how the Father, Son, and Spirit are separate, yet inexorably united. I take the word of The Word.

Thanks I didn't know you believed Jesus is God, thanks for admitting this essential truth of Salvation. No one can say Jesus is LORD( YHWH) except by the Spirit.

hope this helps !!!

 

[BarneyFife]

Thanks I didn't know you believed Jesus is God, thanks for admitting this essential truth of Salvation. No one can say Jesus is LORD( YHWH) except by the Spirit.

hope this helps !!!

What would make you think otherwise?

 

[ChristisGod]

What would make you think otherwise?

I quoted you saying who is the Sovereign and Scripture says its Jesus not the Father, hence He is the Creator.

 

[Heyzeus]

Herein lies the root of the problem with nearly every schism that has ever entered the church--all-or-nothing thinking. There is never a third option. No room for an alternate interpretation. You can type yourself a river if you like. No amount of so-called "logic" will budge me from the belief that all scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.

I have theories about many of the questions you raise. But I will not hold them up to be ridiculed. I won't take the bait. Trolls gonna troll. Have at it.

I gave you 3 options .. Modern Translation, MT . LXX/4DeutQ. Which is the "Word of God" .. is there other divinities .. as per scripture .. or is there not other divinities - as per scripture.

Is it the "Peoples Land" or is it "God's land" Is it A) the peoples land B) God's land C) both Gods and the peoples land.

C) is not stated in Scripture .. so we can eliminate. A and B are stated in Scripture - so which one is it ?

God's land .. or the Peoples land ?

Do you believe in other divinities .. other Son's of God - or not ?

 

[BarneyFife]

I quoted you saying who is the Sovereign and Scripture says its Jesus not the Father, hence He is the Creator.

You lost me.

 

[BarneyFife]

I gave you 3 options .. Modern Translation, MT . LXX/4DeutQ. Which is the "Word of God" .. is there other divinities .. as per scripture .. or is there not other divinities - as per scripture.

Is it the "Peoples Land" or is it "God's land" Is it A) the peoples land B) God's land C) both Gods and the peoples land.

C) is not stated in Scripture .. so we can eliminate. A and B are stated in Scripture - so which one is it ?

God's land .. or the Peoples land ?

Do you believe in other divinities .. other Son's of God - or not ?

I'm not interested in your sophistry. You don't seem to get that. There's a place for manuscript examination but, frankly, I'd rather just read the Bible. Sorry about your dilemma.

 

[Heyzeus]

I'm not interested in your sophistry. You don't seem to get that. There's a place for manuscript examination but, frankly, I'd rather just read the Bible. Sorry about your dilemma.

I realize you wish to hide from Scripture and pretend the stuff you don't like does not exist .. but this is not my dilemma .. this is your dilemma.

That's nice that you wish to just read the Bible - but, which version is correct - Which Bible does one read. The one with "other divinities" or the one without.

Do you believe in other divinities - as per divine scripture .. or do you not.

Even the most simple question confounds the literalist -- who sees a trap at every turn .. unable to reconcile personal dogma with scripture.

Denial of Scripture is the only way the literalist can maintain personal dogma ... as demonstrated by your inability to respond to questions related to the content of scripture.

Where does this desire to run from scripture and engage in self deception come from ? God or Satan ? or ... somewhere else.

 

[BarneyFife]

I realize you wish to hide from Scripture and pretend the stuff you don't like does not exist .. but this is not my dilemma .. this is your dilemma.

That's nice that you wish to just read the Bible - but, which version is correct - Which Bible does one read. The one with "other divinities" or the one without.

Do you believe in other divinities - as per divine scripture .. or do you not.

Even the most simple question confounds the literalist -- who sees a trap at every turn .. unable to reconcile personal dogma with scripture.

Denial of Scripture is the only way the literalist can maintain personal dogma ... as demonstrated by your inability to respond to questions related to the content of scripture.

Where does this desire to run from scripture and engage in self deception come from ? God or Satan ? or ... somewhere else.

I use BibleHub.com a lot. They have nearly 30 different English translations. It's pretty handy. Lots of commentaries, too. Your skepticism does not bother me. I've heard it all or something like it before. Your venturing into ad hominem territory at this point, I think. Just sayin'. Not saying I've never done it, but it's not going to help your cause regardless. How is believing that all Scripture is inspired amount to running from Scripture? That's pretty goofy. By the way, I don't understand everything in the Bible. That doesn't seem like running. I'm sticking with the Good Book for the long haul.

 

[BarneyFife]

@Heyzeus
BTW, I sure am getting a lot out of all this "teachings of Jesus" you're layin' on me.

 

[justbyfaith]

Ridiculous .. you have been quoting passages that do not back up your claim. Your claim that Matt 11:25 says that Jesus is
the Father turned out to be a complete falsehood

25 At that time Jesus said, “I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth,

How does Jesus praising the Father - equate to Jesus being the Father ?

You talk about the spirit of Truth .. this is not the spirit that has you in its grips .. quite the reverse.

Notice that I did not say that the scriptures in question teach that Jesus is the Father...you made that conclusion yourself.

Again, here is my pov:

There is one Lord in holy scripture (Mark 12:29, Ephesians 4:5); and that Lord is clearly the Father (Matthew 11:25, Luke 10:21). Yet, no one can say that Jesus is the Lord except by the Spirit of truth (1 Corinthians 12:3 (kjv)).

And, Jesus is the one Lord (1 Corinthians 8:6).

I will say, now, that if Jesus is not the Father then there are two Lords; and that such a concept is contradictory to the rest of holy scripture (Mark 12:29, 1 Corinthians 8:6, Ephesians 4:5).

I quoted you saying who is the Sovereign and Scripture says its Jesus not the Father, hence He is the Creator.

Both the Father is the Lord of heaven and earth (Matthew 11:25, Luke 10:21) and Jesus is also the only Lord and Sovereign (1 Corinthians 8:6, 1 Corinthians 12:3, Ephesians 4:5, Mark 12:29).

@Heyzeus
BTW, I sure am getting a lot out of all this "teachings of Jesus" you're layin' on me.

Yet, he has not given one quote of our Lord and Saviour's words.

 

[Heyzeus]

I use BibleHub.com a lot. They have nearly 30 different English translations. It's pretty handy. Lots of commentaries, too. Your skepticism does not bother me. I've heard it all or something like it before. Your venturing into ad hominem territory at this point, I think. Just sayin'. Not saying I've never done it, but it's not going to help your cause regardless. How is believing that all Scripture is inspired amount to running from Scripture? That's pretty goofy. By the way, I don't understand everything in the Bible. That doesn't seem like running. I'm sticking with the Good Book for the long haul.

You are just rambling now .. none of those English translations be it 5 or 30 - will include the other divinities as per the Older versions.. as every one of those English translations you own is a "modern Translation" all will claim it is "Gods Land" rather than the Peoples Land .. and all will have God Atoning rather than cleansing... as per the MT - the book the Modern Text was translated from .. and deliberately altered.

So why would you bother stating that you have 30 of them .. Is 30 bad translations better than one ? Does having many as opposed to one bad translation somehow add weight to your non existent argument ?

This is not skepticism .. but simply stating a fact .. one that you are desperate to avoid and ignore .. because if one tiny pillar in your literalist platform falls .. the whole structure collapses.

This is not building foundation on Rock my friend.. Try and challenge my structure - you can not - you can't even dent it .. like throwing a wet rag at a brick wall.

Yet we believe essentially the same thing .. That God is one ...and salvation can be obtained through Jesus. - we are not so different .. despite your attempts to cast me as under the influence of Satan.

Do you think I do not understand where you are at in your spirituality ? Do you think I have not walked in your shoes - from a spiritual perspective ?

I am not coming from "winning" - because if I lose on some technical point - the whole structure falls .. so I have to win .. no matter what amount of mind bending twisting .. yeeesshhhhhh ..

You say "I have heard it all before" -- though you have never heard some of the stuff I am throwing at you ... other stuff yes .. not the first time you have heard someone challenge the flood story ... but not like me .. never .. you have never considered the continuous civilization argument ... you have heard the "how do we pack all those animals into such a small space" argument.

Do you think your responses - or rather response pattern - I have not heard before ? .. I can direct you to numerous other posters on this site .. like pushing B7 on the Jukebox .. put in your quarter and the same song plays.

You have never had someone tell you the story of El - and how he was the God of Abraham .. despite the fact that you can read this in the Encyclopedia Brittanica .. although not nearly as in depth as I go.

You have never heard the vacation argument - with respect to when the soul arrives - and considered the ramifications for the Catholic concept of "ensoulment" - in which you believe deeply.

Its not really heaven if you can't take a vacation once in awhile now is it ? Yet you live in a world where you were completely convinced that should someone terminate a process .. one that started well before conception .. that God will punish .. not you of course because you have a free pass through the pearly gates .. but punish those followers of Satan who do not have a free pass.

So here is a question that does not challenge your foundation .. or shouldn't .. don't see how it could as any answer to this question is completely compatible with literalism.

When does the soul arrive - during the process .. from the twinkle in your fathers eye .. to the head popping out ..
And if the soul has not arrived yet .. does a person exist ?

 

[BarneyFife]

I quoted you saying who is the Sovereign and Scripture says its Jesus not the Father, hence He is the Creator.

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. (Genesis 1:26)

This verse is rendered plural (us, our, we, etc.) in every one of the 28 translations featured on BibleHub.com.

You seem to be elevating The Son above The Father for some reason. The Godhead (Father, Son, Spirit) is Sovereign. 1+1+1=1 in Heaven's math. I don't understand it but I don't deny it.