M
mikeledes
Guest
I may not be online tomorrow, but I will try to respond to the other objections within this week. God bless you all! 
God Bless,
Michael
God Bless,
Michael
- Status
O
Odell
Guest
Welcome back mikeledes
just to get you up to date no one as of yet has responded to your post
How are we to respond to every verse when we get no response to our rebutals:shrug:
Youll have a hard time getting anything out off them Ive been posting the same questions the last 8 post
Its fun repeating myself though
just to get you up to date no one as of yet has responded to your post
I find this rather strange when we have people like sandusky who make a statement like thisFunny, I haven’t brought up Hebrews 6 in my discussions with you. Regarding Galatians 5. Who is he talking to?
Galatians 1:6
6I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel;
According to you, only the elect are called by the grace of Christ.
Galatians 3:2
3Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?
According to you, only the elect have “begun by the Spirit.”
Galatians 5:2-4
2Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you.
3And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law.
4You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.
When we take it in its broader context, Paul is speaking to genuine born again Christians in this passage. Only they are called by the grace of Christ, can begin with the Spirit, and only they can be severed from Christ and fall from grace. You have to be in grace first before you can fall from it.
I know you must really like showing me how I “fail” in my interpretation of these passages. Ilike when you directly respond to my posts and rebuttals.
God Bless,
Michael
When we attempt to deal with a couple passages they just blow it off as if the post never exested
How are we to respond to every verse when we get no response to our rebutals:shrug:
Youll have a hard time getting anything out off them Ive been posting the same questions the last 8 post
Its fun repeating myself though
S
St_Aloysius
Guest
Oi-vay!
Can I just sat I’ve actually read through this entire thread. It’s like one long train wreck that just keeps going.
The OSAS proponents debate brilliantly in their choosing of Scripture texts (albeit the fact that they have the tendency to post verses sometimes as their entire response, not taking time to expound on their interpretation of the said text and in doing so neglect their opponent’s respective views on particular verses [e.g. “There is no condemnation for those in Christ Jesus.” Catholics and Protestants in unison say “AMEN!”, just, of course, with varying takes on its meaning]) and the Catholics do well to defend the Church’s understanding of certain verses.
I have to go right now (shame), so I don’t have time to arge theology or textual interpretation in light of Reformed and Patristic tradition. (Double shame.)
But since here these verses can be understood in a multiplicity of ways, and we each have our respective takes, I would like to say to both sides: The argument is endless. So both sides do well to listen to the logic of the other.
Catholics will argue ambiguous texts must be interpreted in a manner after the Fathers. This is legitimate. Protestants will argue the text itself has certain implications in line with their respective theology.
The discussion will continue like this for… well, ever.
So… that said:
Ears open, mouths shut. I want a clean match!
Peace and much luck to both of ya’s.
Can I just sat I’ve actually read through this entire thread. It’s like one long train wreck that just keeps going.
The OSAS proponents debate brilliantly in their choosing of Scripture texts (albeit the fact that they have the tendency to post verses sometimes as their entire response, not taking time to expound on their interpretation of the said text and in doing so neglect their opponent’s respective views on particular verses [e.g. “There is no condemnation for those in Christ Jesus.” Catholics and Protestants in unison say “AMEN!”, just, of course, with varying takes on its meaning]) and the Catholics do well to defend the Church’s understanding of certain verses.
I have to go right now (shame), so I don’t have time to arge theology or textual interpretation in light of Reformed and Patristic tradition. (Double shame.)
But since here these verses can be understood in a multiplicity of ways, and we each have our respective takes, I would like to say to both sides: The argument is endless. So both sides do well to listen to the logic of the other.
Catholics will argue ambiguous texts must be interpreted in a manner after the Fathers. This is legitimate. Protestants will argue the text itself has certain implications in line with their respective theology.
The discussion will continue like this for… well, ever.
So… that said:
Ears open, mouths shut. I want a clean match!
Peace and much luck to both of ya’s.
S
sandusky
Guest
I doubt that I can prove anything to you, Odell; however, I can explain to you that, while I believe that Jn 15 is talking about the saved Christian life, the “in Me” and “cut off” and “cast away into the fire” is not talking about a loss of salvation.
First, God wills to keep His people. This is the Father’s will (Jn 6:39-40), and that of Jesus’ (17:11-12, 24). The Father has never denied Jesus’ petitions. Jesus clearly states that He has kept the will of the Father, and lost none of those given to Him, but the son of Perdition. Judas was not a **a son of/by adoption,” but, ei mā, **(an adversative which shows two different classes: the others given to the Son to be raised up in the last day (class 1), and Judas, the son of Perdition given to the Son to betray Him (class 2); (cf Mt 12:4; Acts 27:22; Rev 21:27). Scriptures show that Judas was never saved (Jn 6:70-71; 13:10-11).
Second, not only does God will to keep His people, God is able to keep His people. God is omnipotent, and therefore, able to bring His purposes to fulfillment, and to finish His work in those He saves (2 Tim 1:12; Jude 24; Jn 10:28-29; Phil 1:6). Nothing in the creatures power can cause God to fail (Is 46:10). Salvation is wholly of God, and human failure cannot void God’s promises given in the New Covenant; neither can their failures jeopardize their salvation (Rom 3:3-4; Jer 31:31-37).
Third, not only does God will to keep His people, and not only is He able to keep His people, God is also free to keep them. The debt of all our sins—past, present, future—has been paid (Col 2:13ff); therefore, those whom God has chosen to save can never incur condemnation for sinning (Rom 8:1a; 32-34).
God also has provided for His people’s safekeeping by giving them an advocate (1 Jn 2:1); by giving them an intercessor (Heb 7:25) who represents them before the Father, all the while looking after their well-being on earth (Heb 4:14-16; Jn 17:9-24; Lk 22:21-32)—IOW He is able to “perfectly” keep those given to Him, thus fulfilling the Father’s will that of those given to Him, He will raise them up on the last day, and lose none.
Furthermore, with respect to safekeeping, He corrects those who are sinning (1 Cor 11:31-32).
Also, He seals the believer with the HS (Eph 4:30); the HS is an earnest, or down-payment for the final glorification of the saint. In a human operation, the operation is vulnerable until it is completed; however, with God’s operation of salvation, the Spirit keeps the believer secure until the salvation work is finished (Php 1:6).
Lastly, the promise of eternal life given in the gospel is based upon the promises of the New Covenant, which is a better Covenant than the old because Israel broke the Old by disobedience; the new cannot be broken by human failure; the New promises everlasting life to its recipients (cf Jn 10:28-29).
That’s because the New Covenant is mediated by Jesus’ death and resurrection (cf Heb 8:6-12; Jer 31:31-34; Lk 22:20). The New is gracious, and everlasting (Jer 31:35-37; Heb 13:20; Rom 4:25), and again, it cannot be broken by human failure.
So in order for one to understand Jn 15 to be speaking about the loss of salvation for an elect believer, one would have to throw out the verses above (which verses are not exhaustive with respect to the subject, but speak unambiguously to it).
When Jesus says that His sheep (the elect), will never perish, and that no one can take the sheep out of the Father’s hand, that’s what He means; and, that is a comprehensive statement: no one means no one.
Also, when Paul says that the Father will complete the good work that He has begun in the believer (that of justification/salvation), then that’s what Paul means; the Father begins, and completes the justification/salvation of the believer (Php 1:6; 2:13).
S
sandusky
Guest
Your rebuttals are to the OP, who’s gone for the rest of this week.
This began with one question from me, to you Odell: support your statement that Jn 5:24 applies to Judas. Support that Judas was truly saved, and lost his salvation.
I can’t recall you answering that one question.
If you have, please give me the post #.
F
fbl9
Guest
no one has yet to provide prove Judas was not actually saved.
S
sandusky
Guest
Yes; but without the sarcasm, the question would have been unintelligible.
What I was responding to with regard to the wheat and tares, was this statement of yours:
It sounds as though you believe the two to be the same; I showed that the wheat and tares are not the same, but come from different “masters,” if you will, but you seem to be ignoring that; so I ask, please explain how tares are saved, and how tares lose their salvation?
It’s more than “a feeling.”
I understand what you believe.
ISTM that’s a reconstituted ritual system, like the OT ritual system in which the priests daily offered sacrifice not only for the sins of the people, but for their own sins as well. Jesus made that external form of worship obsolete, and, neither He, nor the apostles instruct the church to worship in external sacramental ritual, but He says, one must worship in spirit and truth.
O
Odell
Guest
Sur but I want you to notice that Im answering you when I have yet got a response to questions I asked youYour rebuttals are to the OP, who’s gone for the rest of this week.
This began with one question from me, to you Odell: support your statement that Jn 5:24 applies to Judas. Support that Judas was truly saved, and lost his salvation.
I can’t recall you answering that one question.
If you have, please give me the post #.
Why is **IN HIM **not really IN HIM
You amaze me with how often you accedently look over that particular question
I know you would not avoid a biblical question now would you?
please do me a favor and respond to what I have been asking before responding to this.
I for one have never stated if Judas was saved or not I dont know Judas heart I dont know if he is in heaven or Hell I do not know the mans heart.
But I will tell you that the scripture that has been given you by others cant be easly refuted. thats my opinion and you can take that up with them I think there doing a good enough job with that.
Now can you answer my question or are you just waiting for C2C because you dont seem to have an answer?
J
justinthemartyr
Guest
would the elect be the ones in the (Lamb’s) book of life?
if so, then we see in revelation that God actually removes names from the book of life.
also, do not forget that thos ewho eat the Flesh of the son of man and drink His blood are raised up on the last day, those who do not, have no life in them. John 6
Those IN the true vine (Jesus)can be cut off, wither and be burned. they are only regrafted through obedience again. bear no fruit, be cut off. John 15 and Romans 11 make this very clear.
therefore those who are saved(in christ) can be disqualified.
peace, Justin
S
sandusky
Guest
See post #120.Sur but I want you to notice that Im answering you when I have yet got a response to questions I asked you
Why is **IN HIM **not really IN HIM
You amaze me with how often you accedently look over that particular question
I know you would not avoid a biblical question now would you?
please do me a favor and respond to what I have been asking before responding to this.
I for one have never stated if Judas was saved or not I dont know Judas heart I dont know if he is in heaven or Hell I do not know the mans heart.
But I will tell you that the scripture that has been given you by others cant be easly refuted. thats my opinion and you can take that up with them I think there doing a good enough job with that.
Now can you answer my question or are you just waiting for C2C because you dont seem to have an answer?
N
NotWorthy
Guest
OK, do we go to heaven simply because God loves us? On the flip side, do we go to hell simply because God doesn’t love us (if that’s the wrong term, feel free to correct me).Yes; but without the sarcasm, the question would have been unintelligible.
how are we judged, Sandy, but by the fruit that we bear. The wheat and the weeds are judged upon the fruit., those with ears of wheat are kept.
When did the harvesters realize that there were weeds in the field? When the crop grew and bore fruit, the weeds appeared as well. It was the fruit of the wheat that revealed the difference in the types of plants.
Regarding the two masters. Doesn’t Paul say that we can serve only one master - Jesus or Satan?
yeah, that actually tickled me the first time I heard it.
[sign]The Christian Church is anti-goat!!![/sign]
I’m sorry. I kid! I kid!
Seriously though, Jesus explains that the sheep go to heaven, not because they are sheep (the parable would have been a waster of time otherwise), but because they performed the Will of the Father.
**inherit the kingdom prepared for you … FOR ****I was hungry and you gave me food…
and the goats go to hell not because they are goats:
Depart from me, you cursed, … FOR I was hungry…
Yes, but the daily offering is still performed, just as Malachi prophecied. The OT pre-figured the NT, but in the NT, it is completed, perfected.
P
Pax
Guest
Judas was chosen by Jesus.
Judas is described as “elect.”
(Gk,eklegomai - Strong’s word # 1586 – Lk 6:13, Jn 6:70; cf. Mk 13:20, Jn 13:18, 15:16,19, Acts 1:2), and then falls away and is damned.
Judas is described as “elect.”
(Gk,eklegomai - Strong’s word # 1586 – Lk 6:13, Jn 6:70; cf. Mk 13:20, Jn 13:18, 15:16,19, Acts 1:2), and then falls away and is damned.
P
Pax
Guest
Sandusky,
You’ve essentially claimed that Peter’s repentance is irrelevant to his salvation. You’ve said that he couldn’t lose his salvation, repent, and thus be restored.
We’ve cited the parable of the Prodigal Son as part of the refutation of your position, but you remain unphased largely because it is a parable. Please be advised that we can throw out an awful lot Jesus’ teaching if we throw out the parables. Somehow, I think the argument against using our Savior’s parables to form views on subjects like these is specious argument of desperation.
Let’s take a look at what scripture has to say about repentance.
Matthew 4:17
From that time Jesus began to preach, saying, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”
Matthew 11:20-22
Then he began to upbraid the cities where most of his mighty works had been done, because they did not repent. "Woe to you, Chorazin! woe to you, Beth-saida! for if the mighty works done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I tell you, it shall be more tolerable **on the day of judgment **for Tyre and Sidon than for you.
Acts 2:38
And Peter said to them, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.”
Acts 3:17-21
“And now, brethren, I know that you acted in ignorance, as did also your rulers. But what God foretold by the mouth of all the prophets, that his Christ should suffer, he thus fulfilled. Repent therefore, and turn again, that your sins may be blotted out, that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that he may send the Christ appointed for you, Jesus, whom heaven must receive until the time for establishing all that God spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets from of old.”
These verses tell us a lot about the importance of forgivenss and turning back to God and away from our offenses. Now let’s look carefully at a believer that needed to repent. You accept the doctrine of salvation by faith alone. The example I am going to cite is clearly someone that qualifies as saved by your definition. In Acts 8:13-17 we are told that Simon the Magician became a Christian in response to the preaching of the apostles. The passage says:
Acts 8:13-17
But when they believed Philip as he preached good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. Even Simon himself believed, and after being baptized he continued with Philip. And seeing signs and great miracles performed, he was amazed. Now when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent to them Peter and John, who came down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit; for it had not yet fallen on any of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Then they laid their hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit.
It is clear from the context that Simon believed, was baptized, and that he received the Holy Spirit with all of his companion converts. Upon seeing and experiencing all of this, Simon coveted the power associated with the “laying on of hands.” He desired the power and was even offered the apostles money to get it. Peter immediately rebukes Simon and says the following:
Acts 8:20-23
“Your silver perish with you, because you thought you could obtain the gift of God with money! You have neither part nor lot in this matter, for your heart is not right before God. Repent therefore of this wickedness of yours, and pray to the Lord that, if possible, the intent of your heart may be forgiven you. For I see that you are in the gall of bitterness and in the bond of iniquity” lest he perish.
Peter is clearly telling Simon that his soul is in mortal peril if he does not repent. Moreover, he tells him to pray to the Lord that he may be forgiven. Please note that if your sins are not forgiven you will not be entering heaven. Here we have a saved person that commits a serious sin, and that he must repent of it and ask forgiveness so as to escape “the bond of iniquity.” Sin as Paul says, “leads to death” while obedience “leads to righteousness.”[Rom 6:16]
Simon realizes the seriousness of the situation and responds to Peter saying “Pray for me to the Lord, that nothing of what you have said may come upon me.”
You’ve essentially claimed that Peter’s repentance is irrelevant to his salvation. You’ve said that he couldn’t lose his salvation, repent, and thus be restored.
We’ve cited the parable of the Prodigal Son as part of the refutation of your position, but you remain unphased largely because it is a parable. Please be advised that we can throw out an awful lot Jesus’ teaching if we throw out the parables. Somehow, I think the argument against using our Savior’s parables to form views on subjects like these is specious argument of desperation.
Let’s take a look at what scripture has to say about repentance.
Matthew 4:17
From that time Jesus began to preach, saying, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”
Matthew 11:20-22
Then he began to upbraid the cities where most of his mighty works had been done, because they did not repent. "Woe to you, Chorazin! woe to you, Beth-saida! for if the mighty works done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I tell you, it shall be more tolerable **on the day of judgment **for Tyre and Sidon than for you.
Acts 2:38
And Peter said to them, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.”
Acts 3:17-21
“And now, brethren, I know that you acted in ignorance, as did also your rulers. But what God foretold by the mouth of all the prophets, that his Christ should suffer, he thus fulfilled. Repent therefore, and turn again, that your sins may be blotted out, that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that he may send the Christ appointed for you, Jesus, whom heaven must receive until the time for establishing all that God spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets from of old.”
These verses tell us a lot about the importance of forgivenss and turning back to God and away from our offenses. Now let’s look carefully at a believer that needed to repent. You accept the doctrine of salvation by faith alone. The example I am going to cite is clearly someone that qualifies as saved by your definition. In Acts 8:13-17 we are told that Simon the Magician became a Christian in response to the preaching of the apostles. The passage says:
Acts 8:13-17
But when they believed Philip as he preached good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. Even Simon himself believed, and after being baptized he continued with Philip. And seeing signs and great miracles performed, he was amazed. Now when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent to them Peter and John, who came down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit; for it had not yet fallen on any of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Then they laid their hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit.
It is clear from the context that Simon believed, was baptized, and that he received the Holy Spirit with all of his companion converts. Upon seeing and experiencing all of this, Simon coveted the power associated with the “laying on of hands.” He desired the power and was even offered the apostles money to get it. Peter immediately rebukes Simon and says the following:
Acts 8:20-23
“Your silver perish with you, because you thought you could obtain the gift of God with money! You have neither part nor lot in this matter, for your heart is not right before God. Repent therefore of this wickedness of yours, and pray to the Lord that, if possible, the intent of your heart may be forgiven you. For I see that you are in the gall of bitterness and in the bond of iniquity” lest he perish.
Peter is clearly telling Simon that his soul is in mortal peril if he does not repent. Moreover, he tells him to pray to the Lord that he may be forgiven. Please note that if your sins are not forgiven you will not be entering heaven. Here we have a saved person that commits a serious sin, and that he must repent of it and ask forgiveness so as to escape “the bond of iniquity.” Sin as Paul says, “leads to death” while obedience “leads to righteousness.”[Rom 6:16]
Simon realizes the seriousness of the situation and responds to Peter saying “Pray for me to the Lord, that nothing of what you have said may come upon me.”
S
sandusky
Guest
I don’t believe that the OP is concerned with repentance, or any such thing, but states ”Only the Elect are Saved and Will be Saved.”
Therefore, your objections, and the verses you cite can be easily set aside.
The need for repentance and the forgiveness of sin in order to be saved is a Given, and it is, IMO, not an issue.
I assure you that all of the elect have been “granted repentance,” and that they have/will repent for the forgiveness of sins at the appropriate time.
With respect to Simon, I don’t believe that he was ever saved, and a number of the ECF agree.
I posted links to them before the great crash, and don’t have them on file; nevertheless, a quick google search turned up this one. I’m certain that anyone desiring more information can
google for it.
P
Pax
Guest
Actually, what I have posted cannot be set aside at all because it strikes at the heart of much of what has been discussed on this thread including many of your claims and statements about salvation.
Please be advised that I do not know, nor do I claim to know, the ultimate destination of Simon the Magician. I do know what the Book of Acts has to say about him, and I articulated that in my prior post. There is absolutely no doubt about the meaning of the scripture in this narrative and it does not support your contentions.
Thanks for the web link but it is of no help. It merely gives the same presentations that OSAS people have presented over and over again. All of which have been soundly refuted over and over again.
I respect the fact that you have a position that you hold dearly and firmly. It is clear that we will continue to disagree.
Please be advised that I do not know, nor do I claim to know, the ultimate destination of Simon the Magician. I do know what the Book of Acts has to say about him, and I articulated that in my prior post. There is absolutely no doubt about the meaning of the scripture in this narrative and it does not support your contentions.
Thanks for the web link but it is of no help. It merely gives the same presentations that OSAS people have presented over and over again. All of which have been soundly refuted over and over again.
I respect the fact that you have a position that you hold dearly and firmly. It is clear that we will continue to disagree.
S
sandusky
Guest
For the purpose of this discussion, that’s simple enough. The following passage supports your thesis:**Romans 9:10-13
10 And not only this, but there was Rebekah also, when she had conceived twins by one man, our father Isaac;
11 for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God’s purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls,
12 it was said to her, “The older will serve the younger.”
13 Just as it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”**
You’re not listening to what I’m saying, and are missing my point. I believe the tares serve a purpose within the church, however, the ***tares are not truly a part of the church, as they are among the wheat illegitimately:*****Matthew 13:36-38
36 Then He left the crowds and went into the house. And His disciples came to Him and said, “Explain to us the parable of the tares of the field.”
37 And He said, “The one who sows the good seed is the Son of Man,
38 and the field is the world; and as for the good seed, these are the sons of the kingdom; and the tares are the sons of the evil one;**IOW, the tares are not saved, and they never were; they were sown, as tares, by Satan, and are gathered up, as tares, at the time of the harvest (v40).
Do you understand now? Tares were/are never saved; therefore, they cannot lose salvation; neither can they “regain” it, again, that is because they never had it.
And just as seriously, Jesus refers to those given to Him by the Father as His “Sheep;” correct (Jn 10; Mt 10:16; cf Ps 23; 79:13)?
This again underscores what I’ve said elsewhere on this thread, the lesser reason for those sheep going to reward is their deeds; the greater reason is the predetermined will of God. (Remember, a gift, and not of works (Eph 2:8).
Furthermore, those spoken of as receiving aid are decidedly “Christian,” ”these brothers of Mine…”
IOW, the recipients of the kindness of the sheep are not the poor in general, but other Christians in particular. Christ is most concerned about His sheep caring for one another.
That’s a topic for another thread; however, since you bring it up, I’m not surprised that your Church uses that prophecy as justification for its Eucharistic practice, but that is a prophecy to Israel, concerning Israel, and not concerning the Church.
The early church had a “replacement” mindset—the church replaced Israel, and all of the promises of blessing made to Israel became the blessings of the church. I disagree. Here are some good reads on that subject: Future Israel, Israel and the Church,
Israel in the Plan of God.
S
sandusky
Guest
Yes, the choosing of Judas for the apostolate, is described as “election;” however, in what sense is Judas, “elect?”
Is Judas’ election an election to salvation, or an election to something else?
In the NT, election to salvation is uniformly ascribed to the Father, while the electing work of the Son is to service; read the passages you’ve cited Pax.
Jn 6:70 illustrates this:**John 6:70
Jesus answered them, “Did I Myself not choose you, the twelve, and yet one of you is a devil?”**Jesus chose the 12 as apostles, and one of those He chose knowing that one “is a devil.”
(Jesus chose that devil, Judas, in order that the scripture would be fulfilled).
Within that group of 12, are those chosen by the Father for salvation, and given to the Son for safekeeping:**John 17:6
“I have manifested Your name to the men whom You gave Me out of the world; they were Yours and You gave them to Me, and they have kept Your word.**Those given by the Father to Christ for salvation have “kept the Father’s word.”
Explain how Judas kept the Father’s word.**John 17:12
“While I was with them, I was keeping them in Your name which You have given Me; and I guarded them and not one of them perished BUT the son of perdition, so that the Scripture would be fulfilled.**”BUT” (Gk ei mā), is an adversative conjunction; it separates Judas into another class from the class in which “not one perished.”
IOW, Judas was never among the group that did not perish—they were sons by adoption—but Judas was THE son of Perdition, and he was that, so that, the scripture would be fulfilled.
Here are a few more verses with adversative conjunctions:**Matthew 12:4
how he [King David] entered the house of God, and they ate the consecrated bread, which was not lawful for him to eat nor for those with him, but for the priests alone?
(David was not in the class of priests)
Acts 27:22
“Yet now I urge you to keep up your courage, for there will be no loss of life among you, but only of the ship.
(The ship is not in the class that will not be lost)
Revelation 21:27
and nothing unclean, and no one who practices abomination and lying, shall ever come into it, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb’s book of life.
**(Those whose names are written in the Lambs book of Life are not among the class of unclean, abominable liars who will never enter the kingdom)
If you still doubt what I’m saying, this should remove that doubt:**John 18:6-9
So when He said to them, “I am He,” they drew back and fell to the ground.
Therefore He again asked them, “Whom do you seek?” And they said, “Jesus the Nazarene.”
Jesus answered, “I told you that I am He; so if you seek Me, let these go their way,”
to fulfill the word which He spoke, “Of those whom You have given Me I lost not one.”**John is referring to 17:12.
Of those given by the Father to the Son for salvation, “not one was lost.”
Judas was not elect to salvation.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
Some Hebrew words poorly translate into Greek and then into English. I think the phrase “Esau I hated” is one of them. Are you sure there was a Hebrew word for “loved less” that translates well into the vernacular? The only way to show this “lesser love” poorly translates into “hate”. God did not hate Esau, for God loves all life. Isn’t all life Good?**
**
I’m trying to get your point. I think I do. But I heartily disagree. I think this “pre-chosen” status is very, very dangerous. It takes our actions out of our hands and blames our actions and inactions on whether God loves us or not.
Consequetnly, I think you are missing my point. The Church allows saints in sinners into the Church. If we are not Children of the Covenant, then we are children of Satan. Doesn’t St. Paul make this statement? The Church allows these sinners in their congretation (that’s one of the points of the parable). But the judgment is based on their faith working through love, i.e. the fruit that they bear.
If this were a parable talking of two groups of people born of Christ, then that would be so. But we are all children of Satan until we are baptized.
The parable is simply about our judgment based on the fruit of our labors as we conform to the Will of God.
No it is not.
Jesus says specifically why they are going to heaven when he says “for”.
“Enter in heaven, FOR when I was hungry, you gave me to eat…” (paraphrase)
No where in this parable does Jesus say, “Enter into heaven, FOR you were chosen by me”.
Where does my Church use the Sheep and the Goats as a prophecy of the Eucharistic Practice. Did I miss that lesson in CCD?
The Church is the fulfillment of the prophecies. Israel is fulfilled when her people enter the New Covenant. I don’t think the Church teaches that all the promises of Israel have now been transferred to the Christian Church.
F
fbl9
Guest
say one sees a person on the edge of a tall building.one thinks to ones self if that person falls they will be killed. now the person falls is the person going to die because one knows this fall would kill some one?God knows which souls He created will come to Him, does not mean that Him knowing this causes them to come to Him.why would He not make only the souls that would come to Him and not create the others that don’t? sandusky you seem to limit God’s love only for yourself since you are so perfect by His choosing you.don’t say your ar3e not perfect because you posted earlier only the perfect will get into heaven.ie the saved are the only ones worthy of heaven.
S
sandusky
Guest
It was “all good” before the Fall—God, Himself, said it was; however, after the Fall He cursed the creation, and He subjected it to futility (Gen 3:17; Rom 8:20), and that’s not good.
Paul is quoting from Malachi 1:**Malachi 1:2-4
“I have loved you,” says the Lord. But you say, “How have You loved us?” “Was not Esau Jacob’s brother?” declares the Lord. “Yet I have loved Jacob;
but I have hated Esau, and I have made his mountains a desolation and appointed his inheritance for the jackals of the wilderness.”
Though Edom says, “We have been beaten down, but we will return and build up the ruins”; thus says the Lord of hosts, “They may build, but I will tear down; and men will call them the wicked territory, and the people toward whom the Lord is indignant forever.”**God’s attitude toward Edom was certainly “less than love.”
The writers of the Septuagint use the same Greek word as Paul in this passage: miseō, and it is in the active voice, as is seen in God’s making him a desolation and appointing his inheritance for the jackels.
God hates all who do iniquity (Ps 5:5). (Does this scandalize you?)
Of course you see it as dangerous, and, IMO, the bolded part, is that part of God, that bothers most men most.
That’s true; however, this parabolic teaching cuts to the chase, if you will, and teaches that the tares were sown by the evil one as tares, and were harvested as tares; whereas, the wheat was sown by the Son of Man, and harvested as wheat. Again we see the teaching that the greater reason for these things is the predetermined will of God.
I’m not going to argue with you; what I’ve been saying is mostly for the benefit of Cling2Cross.
You’ve combined two different thoughts/statements of mine here; read it again.
I’ve given you some links to books that deal with the subjects of Israel, and replacement theology in the early church, and its long-term effects on the church; read them, if you care to.
- Status