Refuting Reformed Theology on "2 Corinthians 5:21"

[jcrichton]

in places like jn8:24 jesus said, “unless you believe that i am he, you will die in your sins.” but jesus also said, “you must be born/begotten from above”. Yes only belief saves us, but not mere belief (jms2:19) – only the kind of belief that unites intimately with jesus; a true indwelt fellowship of love. (and it’s the kind of belief that unavoidably results in good works…)

Hi!

Exactly! Jesus’ Call is to Abide in HIM. This means that “Believe” is impregnated with everything that means to be in Fellowship with Christ!

the only question is which comes first – do we (like all the other religions) strive to obey/witness/do-good-deeds to be saved? Or is salvation a real union with jesus, his indwelling presence and the spirit’s indwelling presence then leading us into

doing good deeds? Religion is all about “you are what you do”; christianity is different — he says "i will change your hearts, therefore you do what you now are!"

and that fits philip2:12-13 perfectly, “work out your salvation with fear and trembling; for it is god who is at work in you, both to will and to work according to his good purpose.”

he works through our continued faith. I wish more people would embrace rom1:16 — the commentaries explain “from faith-the-start to faith-the-goal” — “the righteousness of god is revealed from beginning faith, to ending faith; the righteous shall live by faith!”

see gal3:3, “having begun in the spirit, are you now ending in the flesh”? It is important how we begin, but it is critical how we end. in between, is his power, through our diligence. His strength, through our faith. His salvation, through our abiding-in-him!

In rom10:9-10 we confess jesus as lord, and believe he died for us. “lord”, is kurios — master. Is he master of those who do not fully submit to him?
I love St. Paul’s presentation:

14 How then shall they call on him, in whom they have not believed? Or how shall they believe him, of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear, without a preacher? 15 And how shall they preach unless they be sent, as it is written: How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, of them that bring glad tidings of good things! 16 But all do not obey the gospel. For Isaias saith: Lord, who hath believed our report? 17 Faith then cometh by hearing; and hearing by the word of Christ.

(Romans 10:14-17)
Faith Comes by Hearing the Word of Christ!

…but noticed v. 16–not all pay heed to the Holy Spirit’s Call!

And not just once, but continuously. See col2:6-8 (“as you have received jesus, so walk in him”) — and eph4, col3 “lay aside the old sinful man, put on the new godly man”! You – do this, continuously!

(…we seem to hit on Scriptures almost simultaneously–as I read Scriptures pop in!) I was thinking Ephesians 6:10-20… as I came across to your closing paragraph–specifically:

18 By all prayer and supplication praying at all times in the spirit; and in the same watching with all instance and supplication for all the saints:

Jesus’ (yeah, I’m hitting it yet again!) Call to Abide in HIM (St. John 15:1-10). It is a continuous event; St. Paul coined it: a race!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Gadgeteer]

Hi!

…this is one of those issues that I think I’m the only one running with it…

I think that it would have been impossible for Judas to betray Jesus if he was “saved” (Hebrews 6:4-6)…

You are 100% right. Here is the issue – I’m sure you know about RT’s use of 1Jn2:19 — thinking, “They were not of us who went out from us; if they had been of us they would have remained. But they went out to show they were NEVER OF us”.

And it just does not say “they were never of us”. Clearly they were not of us WHEN they went out; but they could have been saved last year, last month, even yesterday! (The answer to RT’s presumption on this verse, is 2Jn1:7-9; no subject change between 2:1:8 and 9, those who go too far (“go out from us”!) and do not abide in the teachings of Christ have not God; he who abides has the Father and the Son.)

So — Judas was “not of them” when he betrayed Jesus; does that mean Judas was never saved? It simply doesn’t mean that. It appears Judas wanted a physical king as did many Jews; he wanted to “force Jesus’ hand”, he never thought they would actually KILL Jesus. That explains the terrible remorse, and hanging himself.

I just can’t make any sense of verses like Jn6:70, if Judas had NEVER been saved; Jesus’ words would have been nonsense…

…remain stuck to the world, then gain the enlightenment that he in deed betrayed God’s Just (presumably this would have been known to him already), not enjoy the money of his ill-gains, have remorse, and then kill himself out of sheer impotence.

I’m just not sure how the Bishops are taking Heb5:11-6:6. Yes it’s a rebuke to the “carnal”, that they should mature; “FOR IN THE CASE of THOSE WHO…” — what derail would it be at that point in the conversation, to start talking about the NEVER-saved?

Suppose it’s continuous — “You should be meat-eaters, but you still need milk. Therefore let’s not spend all our time talking about repentance. Those of you who WERE saved but now have gone back to walking in sin (are carnal!), it is powerless to restore (you) to repentance WHILE by willful sin it is as if (you) crucify Jesus over and over and regard His graceful sacrifice with contempt.”

The rebuke continues in verses 7-8 (a field is tilled expecting good fruit—if it does it’s blessed, but if it bears thorns it is cursed and burned). AND in 12-13, “you need diligence SO THAT when you’ve done God’s will you may receive the Promise!”

Why would there be a subject change anywhere in that? It’s a continuous rebuke to the same audience!

Tell me – do the Bishops agree with this, or do they see “carnal-saved” and then “in the case of those who were NEVER saved”?

…as for Jesus’ terminology… it’s difficult to tell… though I would consider the challenge to be more towards Simon’s self-assuredness rather than Judas’ backsliding.

But if Judas didn’t leave, why in thunder would Jesus have mentioned Judas in response to Peter’s protest of loyalty?

…consider the fact that Judas betrayal did not happen in a vacuum; rather, it was a common theme… can you imagine one who is Saved to hear Jesus tell him/her to his face ‘you, who are eating-nay, dipping your bread with Me, are the betrayer.’

Judas could not but betray Jesus (prophecy) thusly, he could not but have remained in disbelief till the act had been consummated!

I think “prophecy”, is proof of time-travel. A prophecy is simply news of an event, spoken by someone who can see the future. To the time-traveler, Judas’ betrayal had already happened by the Last Supper…

…I think that it deals with humility:

There are people who do not accept the Bible as the Word of God; there are people who reject the New Testament as the Word of God; there are people who reject the existence of God… so it is not hard to understand that there will be those who rather than engage the Truth would put on blinders… sadly, there are those who have been led by the blind–Jesus spoke of them… so our job is to preach and pray!

There is only one Savior, it ain’t you or me. You’re right, we are only to preach and pray, and to love people, and to try to take care of their needs. When it says “save others, snatching them from the fire”, we can only lead them to The Savior.

Bring the Good News to all, near and far!

There’s that pesky smiley again…

 

[Gadgeteer]

Hi!

Exactly! Jesus’ Call is to Abide in HIM. This means that “Believe” is impregnated with everything that means to be in Fellowship with Christ!

Very much so. It’s just a question of perspective; not “passive” as many in RT and Eternal Security think; as we read in Prov6 “God directs our steps”, but we still hafta move our feet…

I love St. Paul’s presentation:

Faith Comes by Hearing the Word of Christ!

…but notice v. 16–not all pay heed to the Holy Spirit’s Call!

The entirety of Scripture is that way. Deut30:11-20 and its connection with Rom10:6-10 is iron-clad. The “word of faith”, the SAME faith then as now with Jesus, is in every mouth and heart; both those who can confess believe and be saved, and in those who turn away disobey and perish. It’s not in Heaven that one has to go GET it and GIVE it to us to make us hear it, that we may observe it; no, it’s very near, it’s not difficult, it’s in our hearts and Spirits because God PUT it there — in everyone!

Try to have a Reformed person explain how Deut30:12 is not a foundational refutation of Monergism, the basis of Reformed Theology! I’d love to hear one of them TRY, they always get quiet and go away when I ask them to explain!!!

(…we seem to hit on Scriptures almost simultaneously–as I read Scriptures pop in!) I was thinking Ephesians 6:10-20… as I came across to your closing paragraph–specifically:
18 By all prayer and supplication praying at all times in the spirit; and in the same watching with all instance and supplication for all the saints:

Nicely played! And THAT exposes the focus. Yes we “put on the whole armor of God, that we may be able to resist evil and to stand firm”; but this is our approach to the world. OUR perspective personally is that the battle is already WON, long ago from atop a cruel tree. “Be strong in the Lord and the strength of His might” (Eph6:10). There it is — all HIS strength, a finished work by His sacrifice of love.

Jesus’ (yeah, I’m hitting it yet again!) Call to Abide in HIM (St. John 15:1-10). It is a continuous event; St. Paul coined it: a race!

Yes, excellent! 1Cor9:25-27 — "They race for a perishable wreath, but you race for an IMMORTAL CROWN."

And James1:12, “blessed is he who perseveres under trials—for when he has passed the test (dokimos been approved!) he will receive the CROWN OF LIFE, which the Lord has promised to those who love Him.”

Stephanos zoe, crown-of-life.
Stephanos aphthartos, immortal-crown.

The same thing.

“Hold fast to what you have so no one steals your CROWN” (Rev3:11). Stephanos, same thing.

 

[SnoopSword]

I’ve sometime state that the default setting for Protestantism is to protest… this goes to exactly what you are stating… going against Scriptures (protesting)

Actually the root cause of this ‘protesting’ could be much more serious. It could be a biproduct of ‘pure evil’ in which St. Dionysius’ teachings clarify:

"The Good is Non-Existent as being beyond existence; evil is non-existent as being contrary to it. Thus evil is by its very nature trying as it were to be Good. This also looks like a barren paradox and yet it may contain a spiritual truth. Evil is, in the words of Goethe, “the spirit that DENIES”

It’s extremely important to note that this ‘Biblical Christianity’ of today is not the same as sola scriptura. We’re talking anout something very recent in history and UNIQUELY American. It’s not even British or practiced in Europe.

These people (who are not even Christians in my opinion) protest the Protest. They make up a small fraction of Christians worldwide. However, as English speakers, their works completely dominate our eyes and ears - especially where media is concerned.

I believe God cast these people out of Europe to America. This is made evident by Our Lady of Guadalupe. God setup a wall at the border of Mexico long ago. American quickly became the land of the heretics and cults - all of which were banned in Europe.

Christians are prone and susceptible to trusting other people in general (mankind) that are OUTSIDE of the Church, yet lay claim to certain rights and authority, or even claim this authority based on the BOLDEST of claims - a literal relation to Christ himself and scripture that supercedes the Church.

We easily believe them and are bewiched into receiving their ‘spirit that DENIES’ because it is not made clear to us that there are fundemental differences between those people who are baptized and inside the Church, and those who are not. The Catechism literally says we are a separate ‘race’ of people. We can get easily taken advantage of and many Popes have warned us of this. The Jesuits learned these things the hard way. They took action to resolve these conflicts shortly after they were founded.

 

[Gadgeteer]

Actually the root cause of this ‘protesting’ could be much more serious. It could be a biproduct of ‘pure evil’ in which St. Dionysius’ teachings clarify:

"The Good is Non-Existent as being beyond existence; evil is non-existent as being contrary to it. Thus evil is by its very nature trying as it were to be Good. This also looks like a barren paradox and yet it may contain a spiritual truth. Evil is, in the words of Goethe, “the spirit that DENIES”

“Protestantism”, by definition, began with “The Reformation”. Reformed theology supposes that God decides everything. Therefore, not only is all of life a stage-play, Jesus actually dying is mere pageantry, the Cross does not actually change anything — all was decided from the beginning by God!

And therefore God is causally involved in wickedness. Either directly (as some read Acts4:28), or causing it indirectly by ordaining that all men are wicked and then capriciously only diverting SOME to righteousness.

Conversely, Scripture says we can CHANGE people’s destinies. We can divert those truly bound for fire, Jude23. But brothers for whom Christ died can be destroyed if we’re not careful, Rom14:15, 1Cor8:11; and those who ARE entering, can be stopped and shut off and made twice children of Hell like their deceivers, Matt23:13-15. If eternity was sovereignly decreed by God, then we could never change anything, the “Great Commission” (Mk16:15) is useless.

Reformers try to insulate God from causality-in-wickedness with sub-doctrines like “compatibilism” – claiming that men HAVE free will, but “freely will” only according to their heart’s desires; a neglected heart “freely” wills ONLY to disbelieve and pursue sin, while a sovereignly changed heart ONLY wills to believe and pursue Jesus.

Charging God with complicity in sin is the same kind of blasphemy Jesus condemned in Matt12:25-31; it really is “evil” — just as all three views of OSAS are nothing other than the same Lie told by satan to Eve, “Don’t worry, you won’t really die”.

It’s extremely important to note that this ‘Biblical Christianity’ of today is not the same as sola scriptura. We’re talking about something very recent in history and UNIQUELY American. It’s not even British or practiced in Europe.

These people (who are not even Christians in my opinion) protest the Protest. They make up a small fraction of Christians worldwide. However, as English speakers, their works completely dominate our eyes and ears - especially where media is concerned.

What do you mean, “protest the protest”?

I believe God cast these people out of Europe to America. This is made evident by Our Lady of Guadalupe. God setup a wall at the border of Mexico long ago. American quickly became the land of the heretics and cults - all of which were banned in Europe.

America exists, because God dynamically interfered. There are stories of Washington being fired on point blank in the French Indian War, but couldn’t be killed. The founders were decidedly Christian; I recommend videos produced by David Barton (wallbuilders.org), “America’s Godly Heritage”. This last election was certain to have elected Hillary in a landslide; suddenly about the last of October something strange happened — the tide turned. Why?

Christians are prone and susceptible to trusting other people in general (mankind) that are OUTSIDE of the Church, yet lay claim to certain rights and authority, or even claim this authority based on the BOLDEST of claims - a literal relation to Christ himself and scripture that supercedes the Church.

We easily believe them and are bewitched into receiving their ‘spirit that DENIES’ because it is not made clear to us that there are fundamental differences between those people who are baptized and inside the Church, and those who are not. The Catechism literally says we are a separate ‘race’ of people. We can get easily taken advantage of and many Popes have warned us of this. The Jesuits learned these things the hard way. They took action to resolve these conflicts shortly after they were founded.

This sounds like 1Jn4, “do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits”. Yes there are heresies and false Christs in America; they are everywhere else too. Psalm 119:11 says “Your word have I hidden in my heart”. There is much in Scripture that is clear, the more we hide it in our hearts, the more it is available to confront the world. The more we study what the Apostles and the Prophets and others wrote, the more we learn how it all fits together. Jesus is Jehovah, salvation is a gift of grace but will inescapably be exposed in believers by good works, and we must consciously and diligently abide in Jesus, fill ourselves with the Spirit, and build ourselves in faith. It is our faith “from beginning to end” (Rm1:16), but His power. Our abiding, but His strength. Our walking-in-Him, but His might.

Technically I am Protestant; but vehemently opposed to Reformed Theology, especially for the maligning it does to God. What I perceive from Scripture parallels a lot of what I have found in spiritual Protestant churches, and a lot of what I have found in Catholicism. Shall we fight, engaging in “disputes dissensions and factions”? Or shall we calmly and respectfully discuss our understandings, celebrating what we have in common, lovingly challenging each other on differences, ALL looking forward to our returning Messiah when we shall all be true brothers and sisters in His presence?

“…speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into Him who is the head, even Christ,
from whom the whole body, being fitted and held together by what every joint supplies, according to the proper working of each individual part, causes the growth of the body for the building up of itself in love.” Eph4:15-16

 

[jcrichton]

So — Judas was “not of them” when he betrayed Jesus; does that mean Judas was never saved? It simply doesn’t mean that. It appears Judas wanted a physical king as did many Jews; he wanted to “force Jesus’ hand”, he never thought they would actually KILL Jesus. That explains the terrible remorse, and hanging himself.

I just can’t make any sense of verses like Jn6:70, if Judas had NEVER been saved; Jesus’ words would have been nonsense…

But if Judas didn’t leave, why in thunder would Jesus have mentioned Judas in response to Peter’s protest of loyalty?

I think “prophecy”, is proof of time-travel. A prophecy is simply news of an event, spoken by someone who can see the future. To the time-traveler, Judas’ betrayal had already happened by the Last Supper…

Hi!

…Judas is in a league all to his own… he is introduced as “the son of perdition.”

This means that even before he was elected as part of the Twelve he was already chosen to not be fully part of the Twelve:

16 Men, brethren, the scripture must needs be fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost spoke before by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who was the leader of them that apprehended Jesus: 17 Who was numbered with us, and had obtained part of this ministry…

20 For it is written in the book of Psalms: Let their habitation become desolate, and let there be none to dwell therein. And his bishopric let another take.

(Acts 1:16-20)
Prophecy is not a vision of the future (as in a possible outcome of an event); it is God’s Revelation of what will transpire:

11 So shall my word be, which shall go forth from my mouth: it shall not return to me void, but it shall do whatsoever I please, and shall prosper in the things for which I sent it.

(Isaiah 55:11)
Consider the Heavenly Battle prophesied in Genesis 3:15 and expanded in Apocalypse (Revelation) 12–if the events did not take place God’s Word (Authority) would mean but naught.

You are 100% right. Here is the issue – I’m sure you know about RT’s use of 1Jn2:19 — thinking, “They were not of us who went out from us; if they had been of us they would have remained. But they went out to show they were NEVER OF us”

.

And it just does not say “they were never of us”. Clearly they were not of us WHEN they went out; but they could have been saved last year, last month, even yesterday! (The answer to RT’s presumption on this verse, is 2Jn1:7-9; no subject change between 2:1:8 and 9, those who go too far (“go out from us”!) and do not abide in the teachings of Christ have not God; he who abides has the Father and the Son.)

I’m just not sure how the Bishops are taking Heb5:11-6:6. Yes it’s a rebuke to the “carnal”, that they should mature; “FOR IN THE CASE of THOSE WHO…” — what derail would it be at that point in the conversation, to start talking about the NEVER-saved?

Suppose it’s continuous — “You should be meat-eaters, but you still need milk. Therefore let’s not spend all our time talking about repentance. Those of you who WERE saved but now have gone back to walking in sin (are carnal!), it is powerless to restore (you) to repentance WHILE by willful sin it is as if (you) crucify Jesus over and over and regard His graceful sacrifice with contempt.”

The rebuke continues in verses 7-8 (a field is tilled expecting good fruit—if it does it’s blessed, but if it bears thorns it is cursed and burned). AND in 12-13, “you need diligence SO THAT when you’ve done God’s will you may receive the Promise!”

Why would there be a subject change anywhere in that? It’s a continuous rebuke to the same audience!

Tell me – do the Bishops agree with this, or do they see “carnal-saved” and then “in the case of those who were NEVER saved”?
The problem here is not the Bishops’ Teaching or pronouncements… it is the injection of the terms man decided to equate to the Word of God–the Bishops are clearly saying that those who leave the Faith were not part of the Body (that’s the reason they left the Faith); they never say that those who leave the Faith were never part of the “saved” since they do not subscribe to OSAS syndrome/s.

RT’s and others employ term/s to make the Word mean “they were never saved” so that they could justify their theological arguments.

Yet not once do we find in Scriptures any Teaching about Christ Coming for the Salvation of the “always saved” nor the Bishops rejecting anyone for being part of the “never saved” group.

The best I can offer to understand this issue is Jesus’ parable of the sower (St. Matthew 13:1-23); not once does Jesus implies that there are some which are of the “never saved” fold/s–the closest that He comes is the Revelation about Israel’s subjugation (vv. 10-15); yet, we know that this is done for the benefit of the Gentiles (John 1:10-13 & Romans 11:25-32) not because Jesus is inferring that Israel is part of the “never saved” construct.

There is only one Savior, it ain’t you or me. You’re right, we are only to preach and pray, and to love people, and to try to take care of their needs. When it says “save others, snatching them from the fire”, we can only lead them to The Savior.

There’s that pesky smiley again…
Exactly! …other than put forth the Warning (Ezekiel 33’s Sentinel) and pray, there’s nothing we can do; if able, we can assist them in their temporal needs but we must do so with no strings attached or fall with those Jesus reject as unworthy servants.

Brother, when your heart calls for an “Amen” there’s nothing wrong with giving it!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Very much so. It’s just a question of perspective; not “passive” as many in RT and Eternal Security think; as we read in Prov6 “God directs our steps”, but we still hafta move our feet…

The entirety of Scripture is that way. Deut30:11-20 and its connection with Rom10:6-10 is iron-clad. The “word of faith”, the SAME faith then as now with Jesus, is in every mouth and heart; both those who can confess believe and be saved, and in those who turn away disobey and perish. It’s not in Heaven that one has to go GET it and GIVE it to us to make us hear it, that we may observe it; no, it’s very near, it’s not difficult, it’s in our hearts and Spirits because God PUT it there — in everyone!

Try to have a Reformed person explain how Deut30:12 is not a foundational refutation of Monergism, the basis of Reformed Theology! I’d love to hear one of them TRY, they always get quiet and go away when I ask them to explain!!!

Hi!

…they miss the whole point God is making: God’s Grace and Mercy is made accessible to man; it is God’s Aspiration that man chooses to ABIDE in HIM–it is the reason why He Made Himself accessible:

12 But as many as received him, he gave them power to be made the sons of God, to them that believe in his name. 13 Who are born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. 14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we saw his glory, the glory as it were of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

(St. John 1:12-14)

14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert, so must the Son of man be lifted up: 15 That whosoever believeth in him, may not perish; but may have life everlasting. 16 For God so loved the world, as to give his only begotten Son; that whosoever believeth in him, may not perish, but may have life everlasting. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world, to judge the world, but that the world may be saved by him. (St. John 3:14-17)

Nicely played! And THAT exposes the focus. Yes we “put on the whole armor of God, that we may be able to resist evil and to stand firm”; but this is our approach to the world.

OUR perspective personally is that the battle is already WON, long ago from atop a cruel tree. “Be strong in the Lord and the strength of His might” (Eph6:10). There it is — all HIS strength, a finished work by His sacrifice of love.

Yes, excellent! 1Cor9:25-27 — "They race for a perishable wreath, but you race for an IMMORTAL CROWN."

And James1:12, “blessed is he who perseveres under trials—for when he has passed the test (dokimos been approved!) he will receive the CROWN OF LIFE, which the Lord has promised to those who love Him.”

Stephanos zoe, crown-of-life.
Stephanos aphthartos, immortal-crown.

The same thing.

“Hold fast to what you have so no one steals your CROWN” (Rev3:11). Stephanos, same thing.
There are some Spanish versions of the Bible that translate John 1’s “the Word” as “el Verbo (Verb);” this is my preferred translation/transliteration of term “Logos” since it denotes "action–it holds/depicts the relationship between God and man: “Be Holy!”

We are Called to be actively involved in and with God!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Actually the root cause of this ‘protesting’ could be much more serious. It could be a biproduct of ‘pure evil’ in which St. Dionysius’ teachings clarify:

"The Good is Non-Existent as being beyond existence; evil is non-existent as being contrary to it. Thus evil is by its very nature trying as it were to be Good. This also looks like a barren paradox and yet it may contain a spiritual truth. Evil is, in the words of Goethe, “the spirit that DENIES”

It’s extremely important to note that this ‘Biblical Christianity’ of today is not the same as sola scriptura. We’re talking anout something very recent in history and UNIQUELY American. It’s not even British or practiced in Europe.

These people (who are not even Christians in my opinion) protest the Protest. They make up a small fraction of Christians worldwide. However, as English speakers, their works completely dominate our eyes and ears - especially where media is concerned.

I believe God cast these people out of Europe to America. This is made evident by Our Lady of Guadalupe. God setup a wall at the border of Mexico long ago. American quickly became the land of the heretics and cults - all of which were banned in Europe.

Christians are prone and susceptible to trusting other people in general (mankind) that are OUTSIDE of the Church, yet lay claim to certain rights and authority, or even claim this authority based on the BOLDEST of claims - a literal relation to Christ himself and scripture that supercedes the Church.

We easily believe them and are bewiched into receiving their ‘spirit that DENIES’ because it is not made clear to us that there are fundemental differences between those people who are baptized and inside the Church, and those who are not. The Catechism literally says we are a separate ‘race’ of people. We can get easily taken advantage of and many Popes have warned us of this. The Jesuits learned these things the hard way. They took action to resolve these conflicts shortly after they were founded.

Hi!

I concur with you that there is a deeper underlying issue within Protestantism; it first rear its head in Church’s infancy but it was battled (repelled) by the Authority of the Apostles; yet, Christ never said that Satan would not attempt against the Church (Apocalypse 12:17) but that he could not prevail against her!

I also concur with you that the “freedoms” gained in North America has lead to the splintering of the Body as Americans seek not to conform to Apostolic Teaching but to restructure the meaning of the Word to avail themselves of the “liberty” to mold Christianity to their conceptions.

Yet, those who Hold Christ as Divine, and part of the Holy Trinity, though they may fall short of the Fullness of the Faith, are seeking to Follow Jesus.

We must pray that the Holy Spirit Convicts those who stray too far from the Truth and accept manmade tenets as Doctrine Inspired by the Holy Spirit so that they too may return to the Fold: One Faith, One Baptism, One Gospel, One Spirit, One Lord, One Body!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Gadgeteer]

Hi!

Hi! Sorry I’ve been slow in the reply…

…Judas is in a league all to his own… he is introduced as “the son of perdition.”

This means that even before he was elected as part of the Twelve he was already chosen to not be fully part of the Twelve:

“Not-chosen-fully-part-of-the-twelve” — how do you make that work?

Jn6:70, Jesus — “I chose ALL TWELVE of you…”
Jn15:16, Jesus — “I chose you (twelve) to be disciples, and to bear fruit that remains…”

Yes those verses brand Judas as “son-of-perdition”; but that reads to me as because he betrayed Jesus.

Lk22:3 “And satan entered into Judas who was called Iscariot, belonging to the number of the twelve.”

“Eimi ek”, belonging to — literally, being of. What was Judas before satan “entered into him”?

Prophecy is not a vision of the future (as in a possible outcome of an event); it is God’s Revelation of what will transpire:

Right; God exists outside of time, prophecy is just an account of what has already happened in the future.

The problem here is not the Bishops’ Teaching or pronouncements… it is the injection of the terms man decided to equate to the Word of God–the Bishops are clearly saying that those who leave the Faith were not part of the Body (that’s the reason they left the Faith); they never say that those who leave the Faith were never part of the “saved” since they do not subscribe to OSAS syndrome/s.

The conflict is in portending that "one can be carnally saved".

RT’s and others employ term/s to make the Word mean “they were never saved” so that they could justify their theological arguments.

That’s right; did you see the connection I made between 1Jn2:19, and 2Jn1:7-9? “Go-too-far” (in 2Jn1:9), is “GO OUT FROM US”. That ruins RT’s position. (So does 1Jn2:26-28 — they’re trying to deceive you, so ABIDE IN HIM in order that Jesus does not find you shrinking-in-shame because of your sin!)

Yet not once do we find in Scriptures any Teaching about Christ Coming for the Salvation of the “always saved” nor the Bishops rejecting anyone for being part of the “never saved” group.

What did you think about confronting RT’s with Matt9:12-13?

The best I can offer to understand this issue is Jesus’ parable of the sower (St. Matthew 13:1-23); not once does Jesus implies that there are some which are of the “never saved” fold/s–the closest that He comes is the Revelation about Israel’s subjugation (vv. 10-15); yet, we know that this is done for the benefit of the Gentiles (John 1:10-13 & Romans 11:25-32) not because Jesus is inferring that Israel is part of the “never saved” construct.

That passage (paralleled in Mk4, and Lk8), is one of RT’s “Fifty-Five-Secondaries” (my term, not theirs!). They truly believe that God MAKES men “good soil”, or “wicked soil”! No, finished people are compared to plants that GREW on good soil (and prospered), or plants that GREW on poor soil (and withered). See Lk8:18, “take care how you listen” — in no sense would Jesus say that if careful listening could not change anything! No, it’s the same as in Matt13:15-16 — “THEY closed their eyes and ears lest they (turn to Me) – but blessed are YOUR eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear!”

Take care how you listen! Over and over and over throughout Scripture are admonitions like, “How long will you remain unclean?” It’s all, "CHOOSE LIFE by loving the Lord your God, by obeying His voice and …holding fast to Him!"

Sometimes ya’ just wanna grab someone like an RT by both sides of his (her?) face, and cry – “Why can’t you see what’s so plain and obvious”?
:banghead:

Exactly! …other than put forth the Warning (Ezekiel 33’s Sentinel) and pray, there’s nothing we can do; if able, we can assist them in their temporal needs but we must do so with no strings attached or fall with those Jesus reject as unworthy servants.

Brother, when your heart calls for an “Amen” there’s nothing wrong with giving it!

 

[Gadgeteer]

Hi!

…they miss the whole point God is making: God’s Grace and Mercy is made accessible to man; it is God’s Aspiration that man chooses to ABIDE in HIM–it is the reason why He Made Himself accessible:
12 But as many as received him, he gave them power to be made the sons of God, to them that believe in his name. 13 Who are born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. 14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we saw his glory, the glory as it were of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. (St. John 1:12-14)

14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert, so must the Son of man be lifted up: 15 That whosoever believeth in him, may not perish; but may have life everlasting. 16 For God so loved the world, as to give his only begotten Son; that whosoever believeth in him, may not perish, but may have life everlasting. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world, to judge the world, but that the world may be saved by him. (St. John 3:14-17)

Not just “whosoever believeth”, it’s in present active participle; whoever IS BELIEVING". Participle in places like 1Jn5:1, and Rm1:16. Not just “well they believed ONCE”, but “who believes and KEEPS ON”!!!

As you have eloquently quoted, Deut30 — “I have set before you life and death; so CHOOSE LIFE by loving God …and holding fast to Him.” Beneath all of that, is the Greatest Commandment — “You shall LOVE the Lord your God with all your heart, all your mind and all your soul!”

What nonsense is that if GOD decides who will obey that command, or not?

There are some Spanish versions of the Bible that translate John 1’s “the Word” as “el Verbo (Verb);” this is my preferred translation/transliteration of term “Logos” since it denotes "action–it holds/depicts the relationship between God and man: “Be Holy!”

We are Called to be actively involved in and with God!

That’s exactly it. We are NOT driving down our roads of life, God (and Jesus!) all neatly wrapped and boxed on the seat next to us, ready to help if ever needed; no, it’s much more intimate than that!

It’s a real union between two real people; Creator (Him!), and creature (you and me!).

Thas’ whut it is…

 

[SnoopSword]

“Eimi ek”, belonging to — literally, being of. What was Judas before satan “entered into him”?

Previously, Judas was/is(?) ‘a devil’:

John 6:70-71 Then Jesus said, “I chose the twelve of you [disciples], but ONE OF YOU IS A DEVIL. [Judas Iscariot]

Judas was the ONLY DISCIPLE that was a Judean:

Judas last name, ‘Iscariot/Iskariot’ translates to ‘man of Kerioth/Karioth/Karyut’ which is a city in JUDEA

The REST of the disciples being from GALILEE IN THE NORTH (near today’s Lebanon and Syria)."

Acts 1:10-11 and suddenly two men stood by [the APOSTLES] in white garments who also said “Ye men of GALILEE”

Jesus was a known resident of Galilee (Nazareth is in Galilee):

Matthew 26:69 “Thou also wast with Jesus the GALILEAN”

John 7:41: Others said, “This is the Christ.” But some said, “Will the Christ come out of GALILEE?

Galilee is considered to be ‘of the Gentiles’ in the OT and the NT:

Isaiah 9:1, Mat 4:15 Galilee, [land] of the Gentiles

The tribe of Benjamin constituted most of Galilee:

“Galilee in the north, inhabited by the Tribe of Benjamin, who were then generally called Galileans." - Iceland’s Great Inheritance By Adam Rutherford F.R.G.S., A.M. Inst. T. Footnote, pp.14-15)

In Jesus time there was THREE different political entities or provinces/countries/states: Galilee up North, Samaria in the middle, and Judea down south (NOT called ‘Judah’).

God’s ‘own people’ are those who are (legally) baptized. (CCC 1268:1). However, in an obscure context not applicable to us, ONLY BENJAMIN, who resided in Galilee in Jesus time, is explicitly (though not exclusively) implied to be of ‘Gods people’ which God foreknew:

Romans 11:1-2 I say then, has God cast away HIS PEOPLE? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite (of the LOST sheep), of the seed of Abraham, of the TRIBE of BENJAMIN. God has not cast away HIS PEOPLE, which HE FOREKNEW.

Hence, Jesus was safe in Galilee:

John 7:1 (DR) After these things [that had happened in Jn 6, namely verse 6:66] Jesus walked in Galilee; for he would NOT walk in Judea, because the Jews sought to KILL HIM.

`

NOTE: Jesus was legally of the Royal Family line of King David. David was was a Judahite, NOT a Judean or ‘Jew’ despite what anyone tells you otherwise):

Romans 1:3 He was born into the FAMILY LINE of King David.

Red letter proof Jesus was not a Judean (or translated ‘Jew’ in the 18th century):

John 4:7,9-10 Jesus said “Give Me a drink.” The Samaria woman said “How is it that YOU, BEING A JEW (or Judean), ask a drink from ME…? For JEWS have NO DEALINGS with Samaritans. JESUS ANSWERED [and continued to have dialog with her verifying he was not a ‘Jew/Judean’]

Did you know: Queen Elizabeth is said to be the 122nd descendant of King David.

 

[James248]

Previously, Judas was/is(?) ‘a devil’:

Judas was the ONLY DISCIPLE that was a Judean:

The REST of the disciples being from GALILEE IN THE NORTH (near today’s Lebanon and Syria)."

Jesus was a known resident of Galilee (Nazareth is in Galilee):

Galilee is considered to be ‘of the Gentiles’ in the OT and the NT:

The tribe of Benjamin constituted most of Galilee:

In Jesus time there was THREE different political entities or provinces/countries/states: Galilee up North, Samaria in the middle, and Judea down south (NOT called ‘Judah’).

God’s ‘own people’ are those who are (legally) baptized. (CCC 1268:1). However, in an obscure context not applicable to us, ONLY BENJAMIN, who resided in Galilee in Jesus time, is explicitly (though not exclusively) implied to be of ‘Gods people’ which God foreknew:

Hence, Jesus was safe in Galilee:

`

NOTE: Jesus was legally of the Royal Family line of King David. David was was a Judahite, NOT a Judean or ‘Jew’ despite what anyone tells you otherwise):

Red letter proof Jesus was not a Judean (or translated ‘Jew’ in the 18th century):

Did you know: Queen Elizabeth is said to be the 122nd descendant of King David.

What point are you trying to make?

 

[SnoopSword]

What point are you trying to make?

John 6:60-61 …“This is very hard to understand. How can anyone accept it?..His disciples complained about this, He said to them, “Does this offend you?”

 

[James248]

SnoopSword:
I’m pretty sure everyone knows Judea is a renedering of the word Judah in Greek, so again I ask you, what point are you trying to make?

 

[jcrichton]

“Not-chosen-fully-part-of-the-twelve” — how do you make that work?

Jn6:70, Jesus — “I chose ALL TWELVE of you…”
Jn15:16, Jesus — “I chose you (twelve) to be disciples, and to bear fruit that remains…”

Yes those verses brand Judas as “son-of-perdition”; but that reads to me as because he betrayed Jesus.

Lk22:3 “And satan entered into Judas who was called Iscariot, belonging to the number of the twelve.”

“Eimi ek”, belonging to — literally, being of. What was Judas before satan “entered into him”?

Hi!

…Jesus hits the ground running: Annunciation, Virgin Birth, the Star of Bethlehem, the shepherds and Magi adoration, the prophets’ adoration, being involved in His Father’s Business, the Lamb of God…

Everything that Unfolds about Revelation is made possible through the Holy Spirit Foretelling and through the Incarnation of the Word Bringing everything into Fruition…

When did Satan asked for permission to sift the Twelve as wheat?

Scriptures is totally silent on this episode (other than St. Luke 22:31-32); yet, this is something that actually took place… yet here’s the imperative:

32 But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers.”

(St. Luke 22:32)
Did Jesus Pray for Peter because Peter was the worst sinner among the Twelve or among the Israelites or among the whole world?

No! He Prayed for Peter because Peter had the task to support (as in keep together/edify) the others.

…if follows that this is part of prophecy since Peter’s objection is met with his denial–and, conversely, the abandonment of Jesus by all of them (St. Matthew 26:31)

…so working from Jesus hitting the ground running, why did He not Pray for Judas’ conversion since he would be the one in most need of protection and conversion?

I argue that God’s Mercy did in deed provide for Judas’ restoration:

24 The Son of man indeed goeth, as it is written of him: but woe to that man by whom the Son of man shall be betrayed: it were better for him, if that man had not been born. 25 And Judas that betrayed him, answering, said: Is it I, Rabbi? He saith to him: Thou hast said it.

(St. Matthew 26:24-25)

The conflict is in portending that "one can be carnally saved".

This issue goes to vocabulary… St. Paul is the first to refer to being carnal, would you dispute with him how he could be in Fellowship with Christ yet carnal? Either you are missing the meaning or I do not understand the conflict that you perceive.

That’s right; did you see the connection I made between 1Jn2:19, and 2Jn1:7-9? “Go-too-far” (in 2Jn1:9), is “GO OUT FROM US”. That ruins RT’s position. (So does 1Jn2:26-28 — they’re trying to deceive you, so ABIDE IN HIM in order that Jesus does not find you shrinking-in-shame because of your sin!)

How can anyone miss this fact? Those who turn from Christ are not part of the Body; yet, those in the Body can be turned by deceptive teaching (heresies–as Gnosticism).

What did you think about confronting RT’s with Matt9:12-13?

Exactly! How clearer could Jesus have been: He came to rescue (elevate) the sinners from their sin!

That passage (paralleled in Mk4, and Lk8), is one of RT’s “Fifty-Five-Secondaries” (my term, not theirs!). They truly believe that God MAKES men “good soil”, or “wicked soil”! No, finished people

are compared to plants that GREW on good soil (and prospered), or plants that GREW on poor soil (and withered). See Lk8:18, “take care how you listen” — in no sense would Jesus say that if careful listening could not change anything! No, it’s the same as in Matt13:15-16 — “THEY closed their eyes and ears lest they (turn to Me) – but blessed are YOUR eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear!”

Take care how you listen! Over and over and over throughout Scripture are admonitions like, “How long will you remain unclean?” It’s all, "CHOOSE LIFE by loving the Lord your God, by obeying His voice and …holding fast to Him!"

Sometimes ya’ just wanna grab someone like an RT by both sides of his (her?) face, and cry – “Why can’t you see what’s so plain and obvious”?
:banghead:
…yeah, it is hard; they are so trained that “interpretation” of Scriptures, even when these are fully against what the text of the Word state, trumps the Word of God.

This is where prayer comes in… they are worse than those inquisitive children, post-toddler stage, that ask the same questions from all around them ignoring the fact that they have received the same answers from several sources… they ignore the truth even when all sources converge on it! :crying::crying::crying:

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Not just “whosoever believeth”, it’s in present active participle; whoever IS BELIEVING". Participle in places like 1Jn5:1, and Rm1:16. Not just “well they believed ONCE”, but “who believes and KEEPS ON”!!!

As you have eloquently quoted, Deut30 — “I have set before you life and death; so CHOOSE LIFE by loving God …and holding fast to Him.” Beneath all of that, is the Greatest Commandment — “You shall LOVE the Lord your God with all your heart, all your mind and all your soul!”

What nonsense is that if GOD decides who will obey that command, or not?

That’s exactly it. We are NOT driving down our roads of life, God (and Jesus!) all neatly wrapped and boxed on the seat next to us, ready to help if ever needed; no, it’s much more intimate than that!

It’s a real union between two real people; Creator (Him!), and creature (you and me!).

Thas’ whut it is…

Hi!

Exactly!

…understanding this Relationship with God (St. John 15:1-10–I know you saw it coming!) is the most crucial element in our Fellowship; it is seconded only by (in my estimation) the understanding of the following passage:

3 Careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. 4 One body and one Spirit; as you are called in one hope of your calling. 5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism. 6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in us all.

(Ephesians 4:3-6)
How valid would God’s Call be if He is determined to ignore man’s response to His Call (“the not saved”) and force His Call upon those who reject it (“always and forever saved”)?

…which brings us to God’s Claim:

11 So shall my word be, which shall go forth from my mouth: it shall not return to me void, but it shall do whatsoever I please, and shall prosper in the things for which I sent it.

(Isaiah 55:11)
Wouldn’t God’s Claim be sterile and deceptive, if He would send out His Word to accomplish nothing? :banghead::banghead::banghead: (Here’s where a nice hair pulling smiley would come in great.)

Thank God that His Mercy is not limited by our understanding!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Gadgeteer]

Previously, Judas was/is(?) ‘a devil’:

Hi, Snoop – I am honored by your reply.

Can you please tell me — why you think Jesus held up Judas to Peter’s protest-of-loyalty? I read it as:

(Many disciples were leaving. Jesus said to the twelve: )
Jesus: “YOU aren’t going to leave Me too, ARE you!”
Peter (paraphrased) : “Of course not, we know You’re the Messiah.”
Jesus: “I chose all twelve of you, and one of you is a devil.”

In using the “ME” construct, Jesus asks a negative question expecting only an answer of “no”. But Peter treated it as a real question; Peter protested his loyalty exactly as he had in Lk22:33. It is in response to Peter’s loyalty, that Jesus holds up Judas. So the only thing that seems to make sense, is:

Jesus: “You aren’t going to leave too, are you!”
Peter: “Of course we can’t leave, You’re the Messiah!”
Jesus: “Don’t be so sure, one of you ALREADY IS LEAVING!”

Yes Jesus said, “is-a-devil”—but does that mean Judas was never-saved (Jesus agreeing with Peter’s loyalty, "Oh of course you can’t leave, what was I THINKING?!")

Or is it so much more credible that He held up Judas to oppose Peter’s assuredness? Remember Lk22:33-34:

Peter: “Lord, I will go to prison and even DIE for You!”
Jesus: “You’ll deny Me three times TONIGHT!”

Judas was the ONLY DISCIPLE that was a Judean:

The REST of the disciples being from GALILEE IN THE NORTH (near today’s Lebanon and Syria)."

Jesus was a known resident of Galilee (Nazareth is in Galilee):

Galilee is considered to be ‘of the Gentiles’ in the OT and the NT:

The tribe of Benjamin constituted most of Galilee:

In Jesus time there was THREE different political entities or provinces/countries/states: Galilee up North, Samaria in the middle, and Judea down south (NOT called ‘Judah’).

God’s ‘own people’ are those who are (legally) baptized. (CCC 1268:1). However, in an obscure context not applicable to us, ONLY BENJAMIN, who resided in Galilee in Jesus time, is explicitly (though not exclusively) implied to be of ‘Gods people’ which God foreknew:

Hence, Jesus was safe in Galilee:

NOTE: Jesus was legally of the Royal Family line of King David. David was was a Judahite, NOT a Judean or ‘Jew’ despite what anyone tells you otherwise):

Red letter proof Jesus was not a Judean (or translated ‘Jew’ in the 18th century):

Okay – if you are willing, please help me to understand how you relate Jn6:70 ("I chose all twelve of you"), with Jn15:16 (“I chose you to be Disciples, and ordained that you bear fruit that remains”).

How was Judas chosen differently than the other eleven?
(And what sense does it make for Jesus to mention Judas in Jn6:70, unless proving “leaving-is-possible”?)

Thanx in advance…

Did you know: Queen Elizabeth is said to be the 122nd descendant of King David.

I did not – that’s interesting!

 

[Gadgeteer]

Hi!

:tiphat:

…Jesus hits the ground running: Annunciation, Virgin Birth, the Star of Bethlehem, the shepherds and Magi adoration, the prophets’ adoration, being involved in His Father’s Business, the Lamb of God…

Everything that Unfolds about Revelation is made possible through the Holy Spirit Foretelling and through the Incarnation of the Word Bringing everything into Fruition…

When did satan asked for permission to sift the Twelve as wheat?

Scriptures is totally silent on this episode (other than St. Luke 22:31-32); yet, this is something that actually took place… yet here’s the imperative:
32 But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers.” (St. Luke 22:32)

Did Jesus Pray for Peter because Peter was the worst sinner among the Twelve or among the Israelites or among the whole world?

Was Peter’s faith in danger of failing? Jesus conspicuously said, “TURNED BACK” – epistrepho is a real spiritual turning; please see 2Pet2:20-22.

No! He Prayed for Peter because Peter had the task to support (as in keep together/edify) the others.

…if follows that this is part of prophecy since Peter’s objection is met with his denial–and, conversely, the abandonment of Jesus by all of them (St. Matthew 26:31)

…so working from Jesus hitting the ground running, why did He not Pray for Judas’ conversion since he would be the one in most need of protection and conversion?

I argue that God’s Mercy did indeed provide for Judas’ restoration:

Clearly Judas made a conscious choice. Personally I think Judas believed Jesus was to be the physical king, and he wanted to force the issue – it appears he was shocked when Jesus was arrested and crucified. Judas had seen the miracles, surely Jesus would do something astonishing.

…but He did not…

It still remains, why did Jesus answer Peter’s protest-of-loyalty, with Judas?

This issue goes to vocabulary… St. Paul is the first to refer to being carnal, would you dispute with him how he could be in Fellowship with Christ yet carnal?

Where does Paul teach we can “be in fellowship with Christ yet carnal”? Because I do not see a subject-change between Heb5:14 and 6:1, (probably Paul) calls “carnal”, unrepentant/apostasy.

In 1Cor3:1ff, “carnal” exhibits things like “JEALOUSY” and “STRIFE” — which Paul blatantly says in Gal5:19-21, “will-not-inherit”! So to perceive some kind of “Antinomianism” — fleshly/in-fellowship-with-Christ — wouldn’t we have to start stamping passages like Gal5:19-21 with “NOT REALLY”, or at least "Well, there are exceptions…"?

How can there be exceptions? Who decides what they are?

Either you are missing the meaning or I do not understand the conflict that you perceive.

I hope now you understand “the conflict that I perceive”. Where does Paul affirm, “fleshly but saved-fellowship-with-Jesus”? Rom6 (for instance) teaches "we are dead to sin and cannot still live in it"!

How can anyone miss this fact? Those who turn from Christ are not part of the Body; yet, those in the Body can be turned by deceptive teaching (heresies–as Gnosticism).

Scripture is absolutely full of instances and warnings against “falling-from-salvation”. It does take effort to cling to one of the three “OSAS” views…

Exactly! How clearer could Jesus have been: He came to rescue (elevate) the sinners from their sin!

But the unregenerated CANNOT receive Him (so Reformed Theology requires), but if regeneration PRECEDES His coming then they do not need Him! You will find they just won’t answer this…

…yeah, it is hard; they are so trained that “interpretation” of Scriptures, even when these are fully against what the text of the Word state, trumps the Word of God.

As you and I have discussed, there is “pride” involved; RT’s very often say things like, “I used to believe as you did, but then I (matured, learned, was taught by the Spirit, etcetera)”. It’s a superior position that would cause embarrassment if it’s reversed…

This is where prayer comes in… they are worse than those inquisitive children, post-toddler stage, that ask the same questions from all around them ignoring the fact that they have received the same answers from several sources… they ignore the truth even when all sources converge on it!

Brother, this is extremely valid and wise. Too often we can approach proselytizing as an “intellectual pursuit”, forgetting that it is a spiritual battle, and PRAYER is our POWER with and from God!

Well done, again! :hug3:

 

[Gadgeteer]

Where does Paul teach we can “be in fellowship with Christ yet carnal”? Because I do not see a subject-change between Heb5:14 and 6:1, (probably Paul) calls “carnal”, unrepentant/apostasy.

In 1Cor3:1ff, “carnal” exhibits things like “JEALOUSY” and “STRIFE” — which Paul blatantly says in Gal5:19-21, “will-not-inherit”! So to perceive some kind of “Antinomianism” — fleshly/in-fellowship-with-Christ — wouldn’t we have to start stamping passages like Gal5:19-21 with “NOT REALLY”, or at least "Well, there are exceptions…"?

Paul’s message in 1Cor3, is continued in chapter 5. He’s blasting those among the (presumed) believers that are more immoral than heathens. He says he will “deliver such a person to satan for destruction of flesh, that his spirit be saved” — clearly implying repentance.

1Cor5:11-13 “But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler—not even to eat with such a one.
For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church?
But those who are outside, God judges. REMOVE THE WICKED MAN FROM AMONG YOURSELVES.”

“So-called” — onomazō, named/proclaimed. Those who SAY they are “brothers”, but are wicked. Carnal. Fleshly.

Is there anyone who is “fleshly” who is not immoral, or covetous, or idolater, or reviler, or drunkard, or swindler? Isn’t that what “fleshly” …means?

 

[Gadgeteer]

Exactly!

…understanding this Relationship with God (St. John 15:1-10–I know you saw it coming!) is the most crucial element in our Fellowship; it is seconded only by (in my estimation) the understanding of the following passage:
3 Careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. 4 One body and one Spirit; as you are called in one hope of your calling. 5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism. 6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in us all. (Ephesians 4:3-6)

I will likely step on a few toes — “one baptism”, meaning:

“I have a baptism to be baptized with, and it distresses Me greatly until it is accomplished.” Lk12:50

"Are you willing to be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with, are you willing to drink the cup that I drink?" Mk10:38

One Lord, one Faith, one Gospel. One salvation — through Jesus, our mutual Savior.

How valid would God’s Call be if He is determined to ignore man’s response to His Call (“the not saved”) and force His Call upon those who reject it (“always and forever saved”)?

Ahhhh, you’re not understanding their confusion!

"They cannot understand God’s salvation, cannot even desire His righteousness unless He changes their hearts first! Well, they can desire to be saved and even joyfully think they ARE SAVED (Lk8:13), but they do NOT REALLY want to be saved. Except they’re joyful about it; but it’s false, they don’t even know it’s false. They cannot want to be saved (except when they do want to), but it must be only a "superficial we-wanna-be-like-you" fitting in and not true desire for eternity. Except they are joyful about it. But not really; they are INCAPABLE of turning to God in ANY measure – except when they do turn, but it’s only SUPERFICIALLY, they prove they are not genuine by falling away. Even though they “believed joyfully”, it was NOT REALLY belief because they left; their joy was false! They can’t turn or even WANT to, except when they want to — but they can’t, thinking themselves part of God’s righteous makes them feel joyful — but they don’t WANT to be righteous BECAUSE THEY CAN’T (not without His sovereign and monergistic heart-change!) …except when they can and do, but it’s not real, because it can’t be, even though it says “believed joyfully” — if they HAD believed THEY WOULD NOT HAVE LEFT!"

Fade in a circus, with performers JUMPING THROUGH HOOPS. Goodness.

…which brings us to God’s Claim:

Wouldn’t God’s Claim be sterile and deceptive, if He would send out His Word to accomplish nothing? :banghead::banghead::banghead: (Here’s where a nice hair pulling smiley would come in great.)

Find one on the Internet, and use the “img” tag!

God must be pretty dense, to command ALL MEN EVERYWHERE to repent, if He really is behind-the-scenes scripting who will, and who will not.

Here is where the word, “STRONGHOLD” — applies. Some doctrines really are strongholds. We must be infinitely patient, unendingly kind and loving, and prayerfully directed by God when we teach.