The myth of grace-only & easy-believism shattered forever

[Doug]

WRONG.

"Disqualified" says it ALL here.
Paul was stating that he must endure in faithfulness or LOSE his secure position.

Lose being effectual for the ministry

 

[Doug]

NOT unless you repent.

Your PAST sins are forgiven when you come to Christ - but any FUTURE sin must be repented of in order that you be forgiven.
There is not ONE SINGLE verse of Scripture to support your false belief that all of our future sins are "automatically" forgiven . . .

Romans
3:24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

3:25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

3:26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

The verses above say our justification is freely given and covers past sins Israel committed and sins now.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Matthew 28:19 says “in the name of” ... it does NOT say “by the authority of”
Colossians 3:17 “And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus...”

The Bible clearly tells us to do ALL in the name of the Jesus, “by the authority of” is NOT found at all in the KJV. Whereas, “in the name of” is found 64 times. Now, if you can provide one place where anyone said, “by the authority of” OR “in the authority of” then provide it now!
I'm not "arguing" anything. Sorry to hear that you are in a state of emotional disarray. Would you like me to pray for you?

And you can KEEP arguing this point until the cows com home but you will STILL lose because the consensus of Greek Scholarship has PROVEN my position already.

Here it is yet AGAIN for your review. When YOU can show me that YOUR credentials exceed those of the following scholars - then we can have another discussion.
UNTIL then, however - the case is CLOSED:

From Macmillan Dictionary:

1. REPRESENTING someone or something
Ex. - They said they came “in the name of peace.”

From Cambridge Dictionary:
1. REPRESENTING someone or something
Ex. - "Open up in the name of the law" before they broke the door down.

From Thesaurus.com:
“In the name of” synonyms
1. THROUGH
2. THROUGH the agency of
3. Under the AUTHORITY of

From english.stackesxhange.com:
What does “in the name of…” actually mean?
Putting all religious contentions aside for the sake of our language, the etymology of name offers a good place to start understanding:

Old English nama, noma "name, reputation,"
from Proto-Germanic *namon

(cognates: Old Saxon namo, Old Frisian nama, Old High German namo, German Name, Middle Dutch name, Dutch naam, Old Norse nafn, Gothic namo "name"),

from PIE *nomn- (cognates: Sanskrit nama; Avestan nama; Greek onoma, onyma; Latin nomen; Old Church Slavonic ime, genitive imene; Russian imya; Old Irish ainm; Old Welsh anu "name").
IN ALL CULTURES, people of authority have always lent their reputation and their authority to their delegates. The founders and leaders of religious movements use the same delegation strategies as the founders and leaders of nations.
The English phrase in the name of simply asserts the reputation and authority of another person.

Here us an example from classic literature:
Victor Hugo's “Dramas” 1519, page 364:
“Richard Varney, in the name of God and Saint George we dub thee knight!”


Now - if YOUR linguistic credentials exceed those of the above scholars - please present them.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Romans
3:24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

3:25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

3:26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

The verses above say our justification is freely given and covers past sins Israel committed and sins now.

And it says absolutely NOTHING about your future sins.
Not a SINGLE word.

YOU are on the hook for EVERY sin you commit after coming to Christ - unless you repent of them . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Lose being effectual for the ministry

No - lose everything.

 

[user]

And you can KEEP arguing this point until the cows com home but you will STILL lose because the consensus of Greek Scholarship has PROVEN my position already.

Here it is yet AGAIN for your review. When YOU can show me that YOUR credentials exceed those of the following scholars - then we can have another discussion.
UNTIL then, however - the case is CLOSED:

Just as I thought ... you have no scripture to present. And, now you wish to run away and close the case.

 

[Truther]

And YOU have your head in the sand.

There are MANY scholars who are well-versed in ancient Greek.
Just because YOU are ignorant - doesn't mean that everybody else is . . .

Very funny.
I suppose some folks believe every hand me down definition by modern scholars.
I wonder where it all originated...hmmm?

 

[BreadOfLife]

Very funny.
I suppose some folks believe every hand me down definition by modern scholars.
I wonder where it all originated...hmmm?

Yet, YOU want us to believe YOUR uneducated translation.

Why should we believe YOU and not the linguistic scholars, Einstein?

 

[BreadOfLife]

Just as I thought ... you have no scripture to present. And, now you wish to run away and close the case.

And as we have established ad nauseam - YOU haven't been able to provide any detailed examples of a 1st century Baptism.
WHY is that??

 

[Truther]

Yet, YOU want us to believe YOUR uneducated translation.

Why should we believe YOU and not the linguistic scholars, Einstein?

My translation was translated by 50 ancient scholars, which were still understanding of Ancient Greek.
The modern translators are busy inventing new and biased meanings to fit a particular narrative per their doctrine.
Also, they must be different from one another per 50,000 words by copyright laws.

 

[Paul Christensen]

Most churches today teach false doctrines for several reasons:
ignorance, unbelief, for popularity, for financial benefit, etc.
Only a few churches are teaching correct doctrine these days.
There is more to correct doctrine than “Jesus is Lord and Savior”.
Many Spirit-filled Christians are warning, “The church is fast asleep!”

Grace-only, cheap-grace, hyper-grace, easy-believism …
are all called antinomianism! This is the notion that a one-time
justification saves … apart from sanctification. But, this is an
incomplete understanding of God’s wonderful free gift of grace!

The problem with easy-believism is that it allows
those who are living in hypocrisy, disobedience, and sin
(i.e. those who are NOT walking in obedience)
to live comfortably with a false assurance of salvation!
This leads to the tragedy described in Matthew 7:21-23 (for example).

“… some ungodly people have wormed their way into your churches,
saying that God’s marvelous grace allows us to live immoral lives.
… they have denied our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.” (Jude 4-5, NLT)

NOTE: We are talking here about believers who have received the Holy Spirit.

There are at least 10 NT verses for each of the following truths …

Believers prove they have true saving faith:
1 -- by their obedience
2 -- by practicing righteousness
3 -- by living holy lives
4 -- by having a healthy fear of God
5 -- by repenting of their occasional sins
6 –- by overcoming sin, the world, Satan, persecution
7 -- by enduring in the faith to the end of their lives

Re: #4 … If people are believing and trusting in grace-only, cheap-grace,
hyper-grace, easy-believism, etc., HOW can they be fearing God?

So, all of these verses PROVE the road to eternal life is indeed narrow,
and believers are responsible for playing their part in their salvation!
Or, shall we view these verses as merely bluffs, exaggerations, lies even?

Initially, through His grace, God gives to new believers:
Jesus’ righteousness, redemption, reconciliation, etc. and salvation.
However, this grace/salvation is NOT guaranteed to last forever!
Because ONLY their old-past-former sins have been forgiven (2 Peter 1:9).
And because NT verses warn about the possibility of losing salvation.

Some believers became “estranged from Christ”
… they had “fallen from grace” (Galatians 5:4).

Some believers are “of those who draw back to perdition” (Hebrews 10:39).

And there are many more warning verses.
.

The Council of Trent, confirmed by Vatican II clearly states that all those who believe in salvation by faith alone in Christ are to be condemned to hell (that's what "anathema" means).

This means that the Roman Catholic church officially views all Reformed, Pentecostal, and Charismatics as not being Christians at all. Make no mistake about it.

This is a direct contradiction to the Scripture which says:
"By grace are we saved, through faith, and not of ourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works lest any should boast", and "The just shall live by faith." I guess some works/faith religious people blank out those verses in their Bibles so they are not reminded that their view contradicts Scripture.

Pope John Paul II, when he visited the United States, his message was of tolerance and unity between faiths. His message was like that because the RCC is not dominant in the United States. But when he visited the South American countries where the RCC is dominant, is message was that all Protestants were anathema and should be firmly suppressed. As a result, many Protestant churches were destroyed, and Protestant Christians beaten up and killed. This shows the two-faced attitude of the RCC where it is saying one thing in countries where it isn't dominant, and saying something quite different where the RCC is dominant.

 

[user]

And as we have established ad nauseam - YOU haven't been able to provide any detailed examples of a 1st century Baptism.
WHY is that??

ummmm ... because your like the three monkeys?

See no scripture
Hear no scripture
Speak only commentary

 

[Paul Christensen]

ummmm ... because your like the three monkeys?

See no scripture
Hear no scripture
Speak only commentary

The baptism of the Ethiopian Eunuch, and that of the Philippian jailor and his household.

 

[Paul Christensen]

And you can KEEP arguing this point until the cows com home but you will STILL lose because the consensus of Greek Scholarship has PROVEN my position already.

Here it is yet AGAIN for your review. When YOU can show me that YOUR credentials exceed those of the following scholars - then we can have another discussion.
UNTIL then, however - the case is CLOSED:

From Macmillan Dictionary:

1. REPRESENTING someone or something
Ex. - They said they came “in the name of peace.”

From Cambridge Dictionary:
1. REPRESENTING someone or something
Ex. - "Open up in the name of the law" before they broke the door down.

From Thesaurus.com:
“In the name of” synonyms
1. THROUGH
2. THROUGH the agency of
3. Under the AUTHORITY of

From english.stackesxhange.com:
What does “in the name of…” actually mean?
Putting all religious contentions aside for the sake of our language, the etymology of name offers a good place to start understanding:

Old English nama, noma "name, reputation,"
from Proto-Germanic *namon

(cognates: Old Saxon namo, Old Frisian nama, Old High German namo, German Name, Middle Dutch name, Dutch naam, Old Norse nafn, Gothic namo "name"),

from PIE *nomn- (cognates: Sanskrit nama; Avestan nama; Greek onoma, onyma; Latin nomen; Old Church Slavonic ime, genitive imene; Russian imya; Old Irish ainm; Old Welsh anu "name").
IN ALL CULTURES, people of authority have always lent their reputation and their authority to their delegates. The founders and leaders of religious movements use the same delegation strategies as the founders and leaders of nations.
The English phrase in the name of simply asserts the reputation and authority of another person.

Here us an example from classic literature:
Victor Hugo's “Dramas” 1519, page 364:
“Richard Varney, in the name of God and Saint George we dub thee knight!”


Now - if YOUR linguistic credentials exceed those of the above scholars - please present them.

So you don't believe that God has given us the righteousness of Christ as a free gift, and that we have to go on trying to continue being righteous by doing what we think God will approve of? Sounds like self-righteousness to me - that righteousness that puffs works-based religious people with a puffed up "holier than thou" type of pride.

Commenting on your bold, red text:
There is the story of a preacher who left his notes in the pulpit, and the janitor found them when he was cleaning in the church. He noticed that parts of the sermon was underlined, and notes in the margin like" "Lift hand here" and "point to heaven here", etc. But there was a section heavily double underlined in red, and the margin note was: "Shout for all you're worth. Argument very weak!!!"

 

[Eternally Grateful]

I think we have shown and seen all the works the Roman Church teaches one must do to earn their salvation. So time to move on from that, we will never convince bread of life he has yet to eat fro the true bread of life, so moving on....

time to get back to the op.

so where did the OP destroy salvation by Grace through faith alone in the work of Christ alone?has anyone seen it?

 

[Anthony D'Arienzo]

That’s not accurate.

First of all – too many people – especially Calvinists – are confused about God’s “foreknowledge”. His foreknowledge doesn’t mean that He ordained the future – but that He knows it. God is outside of time and sees ALL of history simultaneously. He already knows what choices we made.

HOWEVER – this doesn’t mean that all of our future sins are forgiven because we haven’t repented of them yet. Your sins are ONLY forgiven when you repent of them. God is not a fool like so many people believe – and His forgiveness is conditional on our penitence.

There are MANY warnings in Scripture aimed at born-again Christians which tell us that we can LOSE our secure position with God if we fall back into a life of sin and unrepentance.
And before you go on thinking that these warnings are NOT to God’s born again children – you need to read them in context and understand the language that they were written in . . .

Romans 11:22
“See, then, the kindness and severity of God: severity toward those who fell, but God's kindness to you, provided you REMAIN in his kindness; otherwise you to will be cut off.”
Paul is warning the faithful to REMAIN in God’s favor or they will lose their salvation. How can they lose what they never had?

Hebrews 10:26-27
“If we sin deliberately AFTER receiving KNOWLEDGE of the truth, there no longer remains sacrifice for sins but a fearful prospect of judgment and a flaming fire that is going to consume the adversaries.”
This is a clear warning that falling away from God will result in the loss of our salvation. The Greek ford for “knowledge” used here is NOT the usual word (oida). This is talking about a full, experiential knowledge (epignosei). This verse is about CHRISTIANS who had an EPIGNOSIS of Christ and who can fall back into darkness and LOSE their salvation by their own doing.

2 Peter 2:20-22
For if they, having escaped the defilements of the world through the KNOWLEDGE of our Lord and savior Jesus Christ, again become entangled and overcome by them, their last condition is worse than their first.
For it would have been better for them not to have KNOWN the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandment handed down to them.
Here, Peter illustrates that those who had a full, experiential knowledge (epignosei) of Christ – CHRISTIANS – who can fall back into darkness and LOSE their salvation by their own doing.

Matt. 5:13
You are the salt of the earth. But if salt loses its taste, with what can it be seasoned? It is no longer good for anything but to be thrown out and trampled underfoot.
This one is self-explanatory . . .

1 Cor. 9:27
"I pummel my body and subdue it, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified."
Paul is saying that he wrestles with his own fleshly desires so that he might not fall back into sin.

2 Peter 3:17
Therefore, dear friends, since you already know this, be on your guard so that you may not be carried away by the error of lawless men and fall from your secure position.
Peter is warning the faithful not to fall back into sin and lawlessness.

1 John 2:24
See that what you have heard from the beginning remains in you. IF it does, you also will REMAIN in the Son and in the Father.
This is an admonition to try to remain faithful.

Rev. 3:5
He who overcomes will, like them, be dressed in white. I will never blot out his name from the book of life, but will acknowledge his name before my Father and his angels.
God cannot blot out a name that was never there in the first place. He is talking about CHRISTIANS who are already saved and how they can LOSE their salvation.

Rev. 22:19
And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.
How can God take away somebody’s share of heaven if they never had it to begin with? This is about CHRISTIANS who may or may NOT make it into Heaven.

You confuse omniscience with biblical foreknowledge. You will not come to truth this way

 

[SovereignGrace]

You confuse omniscience with biblical foreknowledge. You will not come to truth this way

They don’t want an active God decreeing things. They want an impersonal god who just sets backs and watches things unfold before him. Oh wait, that’s deism. Their god is the god of deism.

They think they can run their lives better w/o Him meddling in their affairs.

 

[Truther]

They don’t want an active God decreeing things. They want an impersonal god who just sets backs and watches things unfold before him. Oh wait, that’s deism. Their god is the god of deism.

They think they can run their lives better w/o Him meddling in their affairs.

You shouldn’t talk about the Catholic behind his back when he is not here to defend himself.
It is Sunday and he is in the black box today asking the priest to remit his sins for him, and his ears are burning.

 

[BreadOfLife]

My translation was translated by 50 ancient scholars, which were still understanding of Ancient Greek.
The modern translators are busy inventing new and biased meanings to fit a particular narrative per their doctrine.
Also, they must be different from one another per 50,000 words by copyright laws.

.WRONG.

The KJV was published in 1611 - which can HARDLY be considered "ancient times", Einstein.
It was just over 400 years ago.

Besides - if you had bothered to actually READ the scholarly evidence I provided - it states emphatically that in ALL CULTURES, the phrase "in the name of" simply means "by the AUTHORITY of."

Try again . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

ummmm ... because your like the three monkeys?

See no scripture
Hear no scripture
Speak only commentary

NOT sure where you're getting that.
I challenged YOU to illustrate - FROM SCRIPTURE - a detailed example of a Baptism and you couldn't do it.

How is this "commentary" on my part??