Donations for the month of July


We have received a total of $123 in donations towards our goal of $175.


Don't want to use PayPal? Go HERE


Search

Member Spotlight
Posts: 56
Joined: April 2013
Show All Member Profiles 
Forum Statistics
Forums30
Topics6,449
Posts50,352
Members912
Most Online373
Mar 5th, 2017
Top Posters(All Time)
Pilgrim 13,211
Tom 3,187
chestnutmare 2,829
J_Edwards 2,615
Wes 1,856
John_C 1,732
RJ_ 1,582
MarieP 1,578
gotribe 1,057
Top Posters(30 Days)
Pilgrim 32
Tom 26
John_C 2
Recent Posts
We should seek the good of other believers.
by chestnutmare. Wed Jul 26, 2017 6:12 AM
Peter Enns
by Tom. Wed Jul 26, 2017 1:16 AM
Whitefield and Wesley
by Tom. Wed Jul 26, 2017 12:55 AM
Offertory Dance at Church of the Redeemer, NYC
by ATulipNotADaisy. Sun Jul 23, 2017 2:33 PM
"Hell's Best Revealed Secret" book review
by Pilgrim. Wed Jul 19, 2017 1:07 PM
4 Blood Moons Video
by Tom. Tue Jul 18, 2017 4:05 PM
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
Page 14 of 14 1 2 12 13 14
#891 - Fri Apr 04, 2003 11:49 AM Re: conditional salvation and God's warnings  
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 285
carlos Offline
Addict
carlos  Offline
Addict

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 285
Philadelphia, PA
JoshT,

I'm sure Fred will give a response. But one thing that I saw and disareed with is your comments regarding Calvin on Romans 11.
In reply to:
[color:"blue"]Concerning Romans 11, it is clearly speaking of salvation for individuals. The example of the root and branches is used to illustrate Israel's fall and the Gentiles obtaining mercy through their fall. Even John Calvin could not escape the conclusion that this was a reference to individual salvation. He simply concluded that it was something that God said to push believers to obedience, but would never really do.



First, Pilgrim has already given u an expostion/exegesis of that chapter in another thread.
Romans 11

Secondly, Let's let Calvin speak in full because your make his commenatary too simplistic and a bit misleading.

"Otherwise thou also shalt be cut off, etc. We now understand in what sense Paul threatens them with excision, whom he has already allowed to have been grafted into the hope of life through God's election. For, first, though this cannot happen to the elect, they have yet need of such warning, in order to subdue the pride of the flesh; which being really opposed to their salvation, ought justly to be terrified with the dread of perdition. As far then as Christians are illuminated by faith, they hear, for their assurance, that the calling of God is without repentance; but as far as they carry about them the flesh, which wantonly resists the grace of God, they are taught humility by this warning, "Take heed lest thou be cut off." Secondly, we must bear in mind the solution which I have before mentioned, -- that Paul speaks not here of the special election of individuals, but sets the Gentiles and Jews in opposition the one to the other; and that therefore the elect are not so much addressed in these words, as those who falsely gloried that they had obtained the place of the Jews: nay, he speaks to the Gentiles generally, and addresses the whole body in common, among whom there were many who were faithful, and those who were members of Christ in name only.

But if it be asked respecting individuals, "How any one could be cut off from the grafting, and how, after excision, he could be grafted again," -- bear in mind, that there are three modes of insition, and two modes of excision. For instance, the children of the faithful are ingrafted, to whom the promise belongs according to the covenant made with the fathers; ingrafted are also they who indeed receive the seed of the gospel, but it strikes no root, or it is choked before it brings any fruit; and thirdly, the elect are ingrafted, who are illuminated unto eternal life according to the immutable purpose of God. The first are cut off, when they refuse the promise given to their fathers, or do not receive it on account of their ingratitude; the second are cut off, when the seed is withered and destroyed; and as the danger of this impends over all, with regard to their own nature, it must be allowed that this warning which Paul gives belongs in a certain way to the faithful, lest they indulge themselves in the sloth of the flesh. But with regard to the present passage, it is enough for us to know, that the vengeance which God had executed on the Jews, is pronounced on the Gentiles, in case they become like them" (Calvin).




"Let all that mind...the peace and comfort of their own souls, wholly apply themselves to the study of Jesus Christ, and him crucified"(Flavel)
#892 - Fri Apr 11, 2003 6:25 AM Re: conditional salvation and God's warnings  
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 406
fredman Offline
Addict
fredman  Offline
Addict

Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 406
Canyon Country, CA
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]To receive salvation, a man must be drawn and called by God (for salvation is of God, not of us), and then answer His call and receive His grace. If any man will hear God and receive His word, he will be granted faith in Christ and repentance to life.</font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>I am in totally agreement, and would add that everyone drawn and called by God will come to the father. If a person is drawn and called, there is no option to reject this work of God. Would you agree with that? I am going to venture a guess and say not, but if so, you are in danger of calling Jesus a liar. Jesus states in John 6:37 that, “all that the Father gives me will come to me and the one who comes to me I will by no means cast out.” Then a little be further, in verse 39 Jesus says, “This is the will of the Father who sent me, that of all He has given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day.” Then in 6:44,45, Jesus states, ”No one can come to me unless the father who sent me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day. It is written in the prophets, and they shall be taught of God, there for everyone who has heard and learned from the father comes to me.” <br><br>It is patently clear, Josh, that if you are going to maintain that to receive salvation a man must be drawn and called by God, then you are going to have to recognize that only those who are drawn and called are the elect, those given to the son by the father as Jesus said in John 6:37. Moreover, those given to the son by the father will be raised up in the last day, which eliminates your idea of a person loosing salvation, and the only way a person can come to Jesus is if the father draws him and he will come. That means that salvation is not an open door for people to come and go as they please like they do in a lounge. Those drawn and called will come, they will believe and follow Christ, and they are eternally secure. <br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"](Fred Asks) "The really burden of proof, however, is for you Josh, to show us, from the text of scripture, why you believe men have the ability to cooperate with God in salvation."<br><br>(then Josh replies)<br>Certainly, John 5:25 says,<br><br>"Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live."<br><br>As you can see, there is regeneration does not precede hearing the call of God, but those that hear will live. How can they hear while they are dead? If God's call can even reach those who are physically dead, then why not those that are spiritually dead as well? Does God compel them to hear, I don't think so; for while it is God who opens the ears and the heart, man can resist him and shut himself off to God's word.</font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>Just a couple of questions: first, are these dead spoken of by Jesus spiritually dead or physically dead? Why or why not? Then secondly, do you agree with Jesus words in the previous verse, 5:24, that, who hears my words and believes in him who sent me has everlasting life, and shall not pass into judgment? In other words, if you are going to use this as a proof text that men have the ability to receive or reject the gospel (even though this section of scripture doesn’t even address that issue), are you ready to also accept the teaching that those who believe will not face judgment, or put another way, loose their salvation?<br><br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"] (Fred had asked) Are there any principles of hermenuetics you utilize when you study the Bible? <br><br>(Josh Responds)They don't have to be similar, simply about the same subject, salvation specifically.</font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>That is a rather naïve assumption. Any proper way to study the Bible would first deal with the exegesis of the text at hand then move out to other texts under consideration. Furthermore, it would first be helpful for you to determine if the text you are using as a proof text is actually talking about salvation specifically, or if you wrongly think it does because it helps under gird your pretext. In other words, you may think a particular verse or passage supports your ideas about salvation, but when placed in the context of where it is found, the author has something else in mind when he wrote. Romans 11:32 is a good example. Paul is not talking about universal salvation, at least not in the manner that you advocate it. The text of Romans 11 is in the broader context of Paul’s discourse about Israel and the Gentiles, and he is specifically addressing the point of why Israel is disobedient, and the purpose of that in relationship to Gentiles. Because of those over riding exegetical factors, it is muddleheaded to suggest Paul is talking about Christ dying for every single person without exception. I believe many others on the board have answered your objection to this, and I will let them answer for me as well.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Many contend that the phrase "in Me" does not necessarily mean saved.</font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>Could you list some of those many who contend that the phrase “in me” does not necessarily mean saved? Are they reputable Biblical teachers, or fruitcakes like Dan Corner?<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]But I cannot think of an example from scripture where a person can be 'in Christ' and not be saved.</font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>Really? Now why is that do you think?<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]But if being 'in Christ' is 'not necessarily being saved', then why would Christ command us to remain in that in order to bear fruit? 'Abide,' indicates continuation, and a person who abides in Him will bear fruit. If a person were not really saved, then abiding anywhere or in anything would do no good at all. To put it simply, you cannot remain in what you were never in, and it does no good to remain in where you should not be. That is why I believe that this is a reference to conditional salvation.</font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>First, who is to say that those people were in to begin with? What brings you to that conclusion? John understood that there were individuals claiming to be “in Christ” but left the church and thus demonstrating that they were never apart of Christ to begin with. (1 John 2:19) How exactly do you understand that passage? Moreover, 2 John and Jude are written to warn believers against false teachers who would try to lead them astray. Nothing in 2 John, Jude, or 2 Peter 2 remotely even suggests that these false teachers were once really saved, but then somehow lost their salvation. That is something you are reading into the Bible.<br>We are told to abide, because like you state, Christ wants us to bear fruit. Those who continue to abide demonstrate the proof of their salvation; those who do not show they were never saved to begin with.<br><br> <blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]To go back to the original language, 'believes' in John 3:16 is present active tense, indicating a presently occuring event. So those who "are believing" in Him will not perish but have everlasting life.</font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>Actually, the word is a participle, as Pilgrim pointed out from a post last week, and is literally rendered “every believing one.” John is not talking about belief as an abstract notion of belief in a set of principles, or the gospel. He is talking about a group of individuals, the believing ones, or the ones believing, ie, the Church, or God’s people. Moreover, you do not deal with the remainder of the verse, or the entire context of what John is talking about. <br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]The question is then, can a person lose their faith? I believe so, consider 1 Timothy 5:11-12, which speaks of younger women who are supported by the church, but begin to turn against Christ, it says,<br><br>"But the younger widows refuse: for when they have begun to wax wanton against Christ, they will marry; Having damnation, because they have cast off their first faith."<br><br>People sometimes ask me, "well, what was their first faith?" Not to be condescending, but one does not have condemnation for casting off a false faith.</font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>This is a perfect example of how you have a skewed Bible study methodology. First, you leave the context of John 3 and go over to 1Timothy to bolster your claim of conditional salvation. Second, you do not even consider what Paul is talking about by not looking at the context. Let me ask you, why do you think Paul is talking about a woman’s salvation here? Is it because he states they cast off their first faith? Are you actually saying that because a young widow desires to be married that she is in danger of loosing her salvation? If you look at the entire context of the passage here, you will notice that Paul is laying out directions on taking care of widows. More than likely, what Paul is talking about is not a loss of salvation, but a young woman who may have pledged to remain a widow in service to the church; then after they have a period of time to grieve for their deceased husband, become desirous to remarry. The point Paul is making is that young widow women should not be taken care of by the church so that they become idle and busybodies. Paul is encouraging the church not to be a stumbling block to young ladies who may be thinking immaturely. So, the thought Paul is making when he states that the women cast off their first faith is not referring to loosing salvation, but disregarding their service to the church they had pledged after becoming widows. Paul is not talking about personal salvation, but a person possibly breaking a vow. <br> <br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"] (Fred had stated) "That is what John summed up in his epistle that they went out from us, because they were not of us (1 John 2:19). These people were not Christian to begin with. If they had been, their would had been perseverance on their part."<br><br>(Josh responds) What John was saying was that those who were not of God departed from out of the church, not from following God.</font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>What exactly is the difference and how do you arrive at this conclusion? Are you saying they left First Baptist church and moved their membership to Bible community church?<br> <br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]No, I do not believe that a small doctrinal error is damnable, this is evidenced by the fact that I do consider Calvinists to be Christians, albeit errant on a secondary point. But the Galatians were a bit different you see, Paul said that they had been taken by another gospel, and noted in Galatians 1:8,<br><br>"But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed."<br><br>It's kind of funny talking to a Calvinist about this, because the charge that I believe in works righteousness is often leveled falsely against me. But the Galatian believers were moved from the true gospel into a false on, and some who had known God embraced it.</font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>If you are correct, then Peter temporarily lost his salvation, along with Barnabas. So, did the Holy Spirit leave them both and then came back after Paul rebuked them?<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]"Of course not all of the believers were taken in by this, it was not to these that Paul wrote,<br>For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. <br>Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. <br>For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith."<br><br>But to those who had embraced this false gospel, he proclaimed that Christ had become of no effect to them, and that they had fallen from grace; and contrasted them with those who still waited for righteousness by faith, that is to say, the ones who had not gone after the false gospel. So he was confident that those who had not fallen from grace would heed his words in one accord</font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>Was Peter and Barnabas part of this second group? Paul says that both of them were to be blamed.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Not really, the false prophets often (I would say usually) came from the holy people of Israel. Peter's description of them shows that they were believers at one time, for how can one "escape the pollutions of the world by knowing the Lord Jesus Christ," and not be saved? As most of you are so fond of pointing out to me, the spiritually dead can do nothing to be subject to God's law. So how then did they rid themselves (even for a time) of the world's pollutions -- much less by the knowledge of Christ?</font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>Peter has specific OT illustrations in mind when he wrote his epistle. None of them are examples of false prophets coming from with in the people. Most importantly, however, Peter states in 2:1, that the false teachers brought in destructive heresies from the outside, meaning that the false teachers were not a part of the congregation, but crept in unnoticed, sly moving along side the people of God. Jude confirms Peter’s words in his epistle when he writes that these men who crept in unnoticed, indicating that they came in from the outside. These were not well intentioned believers who happened to go bad, but bad unbelievers who happened to come into the church from the outside. <br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"] Now about the warnings in scripture, if it is impossible for a thing to happen to us, then why are we warned of it? You seem to think that this is to 'weed out' the true believers from the false, that not one true believer will be lost, and that the scriptures do not imply conditional salvation. Here is where I have a problem, if a conditional statement is made (such as in Revelation 22:19), then that is a condition that is set. It would not matter if the fulfillment or violation of that condition ever occured, it is still a condition. So I cannot see why you fault me for believing in conditional salvation.</font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>Your problem is that you gloss over the context of where the condition is found. You do not consider the intention of the writer, as well as the overall theme of his epistle. Also, you ignore the obvious eternal security passages that we have been pointing out to you. And one textual note. If you have a reputable study Bible, it should note that Revelation 22:19 is a textual variant. In the bulk of good NT manuscripts of Revelation, the text adds the word “may” to Revelation 22:18 and 19. Thus, they are not conditional statements of threat, but John’s personal commentary in the form of a curse against those who would take away from, or add to the Revelation. <br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Secondly, I do believe that God's word clearly states that some will not remain in God's grace, but will fall away. Matthew 24:12 says, "And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold."Yep, 'love' in this passage is agape love.</font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>What difference does the word agape mean? Are you assuming that any use of the word agape implies Christian love? That is a boneheaded assumption, and it would do you well to read some reputable Greek grammarians on the use of agape and philo love. DA Carson has a good study in his short little book, “Exegetical Fallacies.” Nothing in Matthew 24:12 means these are Christians loosing their salvation. You are reading that into the passage. The same goes for 1 Corinthians 16:22.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Thirdly, if the warnings in scripture are given by God with the intention that we receive them and believe them, (such as: If I do not abide in Christ, then I will be 'cut off,' or that my name will be 'removed from the book of life'), then why do you fault me for taking them quite literally? If it was God's purpose that believers actually believe His warnings, then am I not serving God's purpose by teaching the same and believing it to be so? And are you not defying God's purpose by stating effectively that such could never happen, therefore making His warning of no effect? Just a thought.</font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>Again, as I stated above, you have some flawed Bible study skills that need to be corrected. I do not say that to make fun of you, but to point out a weakness in your argumentation. With these warning passages, your don’t consider context, purpose of writing, the intention of the writer, and the theme of the epistle when throwing up your proof texts. Those factors are key in making an effective argument in favor of a particular position, let alone understand the Bible. By taking the Bible “literally” as you state, perverts the work of Christ on the cross, and casts disdain upon the promises of God to save a people unto himself. <br> <br>Talk at you in a couple of months<br>Fred<br><br>


"Ah, sitting - the great leveler of men. From the mightest of pharaohs to the lowest of peasants, who doesn't enjoy a good sit?" M. Burns
#45784 - Tue Jan 11, 2011 8:26 PM Re: Revelation 22:19 Contradicts Calvinist Doctrine [Re: Pilgrim]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2
Ricky Offline
Plebeian
Ricky  Offline
Plebeian

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2
Puerto Rico
Interestingly enough, there are even people who do not agree with Calvinism, and who say they are not Arminians either, like Anonymous here, who agree with Pilgrim. Remember, Anonymous that the issue here is the preservation of the saints, thus, Calvinists and some others (Non- Calvinists) who agree with this doctrine do agree with Pilgrim's interpretation. Check it out.

http://bible.org/seriespage/revelation-appendix-6-book-life

http://net.bible.org/dictionary.php?word=Book%20Of%20Life

http://www.learnthebible.org/the-book-of-life.html-0

Of course, I believe that Calvinism is the most logical, and of course biblical, worldview if you hold to the "two books" position. Since mankind is dead in sin, people can not stay saved, thus God preserves our salvation.

#45786 - Tue Jan 11, 2011 8:32 PM Re: Revelation 22:19 Contradicts Calvinist Doctrine [Re: J_Edwards]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2
Ricky Offline
Plebeian
Ricky  Offline
Plebeian

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2
Puerto Rico
Amen to that J edwards. Agree with that 100%

#45787 - Wed Jan 12, 2011 1:43 PM Re: Revelation 22:19 Contradicts Calvinist Doctrine [Re: Ricky]  
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1
Kez Offline
Plebeian
Kez  Offline
Plebeian

Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1
67432
A newbie here.

Election is simple to the ones who have ears to hear.

(John 10:25-27 KJV) Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me. {26} But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you. {27} My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:

His sheep hear and follow. The reason people don't is because they are not His sheep.


(Gal 2:21 KJV) I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.

#45789 - Wed Jan 12, 2011 5:06 PM Re: Revelation 22:19 Contradicts Calvinist Doctrine [Re: Kez]  
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,829
chestnutmare Offline
Annie Oakley
chestnutmare  Offline
Annie Oakley

Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,829
NH
Hi Kez, Welcome to The Highway Discussion Board! I hope that you will enjoy your time spent here. [Linked Image]

Note that there are many articles on the web site that might interest you. We look forward to getting to know you. There is an FAQ section which may help answer any questions about how this board works but feel free to PM us or ask questions that you may have.





The Chestnut Mare
All that is gold does not glitter,
Not all those who wander are lost
The old that is strong does not wither,
Deep roots are not reached by frost.
- - - -JRR Tolkien "Lord of the Rings"
#50714 - Fri Jun 06, 2014 2:38 PM Re: Revelation 22:19 Contradicts Calvinist Doctrine [Re: ]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,211
Pilgrim Offline
Head Honcho
Pilgrim  Offline

Head Honcho

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,211
NH, USA
Originally Posted By: Cross Reference
[quote=Pilgrim]

Quote:
The fact that there is a warning that one may have his/her name removed from the Lamb's Book of Life does not mean that anyone will actually be removed. But rather it is a "prod" to motivate believers to endure to the end.


You are saying Jesus doesn't mean what He says. Sortta strips Him of credibility, wouldn't you say?

In light of all else He says and means, it is pretty amazing [and amusing] how you conclude that.

1. Having fun yet?

2. Please provide a link to where you extracted this quote allegedly from me.

3. Why is it so amazing to you that I am countless others understand that whoever has his name written in the Lamb's Book of Life it shall forever be there and cannot be removed? Those who are truly united to Christ on the ground of His substitionary atonement given by grace and appropriated through faith will not and cannot fall away. Consider the following passages: Ps 1:3; 48:14; 125:1; 138:8; Isa 46:4; Jer: 32:40; Rom 6:14; 8:29,30,35-39; 11:29; 14:4; Jh 4:14; 5:24; 6:47,51; 10:28; 14:19; 2Cor 2:14; Eph 4:30; Phil 1:6; 2Thess 3:3; 1Jh 5:11,13; Heb 7:25; 10:14 2Tim 4:18; 1Pet 1:5. Many more could be added but those should be sufficient enough to establish the eternal preservation of the saints by the God who loved them from eternity, predestinated them to salvation and elected them to be redeemed by the blood of Christ and by whose Spirit they are sanctified.

In short, Scripture interprets Scripture, aka: the Analogy of Faith determines how a passage should be interpreted. To take any text in isolation is simply asking for problems and to wrongly divide the Word of Truth.


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
#50716 - Fri Jun 06, 2014 3:32 PM Re: Revelation 22:19 Contradicts Calvinist Doctrine [Re: Anonymous]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,211
Pilgrim Offline
Head Honcho
Pilgrim  Offline

Head Honcho

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,211
NH, USA
1. I'm not about to spend time looking through 17 pages of this old thread to find my own quote.

2. Your anti-intellectualism is quite amusing. But my Bible says:

Romans 12:2 (ASV) "And be not fashioned according to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, and ye may prove what is the good and acceptable and perfect will of God.

That is what the Spirit does THROUGH MEANS which God has providentially provided. In this particular case, God eternally and providentially had me provide you with myriad texts that show that no true believer, one for whom Christ died will ever be lost. Thus, Rev. 21:19 is to be understood by the plethora of didactic passages which teach the eternal security of Christ's sheep; those whom the Father gave Him and in whom the Spirit dwells to provide the promised perseverance and eternal life which was given when the sinner first believed. This is true, of course, in the case of every TRUE believer but it is not applicable to everyone who simply professes to believe. No true believer will be nor can be stricken from the Book of Life. However, the majority of those who simply profess to believe never have nor will have their names written in the Book of Life.

[It would appear that you are hostile to the doctrine of the Perseverance/Preservation of the Saints, correct? In short, you believe that someone for whom Christ died can be ultimately lost and be cast into eternal hell... would that be a fair assessment of your view?]

Therefore, the warning is an inducement to persevere and to make one's "calling and election sure". This is not rocket science nor is the understanding of it to be relegated to some alleged 'voice from God' telling you how you should understand such things. It is ascertained by intellectual study with the mind being enlightened to see and then embrace the truth of it by the Spirit of God. The Spirit doesn't by-pass the natural faculties God created man with but rather uses them no less than he did to those men who wrote the Bible.

Lastly, your attitude is becoming rather brash and it might be well that you temper your hostility. On this board it is encombant that you maintain civility and respect. It's your first day and you haven't made a good impression upon me nor the others on Staff. Catch my drift, Snowbank? wink


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
Page 14 of 14 1 2 12 13 14

Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 17 guests, and 115 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
PerpetualLearner, TruthSeeker, BaptistCalvinist, Milan, earl40
912 Registered Users
Shout Box
July
S M T W T F S
1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31
Today's Birthdays
No Birthdays
Popular Topics(Views)
591,589 Gospel truth
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0
Page Time: 0.048s Queries: 15 (0.002s) Memory: 2.6716 MB (Peak: 2.9622 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2017-07-26 16:27:35 UTC