|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Jul 07, 2015 10:34 pm
I've been recently drowning in neverending streams of videos on a side of preachers and faith on YouTube to learn more about the truth and instead gotten myself to be confused on whether Once Saved Always Saved or Calvanism is the right one to go about to uphold and believe. Because parts of both arguments make sense whenever I pass a comment in reply to the one I'd have just read before above I thought concluded or confirmed my last thoughts but they're both very smart(?) in reasoning on the counterargumentative stance and I can't discern from the two.
They've simultaneously called each other out on their beliefs that "that's of the devil" and it's not my desire to want to be on the wrong path ending up in the lake of fire from being deceived by Satan's wolf in sheep's clothing.
I know I need to indulge in the word of God as first priority but I chose to research on some matters (alot of matters way before coming onto this such as the right bible translation which I'm having trouble with finding the right one since I read all bibles are corrupted from the original message. Now I know why they say Satan is so good at twisting it up; it wasn't an exaggeration and I feel like I'm always fooled yet still am thankful for my eyes being opened even just a little) when I came across the strings of videos on youtube with all the comments and arguments attached below the video but I'm just lead into confusion more and more, day by day, hour by hour.
The one time salvation bit where only the blood of Christ who died for our sins and already paid in full and how no one man can take it away and the calvanist bit where it implies there needs to be evidence of fruit shown from believing in Jesus have scriptures pertaining to/backing up both sides of the claim is why I'm confused. Even though people defending the OSAS argue in sin man is still saved because of our title of being a sinner in the flesh the salvation being received and sealed through a one time blood of Jesus on the cross makes complete sense. I mean even the first part where man is never not going to be in sin no matter what thus that makes being still a sinner even when saved makes sense opposed to the other argument in calvanism where it's stated you can't be saved in that you're going to go to heaven in just that alone. I know calvanism supports good fruit as evident from salvation but I'm not trying to see which is correct so I can either choose to not produce good fruit or produce good fruit; I know spirit of the believer automatically yields good results but.. (At this point I don't really get it at all; it's how confused I am) I'm trying to seek the concrete truth so I'm furthermore not mixed up on anything before going on.
Please can my brothers and sisters here help me in this guild if you have any information or powerful discerning spirit I'm trying to learn some of these things I'm confused about. I know I'm flawed in my understandings therefore I'm at total ease with learning and humbling myself to the true knowledge of a right believer in leading me down the right path. Much thanks and God Bless!
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 08, 2015 5:03 am
I would be a Calvinist, and you do seem to have a misunderstanding even of what Calvinism teaches. For example, you seem to perceive a conflict between O.S.A.S. and Calvinism, though O.S.A.S. (a.ka. Perseverance of the Saints, which would be the P in T.U.L.I.P., the 5 points of Calvinism) is historically and logically connected to Calvinism while Arminianism/Synergism really has no grounds to hold to it, so the issue isn't at all O.S.A.S or Calvinism. I'd be glad to answer questions you have and talk with you over this, so you can test what Calvinism teaches against the Scriptures, to see whether it is true or not (not you only, but anyone else who sees this and would like to learn more about this subject). I, of course, believe it is, so I can share my reasoning from the Scriptures with you. It seems like you've looked at people arguing and interacting, maybe, but I wonder how much interaction you personally have had, if you have the misunderstanding of Calvinism that you seem to.
I'll send you a friend request.
EDIT: Removed a random ) that didn't need to be there. Also, seems you aren't accepting friend requests and your PMs are disabled. I'd prefer to interact with you alone, privately, for the sake of time (and I'd figure clarity as well), but if this is the only place you're willing to interact, we can do it here instead.
If you're looking for more interaction between Synergists/Arminians and Calvinists, it seems like you've read and watched these types of things before and yet you are confused. If you have not been interacting yourself, doing so may help clear up many things. I'd be interested in interacting with you personally, rather than just debating with any Arminian/Synergist who may happen to jump in and having you read the interactions (one because you seem to have been doing this already and still don't understand some fundamental issues and two for the sake of time).
Feel free to ask me a question. Try not to throw out many questions at once, but rather, if you're willing, perhaps we can do one thing at a time? This should help avoid text walls and present issues with more clarity overall.
EDIT 2: Spelling corrected. Any other edits will likely just be corrections of any mistakes like that, and if I add or remove anything written I'll say so. I hate editing posts, because you never know what someone may have changed and I try to avoid it, so sorry in advance with this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 08, 2015 6:19 am
edited: to clarify my wording and add more detail I wholeheartedly disagree with Micah. We've had discussions over this before, a discussion he decided not to finish (if you're interested in reading the whole thing: Please Help? I need advice really, really badly.).
But to quote one example from that conversation: there is no such thing as "The Golden Chain of Redemption" in scripture. cristobela Micah Seven Eighteen […] the issue I raised with the Golden Chain of Redemption in Romans 8:29-30 [...]
Romans 8:29-30 (NIV)
29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image
of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. 30
And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also
justified;those he justified, he also glorified.
Consider the chain broken by Jesus' own words.
Matthew 22:14 (KJV)
14 For many are called, but few are chosen.
Many are called (“klētoi”), but few are chosen (“eklektoi ” a.k.a. elect).
It's not a chain. The “called” are not guaranteed to be “elected”.
source: http://biblehub.com/interlinear/matthew/22-14.htm
source: http://biblehub.com/greek/2822.htm
source: http://biblehub.com/greek/eklektoi_1588.htm
source: http://biblehub.com/greek/1588.htm
Thus, no guarantee that you'll be elect (chosen), even if you were “predestined”
to something and “called” out to do that something. That chain can end at “called”.
You can rebel against your predestination and your calling. That was what I
attempted to illustrate with the wilderness wanderings.
In short, I concluded he was following heresy (as defined by the Greek: following a philosophical sect) and that he was an apostate, again according to the Greek definition (which I showed in screenshots in that thread), for abandoning what he once believed (he once believed that one CAN lose their salvation). It doesn't matter what English translation you read/study, as long as you're looking at the Hebrew and Greek definitions of words—and not letting sects define them for you. I recommend using biblos.com (a.k.a. biblehub.com) for that.
O.S.A.S. is false. As are certain aspects of Calvinism. They take "perseverance of the saints" to mean something totally different than what it literally states (Calvinist: the saints [the set-apart] of God will get saved guaranteed because God drew them to himself VS. Biblical: the set-apart people of God, whom God drew to himself, need to persevere until the end or else they won't get saved—no guarantees). One's calling and one's drawing out, from the world to God, can be rejected after having accepted it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 08, 2015 9:32 am
I also completely disagree with Micah. I do not believe Calvinsim is a good viewpoint to hold, its weak and not Biblically accurate. Message me if you'd like to hear my standpoint.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 08, 2015 10:37 am
Thank you for placing me on the right page, for sure I think it's easier the way you clear-grasp explained and showed for me to be able to fully comprehend with quotes from the bible and their right definitions presented in whole truth of light. I feel I'm starting to renew my faith in Him and yours seems to be the honest answer that has no added confusion that I may trust and move forward with. I have the page of your source bookmarked. Thanks so much. I'll be going off on this foundation to strengthen the bond with Him that gives no doubt as to whether I have the truth. I'm so content! Also much thanks for clearing out the other problem of trouble finding a translation. First I thought just KJV, and had looked into it before that it's derived from the textus receptus but people use strong's concordance and interlinear to study alongside it as well. This seems like it's what I need to do to completely understand the gospel. I'm so relieved now thanks for the testimony and reply!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 08, 2015 3:19 pm
Micah Seven Eighteen I would be a Calvinist, and you do seem to have a misunderstanding even of what Calvinism teaches. For example, you seem to perceive a conflict between O.S.A.S. and Calvinism, though O.S.A.S. (a.ka. Perseverance of the Saints, which would be the P in T.U.L.I.P., the 5 points of Calvinism) is historically and logically connected to Calvinism while Arminianism/Synergism really has no grounds to hold to it, so the issue isn't at all O.S.A.S or Calvinism. I'd be glad to answer questions you have and talk with you over this, so you can test what Calvinism teaches against the Scriptures, to see whether it is true or not (not you only, but anyone else who sees this and would like to learn more about this subject). I, of course, believe it is, so I can share my reasoning from the Scriptures with you. It seems like you've looked at people arguing and interacting, maybe, but I wonder how much interaction you personally have had, if you have the misunderstanding of Calvinism that you seem to. I'll send you a friend request. EDIT: Removed a random ) that didn't need to be there. Also, seems you aren't accepting friend requests and your PMs are disabled. I'd prefer to interact with you alone, privately, for the sake of time (and I'd figure clarity as well), but if this is the only place you're willing to interact, we can do it here instead. If you're looking for more interaction between Synergists/Arminians and Calvinists, it seems like you've read and watched these types of things before and yet you are confused. If you have not been interacting yourself, doing so may help clear up many things. I'd be interested in interacting with you personally, rather than just debating with any Arminian/Synergist who may happen to jump in and having you read the interactions (one because you seem to have been doing this already and still don't understand some fundamental issues and two for the sake of time). Feel free to ask me a question. Try not to throw out many questions at once, but rather, if you're willing, perhaps we can do one thing at a time? This should help avoid text walls and present issues with more clarity overall. EDIT 2: Spelling corrected. Any other edits will likely just be corrections of any mistakes like that, and if I add or remove anything written I'll say so. I hate editing posts, because you never know what someone may have changed and I try to avoid it, so sorry in advance with this. Oh wait a second. I think I was mostly confused because I thought perseverance of the saints was the same as "good fruits" but good fruits is merely good works produced from being saved from staying in Christ whereas perseverance of the saints holds to its own doctrine in Calvanism by portraying it in alignment with O.S.A.S---period?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2015 7:55 am
eastern youth Micah Seven Eighteen I would be a Calvinist, and you do seem to have a misunderstanding even of what Calvinism teaches. For example, you seem to perceive a conflict between O.S.A.S. and Calvinism, though O.S.A.S. (a.ka. Perseverance of the Saints, which would be the P in T.U.L.I.P., the 5 points of Calvinism) is historically and logically connected to Calvinism while Arminianism/Synergism really has no grounds to hold to it, so the issue isn't at all O.S.A.S or Calvinism. I'd be glad to answer questions you have and talk with you over this, so you can test what Calvinism teaches against the Scriptures, to see whether it is true or not (not you only, but anyone else who sees this and would like to learn more about this subject). I, of course, believe it is, so I can share my reasoning from the Scriptures with you. It seems like you've looked at people arguing and interacting, maybe, but I wonder how much interaction you personally have had, if you have the misunderstanding of Calvinism that you seem to. I'll send you a friend request. EDIT: Removed a random ) that didn't need to be there. Also, seems you aren't accepting friend requests and your PMs are disabled. I'd prefer to interact with you alone, privately, for the sake of time (and I'd figure clarity as well), but if this is the only place you're willing to interact, we can do it here instead. If you're looking for more interaction between Synergists/Arminians and Calvinists, it seems like you've read and watched these types of things before and yet you are confused. If you have not been interacting yourself, doing so may help clear up many things. I'd be interested in interacting with you personally, rather than just debating with any Arminian/Synergist who may happen to jump in and having you read the interactions (one because you seem to have been doing this already and still don't understand some fundamental issues and two for the sake of time). Feel free to ask me a question. Try not to throw out many questions at once, but rather, if you're willing, perhaps we can do one thing at a time? This should help avoid text walls and present issues with more clarity overall. EDIT 2: Spelling corrected. Any other edits will likely just be corrections of any mistakes like that, and if I add or remove anything written I'll say so. I hate editing posts, because you never know what someone may have changed and I try to avoid it, so sorry in advance with this. Oh wait a second. I think I was mostly confused because I thought perseverance of the saints was the same as "good fruits" but good fruits is merely good works produced from being saved from staying in Christ whereas perseverance of the saints holds to its own doctrine in Calvanism by portraying it in alignment with O.S.A.S---period? It would be the same, ultimately. Within Calvinism, you can't separate the two. If someone is saved, they don't lose their salvation (1 John 2:19; Romans 8:29-30 a.k.a. The Golden Chain of Redemption as a couple examples). The question is, is someone actually saved or are they a false convert. If someone is one of the elect (actually saved) they will bear good fruit and persevere to the end, and if not they will not bear good fruit and though they could sometimes outwardly appear in some sense to not have abandoned the faith, in their hearts they never were in it to begin with.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2015 8:07 am
eastern youth Thank you for placing me on the right page, for sure I think it's easier the way you clear-grasp explained and showed for me to be able to fully comprehend with quotes from the bible and their right definitions presented in whole truth of light. I feel I'm starting to renew my faith in Him and yours seems to be the honest answer that has no added confusion that I may trust and move forward with. I have the page of your source bookmarked. Thanks so much. I'll be going off on this foundation to strengthen the bond with Him that gives no doubt as to whether I have the truth. I'm so content! Also much thanks for clearing out the other problem of trouble finding a translation. First I thought just KJV, and had looked into it before that it's derived from the textus receptus but people use strong's concordance and interlinear to study alongside it as well. This seems like it's what I need to do to completely understand the gospel. I'm so relieved now thanks for the testimony and reply! I'm sorry you feel that way. You should be careful to accept what seems to be strong argumentation so quickly. She may have written a lot, but there isn't much substance behind it. She hasn't addressed the issue in Romans 8 by any means: _ Romans 8:28-30 28And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. 29For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; 30and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified. _ This text clearly shows that those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of Jesus Christ. If someone doesn't become conformed to the image of Jesus, they must not be one of the ones talked about here. Those who were predestined to become conformed to the image of Jesus Christ, He also called, and those whom He called, He also justified. She might say that someone can be called and not justified, but the text says the opposite of what she says. She's jumping outside of the context of the text itself and going to another text with a different context and then placing that text into Romans 8, making it contradictory. This is called eisegesis, and is not a sound principal of interpretation. Those who were called not only are justified, but those who are justified are also glorified, which would be our state in Heaven. Those who are justified cannot fall away and lose that justification, because they also must be glorified. We have to study the text itself in it's context, rather than attempting to undermine the clear teaching of Scripture by jumping someplace else with a different context, taking a text from there, and then inserting it into the other place to make it say what we want it to say. Be careful. Really scrutinize what other people try teaching you. The Bible has to be the final authority.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 10, 2015 10:24 am
Micah Seven Eighteen eastern youth Thank you for placing me on the right page, for sure I think it's easier the way you clear-grasp explained and showed for me to be able to fully comprehend with quotes from the bible and their right definitions presented in whole truth of light. I feel I'm starting to renew my faith in Him and yours seems to be the honest answer that has no added confusion that I may trust and move forward with. I have the page of your source bookmarked. Thanks so much. I'll be going off on this foundation to strengthen the bond with Him that gives no doubt as to whether I have the truth. I'm so content! Also much thanks for clearing out the other problem of trouble finding a translation. First I thought just KJV, and had looked into it before that it's derived from the textus receptus but people use strong's concordance and interlinear to study alongside it as well. This seems like it's what I need to do to completely understand the gospel. I'm so relieved now thanks for the testimony and reply! I'm sorry you feel that way. You should be careful to accept what seems to be strong argumentation so quickly. She may have written a lot, but there isn't much substance behind it. She hasn't addressed the issue in Romans 8 by any means: _ Romans 8:28-30 28And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. 29For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; 30and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified. _ This text clearly shows that those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of Jesus Christ. If someone doesn't become conformed to the image of Jesus, they must not be one of the ones talked about here. Those who were predestined to become conformed to the image of Jesus Christ, He also called, and those whom He called, He also justified. She might say that someone can be called and not justified, but the text says the opposite of what she says. She's jumping outside of the context of the text itself and going to another text with a different context and then placing that text into Romans 8, making it contradictory. This is called eisegesis, and is not a sound principal of interpretation. Those who were called not only are justified, but those who are justified are also glorified, which would be our state in Heaven. Those who are justified cannot fall away and lose that justification, because they also must be glorified. We have to study the text itself in it's context, rather than attempting to undermine the clear teaching of Scripture by jumping someplace else with a different context, taking a text from there, and then inserting it into the other place to make it say what we want it to say. Be careful. Really scrutinize what other people try teaching you. The Bible has to be the final authority.
Paul even acknowledged this about his very own letters:
1 Corinthians 5:9-11 (NIV)
9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10 not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 11 But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister[a] but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people.
Footnotes:
1 Corinthians 5:11 The Greek word for brother or sister (adelphos) refers here to a believer, whether man or woman, as part of God’s family; also in 8:11, 13.
He had to write another letter to clarify what he meant in a previous letter (a totally separate letter—outside of what we know as 1st Corinthians and 2nd Corinthians). Is Paul taking himself out of context? for trying to refer to a separate letter? The danger here: people were making an erroneous absolute statement based on that one phrase of his in a previous letter.
Along that same vein, Calvinists would have us look at Philippians 1:6 (Philippians being a letter written by Paul) and say..."oh, see. you're getting saved regardless once you've been drawn to him / once you've been called"...
Philippians 1:6 (NIV)
6 being confident of this, that he who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus.
But making an absolute statement out of that is unstable in light of what the same Paul writes to Timothy:
2 Timothy 2:12 (NIV)
12 if we endure,
we will also reign with him.
If we disown him,
he will also disown us;
You have to resort to theological commentaries "to undermine the clear teaching of Scripture". What Paul communicates, in light of his thoughts, in two separate letters, taken as one: once you've been drawn to God, he's not the one who initiates abandonment: you are. God has full intentions to save you / finish what he started in you / and work on you—but he's not going to force you to finish. That's the comfort of Phil 1:6. God is not the one who abandons first. The same thought expressed in the Old Testament:
1 Chronicles 28:9 (NIV)
9 “And you, my son Solomon, acknowledge the God of your father, and serve him with wholehearted devotion and with a willing mind, for the Lord searches every heart and understands every desire and every thought. If you seek him, he will be found by you; but if you forsake him, he will reject you forever.
That's like someone trying to make an absolute statement out of one verse in Deuteronomy:
Deuteronomy 31:6 (NIV)
6 Be strong and courageous. Do not be afraid or terrified because of them, for the Lord your God goes with you; he will never leave you nor forsake you.”
While disregarding the Book of Joshua and 2nd Chronicles (entirely different books):
Joshua 24:20 (NIV)
20 If you forsake the Lord and serve foreign gods, he will turn and bring disaster on you and make an end of you, after he has been good to you.”
2 Chronicles 24:20 (NIV)
20 Then the Spirit of God came on Zechariah son of Jehoiada the priest. He stood before the people and said, “This is what God says: ‘Why do you disobey the Lord’s commands? You will not prosper. Because you have forsaken the Lord, he has forsaken you.’”
Are you only going to look at Deuteronomy and ignore Joshua and Chronicles because it's another book, another context? God does forsake his people, which he drew to himself and bestowed favor upon once upon a time, but when they forsake God, God forsakes them back. That's the behavior you're trying to encourage in eastern youth (don't take what other books have to say and try to compare it to Paul's letters; don't compare books to books).
Stop your instability.
God is only saving those who stay in Jesus until the end. Just because he called you, it doesn't mean you'll be one of those people who stay in him. Those who don't stay in Jesus after receiving the Holy Spirit—whether that forsaking is immediate, half way, or near the end—all they have to look forward to is God dealing with them faithfully in accord with his word, staying loyal to what he said: they won't be saved. He won't be holding people against their will, to love him against their will, to reign with him despite not agreeing with him. That's illogical. A person that forsakes Jesus is not in agreement with him anymore.
You're totally obfuscating yourself behind a wall of theological terms and philosophical concepts—that do not originate with the bible but with a sect i.e. Calvinism—(and mislabeling what I'm doing as eisegesis) so you don't see the overwhelming pattern in scripture from beginning to end: God calls people out from the world; but not all of them stay with him despite being called, despite God cleaning them up and separating them from worldly ways. It's that simple. Why can't you see that this is what's happening from Genesis to Revelation? That a remnant gets saved will never change: but what does change: the individuals that make up that remnant along the way. Ergo, make sure you don't lose your crown and someone does not take it from you, that no one takes your place at the dinner table. You really shouldn't speak before hearing a matter out; seeing as you ignored my post, you're prematurely saying I didn't address Romans 8 (it took three separate posts, the totality of my response, to address the concept); that is why I could not divide it up into short, individual posts. That is not the way i communicate (nor is it the way Paul communicates; not surprisingly, you have the same attitude towards his letters—here a little, there a little, not the entirety). And instead of believing the truth, that I cannot express myself/the full concept in such short words, you become cynical and say I'm making excuses, and that my form of communicating is something you feel sorry for (insults, nothing of substance). I don't turn Paul into a hypocrite the way I interpret his letters. You do and it's something I'm saving eastern youth from.
The only thing I agree with you on is this:Quote: The Bible has to be the final authority.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 10, 2015 5:18 pm
I'd like to agree, if it were true why is there 'walk in Christ' where you can fall away by disobedience and sin and back into the pit of both internal/external hell? Why would He call and bring others to repent? Why did He create us in the first place with the ability to each act on our separate own entirely apart from His? Why does He want us to grow in the walk then never fall away but stick ourselves to Him? Instead of getting as complicated as beyond the simple answer it's safer to tackle the bigger question/question you can't ignore. I more than want to believe I'll be saved just by accepting the call. But look at how much we/everyone sin and we dig our graves. Even hearing the call is enough for that person to admit he has a heart not made of cold stone. Then for rejecting the actual walk, that soul is completely responsible along with his efforts when it's the last for the end of his time. Because the excuse is hearing the call and not allowing yourself to be in Him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 11, 2015 12:56 am
Just attempt to read some verses of Scripture as if once saved always saved was true. You will see how it doesn't make sense. It is imposing a grid on the text and forcing the text to agree with the grid. It will make for a very strained reading of the Bible where you have to reinterpret everything it says in light of the grid. Revelation 2:10 Do not fear what you are about to suffer. Behold, the devil is about to throw some of you into prison, that you may be tested, and for ten days you will have tribulation. Be faithful unto death, and I will give you the crown of life. The eisegesis would be; Fear what you are about to suffer. Behold, the devil is about to throw some of you into prison, so that you may be tested, and for ten days you will have tribulation. Don't be faithful unto death, and I will still give you the crown of life. Quote: Definition of EISEGESIS : the interpretation of a text (as of the Bible) by reading into it one's own ideas Romans 6:16 Don't you know that when you offer yourselves to someone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one you obey--whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? Eisegesis: Don't you know that when you offer yourselves to someones as obedient slaves, you are not slaves of the one you obey--whether you are slaves to sin, which does not lead to death, or to obedience, which does not lead to righteousness? Revelation 3:4-6 Yet you have a few people in Sardis who have not soiled their clothes. They will walk with me, dressed in white, for they are worthy. The one who is victorious will, like them, be dressed in white. I will never blot out the name of that person from the book of life, but will acknowledge that name before my Father and his angels. Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches. Eisegesis: All the people in Sardis have not soiled their clothes, because it is impossible to soil your clothes. They will will walk with me, dressed in white, because all you have to do is be saved at one point. There is nothing to be victorious over. Names are never blotted out of the book of life, therefor I will acknowledge that name before my Father and his angels. Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches. Matthew 10:33 But whoever disowns me before others, I will disown before my Father in heaven. Eisegesis: But whoever disowns me before others, I will never disown before my Father in heaven. Matthew 10:22 and you will be hated by all for my name's sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved. Eisegesis: And you will be hated by all for my name's sake. But the one who does not endure to the end will be saved. Revelation 3:11-12 I am coming soon. Hold on to what you have, so that no one will take your crown. 'He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he will not go out from it anymore; and I will write on him the name of My God, and the name of the city of My God, Eisegesis: I am coming soon. No need to hold on to what you have, so that no one will take your crown. You will receive a new one. 'He who does not overcome, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he will not go out from it anymore; and I will write on him the name of My God, and the name of the city of My God, Revelation 22:12 "Look, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to each person according to what they have done. Eisegesis: "Look, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will not give to each person according to what they have done, but reward those that are unfaithful. Romans 1:17 For in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed--a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: "The righteous will live by faith." Eisegesis: For in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed--a righteousness that is not by faith from first to last, just as it is written: "The righteous will not live by faith." 2 Timothy 4:7-8 I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith: in the future there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day; and not only to me, but also to all who have loved His appearing. Eisegesis: I have fought in vain, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith though it was not necessary: in the future there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award me on that day; and not only me, but also all who are indifferent to His appearing. 1 Corinthians 9:24 Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one gets the prize? Run in such a way as to get the prize. Eisegesis: Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but everyone gets the prize? Stop and take a breather. Philippians 1:27 Whatever happens, conduct yourselves in a manner worthy of the gospel of Christ. Then, whether I come and see you or only hear about you in my absence, I will know that you stand firm in the one Spirit, striving together as one for the faith of the gospel Eisegesis: Whatever happens, conduct yourself in what ever manner you please. Then, whether I come and see you or only hear about you in my absence, I will know that you stand firm in the one Spirit, striving together as one for the faith of the gospel Hebrews 6:4-8 It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age 6 and who have fallen away, to be brought back to repentance. To their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace. Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. But land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned. Eisegesis: It is possible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared and still share in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted and still tastes the goodness of the Word of God and the powers of the coming age and who have fallen away yet stand, to be brought back to repentance. They suffer no loss in crucifying the Son of God over again and subjecting him to public disgrace. Deserts not receiving rain produce a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. The land that produces thorns and thistles is still worth a little and blessed abundantly. In the end it will be redeemed. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. Eisegesis: Do you not know that wrongdoers will inherit the kingdom of God? You are not deceived: The sexually immoral and idolaters and adulterers and men who have sex with men, and thieves, and the covetous, and drunkards, and revilers, and swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 11, 2015 9:44 am
eastern youth I've been recently drowning in neverending streams of videos on a side of preachers and faith on YouTube to learn more about the truth and instead gotten myself to be confused on whether Once Saved Always Saved or Calvanism is the right one to go about to uphold and believe. Because parts of both arguments make sense whenever I pass a comment in reply to the one I'd have just read before above I thought concluded or confirmed my last thoughts but they're both very smart(?) in reasoning on the counterargumentative stance and I can't discern from the two. They've simultaneously called each other out on their beliefs that "that's of the devil" and it's not my desire to want to be on the wrong path ending up in the lake of fire from being deceived by Satan's wolf in sheep's clothing. I know I need to indulge in the word of God as first priority but I chose to research on some matters (alot of matters way before coming onto this such as the right bible translation which I'm having trouble with finding the right one since I read all bibles are corrupted from the original message. Now I know why they say Satan is so good at twisting it up; it wasn't an exaggeration and I feel like I'm always fooled yet still am thankful for my eyes being opened even just a little) when I came across the strings of videos on youtube with all the comments and arguments attached below the video but I'm just lead into confusion more and more, day by day, hour by hour. The one time salvation bit where only the blood of Christ who died for our sins and already paid in full and how no one man can take it away and the calvanist bit where it implies there needs to be evidence of fruit shown from believing in Jesus have scriptures pertaining to/backing up both sides of the claim is why I'm confused. Even though people defending the OSAS argue in sin man is still saved because of our title of being a sinner in the flesh the salvation being received and sealed through a one time blood of Jesus on the cross makes complete sense. I mean even the first part where man is never not going to be in sin no matter what thus that makes being still a sinner even when saved makes sense opposed to the other argument in calvanism where it's stated you can't be saved in that you're going to go to heaven in just that alone. I know calvanism supports good fruit as evident from salvation but I'm not trying to see which is correct so I can either choose to not produce good fruit or produce good fruit; I know spirit of the believer automatically yields good results but.. (At this point I don't really get it at all; it's how confused I am) I'm trying to seek the concrete truth so I'm furthermore not mixed up on anything before going on. Please can my brothers and sisters here help me in this guild if you have any information or powerful discerning spirit I'm trying to learn some of these things I'm confused about. I know I'm flawed in my understandings therefore I'm at total ease with learning and humbling myself to the true knowledge of a right believer in leading me down the right path. Much thanks and God Bless!
If you'll allow me to shed some important light on a very important matter...
Calvinists and Arminians, and everyone in-between, tend to label others as "heretics" or holding to doctrines "of the Devil". Both sides of the debate will go so far as to say that the other side isn't saved. It's a classic case of human arrogance and pride, or simply not understanding the Gospel.
There are several subjects of study in Christian theology. Their names are: Theology Proper (study of God), Doctrines of the Scriptures (inerrancy, infallibility, reliability of the Bible), Angelology (the study of angels and demons), Anthropology and Harmartiology (the study of man and sin), Christology (the study of Jesus), Soteriology (the study of salvation), Pneumatology (the study of the Holy Spirit), Ecclesiology (the study of the Church), and Eschatology (the study of the end times).
There are three circles, if you will, in Christian theology. These circles are Primary, Secondary, and Tertiary. Generally, people put the above categories into one of the three circles. These circles demonstrate the importance the doctrines have in the faith.
Primary: Theology Proper, Anthropology and Harmartiology, Christology, and some Soteriology
Secondary: Doctrines of the Scriptures, Pneumatology, and some Soteriology
Tertiary: Angelology, Ecclesiology, and Eschatology
Now of course, individual Christians will list certain categories in other circles. This is where the problem is, and why the debate over something such as Eschatology is so fierce. But a lot of people will generally agree to the way I've listed them. When we look at Jesus' teachings and the book of Acts, we really find the central doctrines, the core of what Christianity is. When you look at the Gospels and Acts, you will notice that most of the discussion is centered on the Kingdom of God, sin and repentance, Jesus' death, Jesus' resurrection, and salvation.
This is important. It is important because it demonstrates what the apostles thought was most important. Additionally, the early creeds helped to demonstrate what was most important. That is, who Jesus is (God), what Jesus did (died for your sin and the sin of others, and was resurrected--the resurrection is the most important doctrine in Christianity), what Jesus will do (He will return), what man is and why man needs Jesus (man is made in the Image of God, man is sinful, man needs redeemed).
You will find a lot of debate in Christianity. But unless someone is claiming something like "Jesus didn't rise from the dead", or "Jesus didn't really die for sin", salvation is not threatened. It's not threatened because such things as eschatology and certain nuances of soteriology may be important, but they're not foundational to salvation or to the truth of Christian faith. You don't have to believe that the Bible is inerrant. You can believe in evolution.
What is most important to Christian faith and practice is this: You are a sinner who deserves death and you are an enemy of God, Jesus lived a perfect life and died in your place for your sins, that you might live and be a friend of God, Jesus was resurrected to show that eternal life will be granted to you and that His payment for your sin was accepted by the Father, and that Jesus will return to restore the world and to resurrect believers into glorified, physical bodies, that they might live in communion with God forever and ever. That is the Gospel.
So the debate between Calvinists and Arminians, while important, isn't near as important as the Gospel. So when Calvinists and Arminians condemn each other to hell, what they're really doing is putting their theological differences before the Gospel. They either don't understand what the heart of the Gospel is or they are proud and demand that they have their way when it comes to theology.
Do not be afraid. If you love Jesus and you trust in His sacrifice, recognizing that you are a sinner in need of God's grace, and that Jesus came back from the dead, you will be saved. Can you lose that salvation? If somebody leaves the faith, were they ever really saved to begin with?
Here's what is most important: Always put your faith in Jesus to the very end.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 11, 2015 5:57 pm
cristobela Micah Seven Eighteen eastern youth Thank you for placing me on the right page, for sure I think it's easier the way you clear-grasp explained and showed for me to be able to fully comprehend with quotes from the bible and their right definitions presented in whole truth of light. I feel I'm starting to renew my faith in Him and yours seems to be the honest answer that has no added confusion that I may trust and move forward with. I have the page of your source bookmarked. Thanks so much. I'll be going off on this foundation to strengthen the bond with Him that gives no doubt as to whether I have the truth. I'm so content! Also much thanks for clearing out the other problem of trouble finding a translation. First I thought just KJV, and had looked into it before that it's derived from the textus receptus but people use strong's concordance and interlinear to study alongside it as well. This seems like it's what I need to do to completely understand the gospel. I'm so relieved now thanks for the testimony and reply! I'm sorry you feel that way. You should be careful to accept what seems to be strong argumentation so quickly. She may have written a lot, but there isn't much substance behind it. She hasn't addressed the issue in Romans 8 by any means: _ Romans 8:28-30 28And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. 29For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; 30and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified. _ This text clearly shows that those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of Jesus Christ. If someone doesn't become conformed to the image of Jesus, they must not be one of the ones talked about here. Those who were predestined to become conformed to the image of Jesus Christ, He also called, and those whom He called, He also justified. She might say that someone can be called and not justified, but the text says the opposite of what she says. She's jumping outside of the context of the text itself and going to another text with a different context and then placing that text into Romans 8, making it contradictory. This is called eisegesis, and is not a sound principal of interpretation. Those who were called not only are justified, but those who are justified are also glorified, which would be our state in Heaven. Those who are justified cannot fall away and lose that justification, because they also must be glorified. We have to study the text itself in it's context, rather than attempting to undermine the clear teaching of Scripture by jumping someplace else with a different context, taking a text from there, and then inserting it into the other place to make it say what we want it to say. Be careful. Really scrutinize what other people try teaching you. The Bible has to be the final authority.
Paul even acknowledged this about his very own letters:
1 Corinthians 5:9-11 (NIV)
9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10 not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 11 But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister[a] but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people.
Footnotes:
1 Corinthians 5:11 The Greek word for brother or sister (adelphos) refers here to a believer, whether man or woman, as part of God’s family; also in 8:11, 13.
He had to write another letter to clarify what he meant in a previous letter (a totally separate letter—outside of what we know as 1st Corinthians and 2nd Corinthians). Is Paul taking himself out of context? for trying to refer to a separate letter? The danger here: people were making an erroneous absolute statement based on that one phrase of his in a previous letter.
Along that same vein, Calvinists would have us look at Philippians 1:6 (Philippians being a letter written by Paul) and say..."oh, see. you're getting saved regardless once you've been drawn to him / once you've been called"...
Philippians 1:6 (NIV)
6 being confident of this, that he who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus.
But making an absolute statement out of that is unstable in light of what the same Paul writes to Timothy:
2 Timothy 2:12 (NIV)
12 if we endure,
we will also reign with him.
If we disown him,
he will also disown us;
You have to resort to theological commentaries "to undermine the clear teaching of Scripture". What Paul communicates, in light of his thoughts, in two separate letters, taken as one: once you've been drawn to God, he's not the one who initiates abandonment: you are. God has full intentions to save you / finish what he started in you / and work on you—but he's not going to force you to finish. That's the comfort of Phil 1:6. God is not the one who abandons first. The same thought expressed in the Old Testament:
1 Chronicles 28:9 (NIV)
9 “And you, my son Solomon, acknowledge the God of your father, and serve him with wholehearted devotion and with a willing mind, for the Lord searches every heart and understands every desire and every thought. If you seek him, he will be found by you; but if you forsake him, he will reject you forever.
That's like someone trying to make an absolute statement out of one verse in Deuteronomy:
Deuteronomy 31:6 (NIV)
6 Be strong and courageous. Do not be afraid or terrified because of them, for the Lord your God goes with you; he will never leave you nor forsake you.”
While disregarding the Book of Joshua and 2nd Chronicles (entirely different books):
Joshua 24:20 (NIV)
20 If you forsake the Lord and serve foreign gods, he will turn and bring disaster on you and make an end of you, after he has been good to you.”
2 Chronicles 24:20 (NIV)
20 Then the Spirit of God came on Zechariah son of Jehoiada the priest. He stood before the people and said, “This is what God says: ‘Why do you disobey the Lord’s commands? You will not prosper. Because you have forsaken the Lord, he has forsaken you.’”
Are you only going to look at Deuteronomy and ignore Joshua and Chronicles because it's another book, another context? God does forsake his people, which he drew to himself and bestowed favor upon once upon a time, but when they forsake God, God forsakes them back. That's the behavior you're trying to encourage in eastern youth (don't take what other books have to say and try to compare it to Paul's letters; don't compare books to books).
Stop your instability.
God is only saving those who stay in Jesus until the end. Just because he called you, it doesn't mean you'll be one of those people who stay in him. Those who don't stay in Jesus after receiving the Holy Spirit—whether that forsaking is immediate, half way, or near the end—all they have to look forward to is God dealing with them faithfully in accord with his word, staying loyal to what he said: they won't be saved. He won't be holding people against their will, to love him against their will, to reign with him despite not agreeing with him. That's illogical. A person that forsakes Jesus is not in agreement with him anymore.
You're totally obfuscating yourself behind a wall of theological terms and philosophical concepts—that do not originate with the bible but with a sect i.e. Calvinism—(and mislabeling what I'm doing as eisegesis) so you don't see the overwhelming pattern in scripture from beginning to end: God calls people out from the world; but not all of them stay with him despite being called, despite God cleaning them up and separating them from worldly ways. It's that simple. Why can't you see that this is what's happening from Genesis to Revelation? That a remnant gets saved will never change: but what does change: the individuals that make up that remnant along the way. Ergo, make sure you don't lose your crown and someone does not take it from you, that no one takes your place at the dinner table. You really shouldn't speak before hearing a matter out; seeing as you ignored my post, you're prematurely saying I didn't address Romans 8 (it took three separate posts, the totality of my response, to address the concept); that is why I could not divide it up into short, individual posts. That is not the way i communicate (nor is it the way Paul communicates; not surprisingly, you have the same attitude towards his letters—here a little, there a little, not the entirety). And instead of believing the truth, that I cannot express myself/the full concept in such short words, you become cynical and say I'm making excuses, and that my form of communicating is something you feel sorry for (insults, nothing of substance). I don't turn Paul into a hypocrite the way I interpret his letters. You do and it's something I'm saving eastern youth from.
The only thing I agree with you on is this:Quote: The Bible has to be the final authority. Nothing you quoted here conflicts with what I wrote (or what Calvinism teaches; why don't you try figuring out what we believe and thinking about those passages from our perspective to see if they really conflict), and yet you still do not respond to Romans 8 in any meaningful fashion. If you understand a subject well enough, you can use fewer words to explain. I suggest that you had to write walls of text last time because you don't know how to lock in on what's important in a conversation, but rather you have to throw many things in that often are not at all relevant, ultimately. I used to do these same things myself, but by God's grace I've gotten better at this. I have no interest in debating with someone who has no interest in actually addressing the text. I have had too many of those, and they just go on and on until someone decides to stop. You bring up texts that don't cause conflict (no one claims God doesn't reject people who are professing followers but rather we say God never casts out true followers, who would be the elect; when you quote those texts you make assumptions that these people cannot be false converts but must be the elect, yet you will not be able to substantiate that), yet say Romans 8 can't mean what it says because they cause conflict. I was able to exegete Romans 8 with few words to eastern youth because it's the plain, true meaning of the text; feel free to share how my exegesis is wrong in few words as well, unless you're really unable. By the way, thank you for the shorter post this time. I did read through it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 11, 2015 6:18 pm
eastern youth I'd like to agree, if it were true why is there 'walk in Christ' where you can fall away by disobedience and sin and back into the pit of both internal/external hell? Why would He call and bring others to repent? Why did He create us in the first place with the ability to each act on our separate own entirely apart from His? Why does He want us to grow in the walk then never fall away but stick ourselves to Him? Instead of getting as complicated as beyond the simple answer it's safer to tackle the bigger question/question you can't ignore. I more than want to believe I'll be saved just by accepting the call. But look at how much we/everyone sin and we dig our graves. Even hearing the call is enough for that person to admit he has a heart not made of cold stone. Then for rejecting the actual walk, that soul is completely responsible along with his efforts when it's the last for the end of his time. Because the excuse is hearing the call and not allowing yourself to be in Him. Cristobella would be confusing the general call with the effectual call. These are not the same thing. You're pointing to how much we sin, but again, this shows a misunderstanding of Calvinism and salvation. First, did you sin less to earn salvation somehow? If you didn't earn it by being righteous, how do you keep it by being righteous? Secondly, you could never be perfectly righteous and if Christ's righteousness is really credited to us, we're saved based on that, not how well we perform. If we can lose our salvation because we don't perform well enough, then we're being cast away ultimately because we're being credited with our own righteousness (or lack thereof), whereas the reality is that the Christian is seen as not guilty and holy based only upon the perfect work of Jesus and that alone. True believers will never forsake Jesus. It's as simple as that. The called in Romans 8 are the same ones who love Jesus; if they don't love Him they aren't those people. The question isn't "Are you a believer who then isn't" but rather "Were you ever a believer truly to begin with, or was it just a profession"? True believers will perform good works because this is what the elect are created for (Ephesians 2:10; Philippians 2:12-13). Remember that Romans 8 also says they are predestined to be conformed to the image of Jesus; performing good works is part of that and if someone rejects the faith then they obviously are not doing that, so again, they cannot be one of those who are predestined to be conformed to the image of Jesus, because they were not. There are many assumptions in your language that I would love to address, and because of that I've tried to put a lot in and still keep this short, hopefully giving some sort of starting point at least if you're at all interested in looking. God draws His people to Himself. I trust Him, even in your sanctification. Though you have people hitting you pretty hard with things that are not true, I don't think they mean ill at all, but rather I believe they are not as sanctified in this particular area (in others, they may well be much more sanctified than myself) and their traditions are blinding them. I believe your traditions are also blinding you on this issue, and the objection to O.S.A.S. is a common tradition. You're always welcome to message me or add me, if you'd ever like. If not, it's not like I think you're not saved, and just because you might disagree with me doesn't mean I think you're a heretic (I don't believe cristobella is, either, though she's pretty quick to throw that at me; I used to be pretty quick about that stuff too, when I was a younger Christian). I'll be praying for you and cristobella (have been since our exchange last time, actually, and I believe that's one reason God had us have that exchange, not just for prayers for her, but I hope she or others pray for me as well) and the others here as well. Please, pray for me, also, if you're willing to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 11, 2015 6:30 pm
Garland-Green Just attempt to read some verses of Scripture as if once saved always saved was true. You will see how it doesn't make sense. It is imposing a grid on the text and forcing the text to agree with the grid. It will make for a very strained reading of the Bible where you have to reinterpret everything it says in light of the grid. Revelation 2:10 Do not fear what you are about to suffer. Behold, the devil is about to throw some of you into prison, that you may be tested, and for ten days you will have tribulation. Be faithful unto death, and I will give you the crown of life. The eisegesis would be; Fear what you are about to suffer. Behold, the devil is about to throw some of you into prison, so that you may be tested, and for ten days you will have tribulation. Don't be faithful unto death, and I will still give you the crown of life. Quote: Definition of EISEGESIS : the interpretation of a text (as of the Bible) by reading into it one's own ideas Romans 6:16 Don't you know that when you offer yourselves to someone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one you obey--whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? Eisegesis: Don't you know that when you offer yourselves to someones as obedient slaves, you are not slaves of the one you obey--whether you are slaves to sin, which does not lead to death, or to obedience, which does not lead to righteousness? Revelation 3:4-6 Yet you have a few people in Sardis who have not soiled their clothes. They will walk with me, dressed in white, for they are worthy. The one who is victorious will, like them, be dressed in white. I will never blot out the name of that person from the book of life, but will acknowledge that name before my Father and his angels. Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches. Eisegesis: All the people in Sardis have not soiled their clothes, because it is impossible to soil your clothes. They will will walk with me, dressed in white, because all you have to do is be saved at one point. There is nothing to be victorious over. Names are never blotted out of the book of life, therefor I will acknowledge that name before my Father and his angels. Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches. Matthew 10:33 But whoever disowns me before others, I will disown before my Father in heaven. Eisegesis: But whoever disowns me before others, I will never disown before my Father in heaven. Matthew 10:22 and you will be hated by all for my name's sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved. Eisegesis: And you will be hated by all for my name's sake. But the one who does not endure to the end will be saved. Revelation 3:11-12 I am coming soon. Hold on to what you have, so that no one will take your crown. 'He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he will not go out from it anymore; and I will write on him the name of My God, and the name of the city of My God, Eisegesis: I am coming soon. No need to hold on to what you have, so that no one will take your crown. You will receive a new one. 'He who does not overcome, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he will not go out from it anymore; and I will write on him the name of My God, and the name of the city of My God, Revelation 22:12 "Look, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to each person according to what they have done. Eisegesis: "Look, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will not give to each person according to what they have done, but reward those that are unfaithful. Romans 1:17 For in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed--a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: "The righteous will live by faith." Eisegesis: For in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed--a righteousness that is not by faith from first to last, just as it is written: "The righteous will not live by faith." 2 Timothy 4:7-8 I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith: in the future there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day; and not only to me, but also to all who have loved His appearing. Eisegesis: I have fought in vain, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith though it was not necessary: in the future there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award me on that day; and not only me, but also all who are indifferent to His appearing. 1 Corinthians 9:24 Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one gets the prize? Run in such a way as to get the prize. Eisegesis: Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but everyone gets the prize? Stop and take a breather. Philippians 1:27 Whatever happens, conduct yourselves in a manner worthy of the gospel of Christ. Then, whether I come and see you or only hear about you in my absence, I will know that you stand firm in the one Spirit, striving together as one for the faith of the gospel Eisegesis: Whatever happens, conduct yourself in what ever manner you please. Then, whether I come and see you or only hear about you in my absence, I will know that you stand firm in the one Spirit, striving together as one for the faith of the gospel Hebrews 6:4-8 It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age 6 and who have fallen away, to be brought back to repentance. To their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace. Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. But land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned. Eisegesis: It is possible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared and still share in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted and still tastes the goodness of the Word of God and the powers of the coming age and who have fallen away yet stand, to be brought back to repentance. They suffer no loss in crucifying the Son of God over again and subjecting him to public disgrace. Deserts not receiving rain produce a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. The land that produces thorns and thistles is still worth a little and blessed abundantly. In the end it will be redeemed. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. Eisegesis: Do you not know that wrongdoers will inherit the kingdom of God? You are not deceived: The sexually immoral and idolaters and adulterers and men who have sex with men, and thieves, and the covetous, and drunkards, and revilers, and swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. Brother, nothing you're quoting conflicts with O.S.A.S. To say it does betrays a misunderstanding of the position you're criticizing. I can heartily agree with everything that you quoted, because it doesn't conflict with what I believe. Now, you could say that I'm changing meanings of texts so they won't conflict. It wouldn't be the first claim of that sort, and I can totally understand how that might be the reaction. I used to see it the same way you guys might. If you're interested in learning why the Reformed position believes those texts in such a way that it does not cause conflict (obviously I believe the way we understand the texts are the true and plain meaning, if someone simply steps back and looks at them), there are plenty of writers who have written in depth who could explain plenty better than myself, I'm sure. Why spend the time re-explaining what others have already written extensively about, explaining in-depth? On the other hand, if you have specific questions, feel free to ask them, though I'd prefer privately, if possible. You can't really interact with writings of some dead author and I'd rather actually just have a dialogue between you and myself, rather than run the risk of random people jumping in who also require replying to. Thank you for the charity in your objection to what I believe. I'm glad you're willing to labor in the Gospel with me, despite our disagreements on this issue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
