The Commandments should not be followed ... Part 2

[Odell]

You don’t think that the Father’s will is that men believe in the Son?

Never said I didn’t

Are you implying that believing in the son is all that the fathers will is?

No both fath and love

You’ll notice that those in that passage you reference claimed to do all sorts of works, yet Jesus says He never knew them. They demanded entrance into the Kingdom based on their works. It wasn’t going to happen. What they lacked was belief in Him.

And you will notice Catholics teach that you can’t demand heaven because you did works

Where these works based on love or are they hey look at what I did God let me into heaven?

Catholics teach that the fathers will is faith working threw love if you have that then good but if you just have faith without the othe part of the fathers will LOVE then your no different than the demons

By this I don’t mean belief in His existence; they believed in that, calling Him “Lord.” But even I’ve met many unbelievers who refer to Jesus as “the Lord.” After all, we’ve had 2000 years of Christianity for that kind of conditioning.

So you are going to go so far as to say that the demons don’t belive Jesus is lord?

 

[Pax]

I know how it is defined now in the English language, however, the Greek word is apostasia. Can you show me where, Biblically, this term is used to describe a once believer who has lost his salvation by falling out of faith?

You are attempting to play a word game with the Greek and it simply won’t work.

The Greek word that you are looking for occurs in 2 Thess 2:3 where it says:

– King James
2 Thessalonians 2:3
“Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;” Some translations use the term “falling away” while others like Weymouths and Darby use the word “apostasy.”

Hebrew 6:6 does not use apostasia but the passage is likewise translated using the term “falling away” in the KJV while the RSV uses the word “apostasy.”

Falling away and apostasy are synonyms.

The passage reads as follows in the KJV:

Hebrews 6:6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

Henry’s Concise Commentary (a protestant source) says this about Hebrews 6:6:

*"Citation: - HEBREWS 6

Synopsis: - The Hebrews are urged to go forward in the doctrine of Christ, and the consequences of apostacy, or turning back, are described. (1-8)" *

Gray’s Home Bible Commentary says this:

(6, 10), of whom he will speak later after another digression of warning and encouragement. Teaching About Apostasy This digression covers 5:12-6:20, and consists (a), of an explanation as to why they should be so seriously tempted to apostatize (v. 11-14).

You are trying to dodge the issue of apostasy, but it simply will not fly. Your efforts to nuance and manipulate the language to fit your doctrine is misplaced. In the passages quoted the inspired author is clearly addressing Christian believers.

 

[Pax]

Moon,

I’m still waiting for the logical and exegetical refutation concerning all that I scripturally presented concerning Abraham.

 

[Philthy]

Jesus did not say, “Do this and you will have eternal life.” He Himself is the source of eternal life. Loving God and your neighbor as yourself (keeping the Law) does not merit any man eternal life.

In today’s Gospel reading Christ says exactly what you claim he did not say:

Matt: 19:16-18

And someone came to Him and said, “Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may obtain eternal life?” And He said to him, “Why are you asking Me about what is good? There is {only} One who is good; but if you wish to enter into eternal life, keep the commandments.”

Your entire post regarding the lawyer who asked about “eternal life” and got an answer on how to “live” was predicated upon your unsubstantiated claim that Christ, in using the term “live” was speaking according to the “law” and not about “eternal life”. Here, in this exchange there is no wiggle room, MD. Christ is asked about eternal life and answers - just as he did before - honestly about eternal life. The answer is the same. You had so much excellent stuff in that post, but you are stumbling over this one area, IMHO. Faith in Christ cannot be separated from obedience; if it is, it is a dead faith which does not save. (cf James 2).
I think you would be wiser to direct your attention to HOW we can be obedient. The answer there is that it is only through faith in Christ with a will enlightened and empowered by the Holy Spirit so that “no man may boast”. Give it some thought and prayer.

 

[Philthy]

Hi MD, I hope your weekend was fruitful

You SAY your faith remains in Christ your redeemer but then you deny that He’s even redeemed when you say that you “hope” and “pray” that you’ll finally gain approval by persevering to the end (of what, your life?)

Nope. I have been saved, am being saved and hope to be saved - just like St Paul.

and by your perseverance be brought “to the glory of eternal life.” This is works (merit) on your part; salvation and eternal life being based on personal merit.

Nope, its by Gods grace alive in me that allows me to “offer a living sacrifice holy and pleasing to God.” It is a holy, pleasing sacrifice because it’s source is the grace Christ merited on the Cross.

Contrary to Divine revelation, you deny that they’re both *gifted *by God

No I dont. It remains a gift, but I must accept it as one for it to truly have effect.

(Eph. 2:8; Rom. 6:23). You also deny Christ’s own words where He states that whoever believes in Him HAS eternal life (Jn. 3:15-18; 5:24).

No I deny nothing of the sort. I simply accept the ENTIRE gospel that our actions during our earthly life, even after we become part of God’s family, can result in our rejecting Gods gift.

Not according to what you clearly state above. You save yourself through your perseverance.

Wrong. My perseverence is by Gods grace through faith and it is united to my salvation: it is God’s will.

Will men be “happy” with a salvation devoid of rewards, ABSOLUTELY!! In fact, nothing will give him greater joy because grace glorifies the Lord Jesus Christ, and when Christ is glorified those whom are His (redeemed by His blood) are satisfied.

Then why is there so much attention to Christian conduct in the NT? So much attention that it would appear to overshadow the gospel itself.

Because the true believer is to glorify Christ, who redeemed them, by their conduct. Conduct is not FOR salvation but glorification, and that of the Redeemer’s.

And when the “beleiver” decides that they dont care enough about Christ to “glorify” him through their conduct, but merely wish for their own salvation you think Christ is gonna greet them with “Well DONE my good and faithful SERVANT”?

If you want eternal life you must believe in the Source of it.

I do

Scripture records only ONE occasion where God justified (hence, once for all) Abraham.

False. Your inability to offer any direct refutation of Pax’s Scriptural analysis (other than your repeated pleas that it isnt “recorded”) is quite revealing to those with an open mind. Scripture reveals through James and Paul that Abraham was justified on more than one occasion. In addition, no where is it revealed in Scripture that we are saved by faith alone. Even better, it is definitively stated, recorded and revealed that we are not justified by faith alone.
It is completely ridiculous, IMHO, to ask someone to believe that God would inspire James to make such a claim(not by faith alone) regarding a relatively irrelevent point (works demonstrate your salvation) when his doing so profoundly confuses and jeopardizes what you claim is a central message of the faith: Salvation by faith alone.

 

[Sean_Boyle]

They demanded entrance into the Kingdom based on their works. It wasn’t going to happen.quote]

Your faith is a work. Declaring your faith is a work, living your faith is a work, living in obedience to the Father is a work, rejecting sin in your life is a work.

So what are you saying…

 

[BRB]

Then by definition you do not agree with the doctrine of eternal security.

.

Only the most radical fundamentalist [like Wilson Ewin / author; There Is Therefore Now No Condemnation] teach that Apostasy is never an option for a believer. Most Protestants admit the Bible clearly teaches Apostasy is an option.

Are you as radical as Ewin ?

 

[BRB]

God saves based on one’s “faith,” not one’s "oath."Matt 5:34 “But I say to you, make no oath at all, either by heaven, for it is the throne of God,”.

Faith yes, that is motivated to Serve Christ in Discipleship til the end.

Your faith in Christianity is a ‘nothing’ … if it is not a covenantal bonding of yourself to C.J. via faithful discipleship.

Christ came to earth to call disciples to himself. And he Ascended having left us a command/commission to take the Gospel to all nations … making Disciples of Christ.

You must bond to Christ, thru the NEW COVENANT in his Blood at Calvary, our you have no part in him. Christ has sworn the Oath, in God’s name, because there is none greater.

The oath [little o] we take is secured by God’s. We are joined/sealed into him, thru his OATH to the Father to do God’s will, and shepherd his flock into eternity.

Next time you are in court … just tell the judge you don’t believe in taking oaths

 

[BRB]

Now that we are ‘stuck’ on SALVATION … a quick review of Protestant and Catholic concepts of Salvation … as taken from Karl Keatings 1988 book; Catholocism and Fundamentalism.

PROTESTANT-FUNDAMENTALIST dogma : Firmly planted in John 3:3 “Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God”. The new birth says K. Hagin [Protestant evangelist], “is a necessity to being saved. Through the new birth you come into the right relationship with God.” Those who have obtained the new birth “did the one thing necessary - they accepted J.C. as personal Savior by repenting and turning to God with the whole heart as a little child”.

Comments of Keating: The new birth is not: confirmation - church membership - water baptism - the taking of sacraments - observing religious duties - an intellectual reception of Christianity - orthodoxy of faith - going to church - saying prayers - reading the Bible - being moral - being cultured or refined - doing good deeds - doing your best - nor any of the many other things some men are trusting in to save them.

CATHOLIC dogma … per Keating. For Catholics, salvation depends on the state of the soul at death. Christ has already redeemed us, unlocked the gates of heaven, as it were. (Note that redemption is not the same as salvation but is a necessary prelude.) Christ did his part, and NOW WE HAVE TO COOPERATE BY DOING OURS. If we are to pass through those gates, we have to be in the right spiritual state. We have to be spiritually alive. If a soul is merely in a natural state, w/o sanctifying grace, which is the grace that gives it supernatural life, then it is dead supernaturally and incapable of enjoying heaven. It will not be allowed through the gates. But if it has sanctifying grace, then heaven is GUARANTEED even if a detour through purgatorial purification is required first. The Church teaches that only souls that are objectively good and objectively pleasing to God merit heaven, and such souls are ones filled with sanctifying grace. … To some it seems arbitrary that God would put the main emphasis on one’s last moments, which may come entirely by surprise, but this reality is tempered by the fact that everyone is given a chance to repent – and not just a chance, but a succession of chances. Grace abounds and can always be grabbed if only reached for. God does everything short of getting down on his knees in front of us and begging us to repent.

 

[mikeledes]

But the context is fruit bearing, not salvation. He was speaking to those who were already His. The Apostles were being told that in order to bear fruit in their coming ministry, they needed to abide (metaphorically) in the Vine.Life is the power in the Vine by which the branch produces fruit.That’s right. That’s why He presents the principle of abiding in Him. Not a church, not a program, not a religious system, or any person or persons, but Him alone. Only He has the life to produce fruit. It is Christ who would do His work through them. The church is the “body of Christ,” not the “head.”

Yes, it is Christ who does His work through the believer, resulting in good fruit. That is precisely what Catholics have been consistently saying in this thread. Yes, John 15 discusses fruit bearing. It discusses the source of the power to bear fruit (Christ) and what happens when you do not bear fruit. You claim that this is purely volitional, and not positional. However, why have you accepted that John 15 is about genuine Christians while other OSAS or Calvinist Protestants have not? What do you see in this passage that clearly indicates that these “branches” are positionally in Christ? Perhaps John 15:2 has caused you to interpret John 15 differently from other Protestants:

2"Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit, He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit, He prunes it so that it may bear more fruit.

You have apparently come to the conclusion that “in me” refers to the branches position (in Christ), and rigtfully so. So now what does “abide” mean? Again, it means to remain, continue, or stay in the condition, state, location, place, etc. one is already in. This is how the Greek word “meno” is used throughout the New Testament:

John 19:31

Then the Jews, because it was the day of preparation, so that the bodies would not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day ), asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

“Abiding” is not the metaphor, since “abiding” in Christ is used outside of this passage in a clearly non-metaphoric way (1 John 2:24, 28). The “vine” and the “branches” are the metaphor. Jesus says:

**"Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in Me. **

How Jesus uses “abide” in the metaphor defines how He uses it in the reality that the metaphor represents. In other words, just as the branch must continue to be in- remain an * integral member * of - the Vine, so the Christian must continue to be in Christ, remain and integral member of His body. Abiding is “volitional”, but it is directly related to "position, because “in me”, as you have apparently accepted in your interpretation of John 15:2, refers to the branches “position.” Jesus clearly says abide (volitional) in me (position). In other words, remain in the position in which you have been placed. And He says that one can cease to remain (abide) in that position (“in me.”)

It makes no clear reference to that at allIf that’s what Jesus was saying then salvation is not "by grace through faith, but on fruit bearing (works). And He would contradict what He stated earlier regarding belief in Him, salvation and eternal life:John 3:14-18 “As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.** He who believes** in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.”

Other Protestants see it as a clear reference to eternal damnation - see the respected Calvinist Matthew Henry Commentary. And why? Because the language used in John 15:6 has all of the key hallmarks of eternal damnation (a “gathering” , “cast into the fire”, and “burned”) that is lacking in passages like 1 Corinthian 3:14-15, but found in passages like:

Matthew 13:39-40, 49–50

39and the enemy who sowed them is the devil, and the harvest is the end of the age; and the reapers are angels.
40"So just as the tares are gathered up and burned with fire, so shall it be at the end of the age.
**49"So it will be at the end of the age; the angels will come forth and take out the wicked from among the righteous,
50and will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. **

The believer “has eternal life” insomuch as “life is in the Son” (1John 5:11). He who is engrafted into the Son shares in that life, just as a branch shares in the life that’s in the vine. He who is cut off from Christ no longer shares in the life that is in Him, just as the branch cut off from the vine no longer shares in the life of the vine and withers. Having “eternal life” does not mean that it is a permanent quality of our soul, as demonstrated by the following verse:

1 John 3:15

15Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer; and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.

Eternal life does not remain/ stay - and remember “meno” means to remain in the place one is already in - in a person who has hardened his heart through hate. True love is the objective evidence of the presence of life within. Good works are the objective evidence of the continued presence of that love which was poured into our hearts through the Spirit:

1 John 3:17-18

17But whoever has the world’s goods, and sees his brother in need and closes his heart against him, how does the love of God abide in him?
18Little children, let us not love with word or with tongue, but in deed and truth.

2 John 6

**6And this is love, that we walk according to His commandments This is the commandment, just as you have heard from the beginning, that you should walk in it. **

The love of God does not remain in a heart that’s been closed or hardened, as evidenced by lack of good works. Catholics believe that faith without love is dead and love without works is dead. When we love ( a verb), God’s presence within us continues:

1 John 4:12

12No one has seen God at any time; if we love one another, God abides in us, and His love is perfected in us.

And if the eternal God remains in us, then eternal life remains/abides in us. The life that the believer receives is eternal because the source is eternal (God the Son), not because our possession of it is eternal. You yourself said that “Life is the power in the Vine by which the branch produces fruit.” So if the branch no longer has power to produce fruit - having been cut off from the vine - then the branch no longer possesses life, since life is the power, and hence withers/dies. Just as a branch taken away from the Vine, it’s source of life, dies, how can someone that does not remain in the Son and cut off from Him (the source of spiritual life) continue to spiritually live and be saved? And this brings us back to what Jesus says about the fate of this cut off and lifeless branch. The spiritually dead end in hell and the language he uses to describe the fate of this “withered branch” exactly corresponds to His previous descriptions of reprobation/eternal damnation, namely, gathered, cast into the fire, and burned. It is no coincidence that the promise of eternal life (continued enjoyment of it and its consummation) is directly linked to abiding:

1 John 2:24

**24As for you, let that abide in you which you heard from the beginning If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, you also will abide in the Son and in the Father.25This is the promise which He Himself made to us: eternal life. **

Those who are and continue to be in Christ, will not suffer condemnation. Perhaps what is being contradicted is not what Christ and Paul taught, but your interpretation of it.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

What I also would like to know how you reconcile the existence of fruitless branches in Christ that remain saved with the following passage:

James 2:14, 20, 24

14What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him?
20But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless?
24You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

If genuine faith saves and exists without works - since a fruitless branch must have genuine saving faith in order to in the True Vine - then how do you reconcile that with James, particularly when he indicates that a fruitless faith cannot save?

God Bless,
Michael

This question remains unanswered.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[sandusky]

mikeledes:

Other Protestants see it as a clear reference to eternal damnation - see the respected Calvinist Matthew Henry Commentary…

I don’t think you’ve read Matthew Henry, Mike, because he doesn’t help you at all; read him. Here are some from him on Jn 15:Under pt 1:

**(1.) The doom of the unfruitful (v. 2): They are taken away. [1.] It is here intimated that there are many who pass for branches in Christ who yet do not bear fruit. Were they really united to Christ by faith, they would bear fruit; but being only tied to him by the thread of an outward profession, though they seem to be branches, they will soon be seen to be dry ones. Unfruitful professors are unfaithful professors; professors, and no more. It might be read, Every branch that beareth not fruit in me, and it comes much to one; for those that do not bear fruit in Christ, and in his Spirit and grace, are as if they bore no fruit at all, (Hos. x. 1). [2.] It is here threatened that they shall be taken away, in justice to them and in kindness to the rest of the branches. From him that has not real union with Christ, and fruit produced thereby, shall be taken away even that which he seemed to have, (Luke viii. 18). Some think this refers primarily to Judas.

(2.) The promise made to the fruitful: He purgeth them, that they may bring forth more fruit. Note, [1.] Further fruitfulness is the blessed reward of forward fruitfulness. The first blessing was, Be fruitful; and it is still a great blessing. [2.] Even fruitful branches, in order to their further fruitfulness, have need of purging or pruning; kathairei—he taketh away that which is superfluous and luxuriant, which hinders its growth and fruitfulness. The best have that in them which is peccant, aliquid amputandum—something which should be taken away; some notions, passions, or humours, that want to be purged away, which Christ has promised to do by his word, and Spirit, and providence; and these shall be taken off by degrees in the proper season. [3.] The purging of fruitful branches, in order to their greater fruitfulness, is the care and work of the great husbandman, for his own glory.**

Under pt #2.

(3.) The fatal consequences of forsaking Christ (v. 6): If any man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch. This is a description of the fearful state of hypocrites that are not in Christ, and of apostates that abide not in Christ. [1.] They are cast forth as dry and withered branches, which are plucked off because they cumber the tree. It is just that those should have no benefit by Christ who think they have no need of him; and that those who reject him should be rejected by him. Those that abide not in Christ shall be abandoned by him; they are left to themselves, to fall into scandalous sin, and then are justly cast out of the communion of the faithful. [2.] They are withered, as a branch broken off from the tree. Those that abide not in Christ, though they may flourish awhile in a plausible, at least a passable profession, yet in a little time wither and come to nothing. Their parts and gifts wither; their zeal and devotion wither; their credit and reputation wither; their hopes and comforts wither, (Job viii. 11-13).

mikeledes:

This question remains unanswered:

If genuine faith saves and exists without works - since a fruitless branch must have genuine saving faith in order to in the True Vine - then how do you reconcile that with James, particularly when he indicates that a fruitless faith cannot save?

Read Henry above.

 

[Sean_Boyle]

I don’t think you’ve read Matthew Henry, Mike, because he doesn’t help you at all; read him. Here are some from him on Jn 15:Under pt 1:

(1.) The doom of the unfruitful (v. 2): They are taken away. [1.] It is here intimated that there are many who pass for branches in Christ who yet do not bear fruit. Were they really united to Christ by faith, they would bear fruit; but being only tied to him by the thread of an outward profession, though they seem to be branches, they will soon be seen to be dry ones. Unfruitful professors are unfaithful professors; professors, and no more. It might be read, Every branch that beareth not fruit in me, and it comes much to one; for those that do not bear fruit in Christ, and in his Spirit and grace, are as if they bore no fruit at all, (Hos. x. 1). [2.] It is here threatened that they shall be taken away, in justice to them and in kindness to the rest of the branches. From him that has not real union with Christ, and fruit produced thereby, shall be taken away even that which he seemed to have, (Luke viii. 18). Some think this refers primarily to Judas.

(2.) The promise made to the fruitful: He purgeth them, that they may bring forth more fruit. Note, [1.] Further fruitfulness is the blessed reward of forward fruitfulness. The first blessing was, Be fruitful; and it is still a great blessing. [2.] Even fruitful branches, in order to their further fruitfulness, have need of purging or pruning; kathairei—he taketh away that which is superfluous and luxuriant, which hinders its growth and fruitfulness. The best have that in them which is peccant, aliquid amputandum—something which should be taken away; some notions, passions, or humours, that want to be purged away, which Christ has promised to do by his word, and Spirit, and providence; and these shall be taken off by degrees in the proper season. [3.] The purging of fruitful branches, in order to their greater fruitfulness, is the care and work of the great husbandman, for his own glory.

Under pt #2.

(3.) The fatal consequences of forsaking Christ (v. 6): If any man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch. This is a description of the fearful state of hypocrites that are not in Christ, and of apostates that abide not in Christ. [1.] They are cast forth as dry and withered branches, which are plucked off because they cumber the tree. It is just that those should have no benefit by Christ who think they have no need of him; and that those who reject him should be rejected by him. Those that abide not in Christ shall be abandoned by him; they are left to themselves, to fall into scandalous sin, and then are justly cast out of the communion of the faithful. [2.] They are withered, as a branch broken off from the tree. Those that abide not in Christ, though they may flourish awhile in a plausible, at least a passable profession, yet in a little time wither and come to nothing. Their parts and gifts wither; their zeal and devotion wither; their credit and reputation wither; their hopes and comforts wither, (Job viii. 11-13).Read Henry above.

So…

True faith, a saving faith must prove through with works in faith?

yes or no please?

Will you unite with those of us in faith that struggle against the idea that “faith alone” saves within the christian community as a whole?

 

[mikeledes]

I don’t think you’ve read Matthew Henry, Mike, because he doesn’t help you at all; read him. Here are some from him on Jn 15:Under pt 1:

(1.) The doom of the unfruitful (v. 2): They are taken away. [1.] It is here intimated that there are many who pass for branches in Christ who yet do not bear fruit. Were they really united to Christ by faith, they would bear fruit; but being only tied to him by the thread of an outward profession, though they seem to be branches, they will soon be seen to be dry ones. Unfruitful professors are unfaithful professors; professors, and no more. It might be read, Every branch that beareth not fruit in me, and it comes much to one; for those that do not bear fruit in Christ, and in his Spirit and grace, are as if they bore no fruit at all, (Hos. x. 1). [2.] It is here threatened that they shall be taken away, in justice to them and in kindness to the rest of the branches. From him that has not real union with Christ, and fruit produced thereby, shall be taken away even that which he seemed to have, (Luke viii. 18). Some think this refers primarily to Judas.

(2.) The promise made to the fruitful: He purgeth them, that they may bring forth more fruit. Note, [1.] Further fruitfulness is the blessed reward of forward fruitfulness. The first blessing was, Be fruitful; and it is still a great blessing. [2.] Even fruitful branches, in order to their further fruitfulness, have need of purging or pruning; kathairei—he taketh away that which is superfluous and luxuriant, which hinders its growth and fruitfulness. The best have that in them which is peccant, aliquid amputandum—something which should be taken away; some notions, passions, or humours, that want to be purged away, which Christ has promised to do by his word, and Spirit, and providence; and these shall be taken off by degrees in the proper season. [3.] The purging of fruitful branches, in order to their greater fruitfulness, is the care and work of the great husbandman, for his own glory.

Under pt #2.

(3.) The fatal consequences of forsaking Christ (v. 6): If any man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch. This is a description of the fearful state of hypocrites that are not in Christ, and of apostates that abide not in Christ. [1.] They are cast forth as dry and withered branches, which are plucked off because they cumber the tree. It is just that those should have no benefit by Christ who think they have no need of him; and that those who reject him should be rejected by him. Those that abide not in Christ shall be abandoned by him; they are left to themselves, to fall into scandalous sin, and then are justly cast out of the communion of the faithful. [2.] They are withered, as a branch broken off from the tree. Those that abide not in Christ, though they may flourish awhile in a plausible, at least a passable profession, yet in a little time wither and come to nothing. Their parts and gifts wither; their zeal and devotion wither; their credit and reputation wither; their hopes and comforts wither, (Job viii. 11-13)…

I am familiar with Matthew Henry’s argument, that’s why I referenced it. My point is that Matthew Henry sees John 15:6 as a clear reference to eternal damnation, hence his interpretation of the fruitless branches differs from yours and moondweller’s.

Read Henry above

So have you now abandoned your old interpretation of this passage and have adopted Matthew Henry’s? Moondweller’s argument is significantly different from Henry’s, hence the question. If he had accepted Matthew Henry’s interpretation, then I would have asked him a different question. But since moondweller and you - unless I need an update - believe that John 15 is about genuine Christians and that “cast into fire” is not a reference to eternal damnation, then I would like to know how you reconcile James 2 with the existence of a fruitless branch? We also have 2 Peter 1:5-9:

But also for this very reason, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue, to virtue knowledge, 6 to knowledge self-control, to self-control perseverance, to perseverance godliness, 7 to godliness brotherly kindness, and to brotherly kindness love. 8 For if these things are yours and abound, you will be neither barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 For he who lacks these things is shortsighted, even to blindness, and has forgotten that he was cleansed from his old sins.

Note that Peter does not say he who lacks “these things” (virtue, knowledge, self-control, perseverance, godliness, bortherly kindness, and love) was never really saved or never had genuine faith. He says he who lackes these things has “forgotten he was cleansed from his old sins,” which obviouly means he had genuine faith.

God bless,
Michael

 

[BRB]

Just a thought about Keating’s description of Prot-Fundamental vs Catholics regarding Salvation.

For the former group … its all about BEGINNINGS.
For the latter …its all about ENDINGS.

Isn’t it really BOTH ? For things to end well, they ‘generally’ must begin well.

When will Protestants accept truth of James & Christ regarding endings … and will Catholics truly accept the rebirth beginnings as taught by Christ, Paul, and John ?

Lets accept BOTH as our Reality in Christ … so we can reunify the 2 tribes [Judah & Israel] together in the covenantal spirit of David and Abner.

 

[sandusky]

mikeledes:

I am familiar with Matthew Henry’s argument, that’s why I referenced it. My point is that Matthew Henry sees John 15:6 as a clear reference to eternal damnation, hence his interpretation of the fruitless branches differs from yours and moondweller’s.

Henry’s interpretation doesn’t differ from mine, Mike; I’ll let moondweller speak for himself with respect to that.

Read what I’ve posted again; you’ll notice that Henry refers to those discarded and burned branches as those "who pass for branches in Christ,” and Henry says of them, "Were they really united to Christ by faith, they would bear fruit;” IOW, he doesn’t believe that they are “truly united to Christ," but that their tie is a mere "outward profession,” of faith. Finally, he sums up concerning them in this way, they are, “Unfruitful professors are unfaithful professors; professors, and no more."

That is Henry’s position, because the following is his position as well:**
III. Whom he called those he also justified. All that are effectually called are justified, absolved from guilt, and accepted as righteous through Jesus Christ. They are recti in curia—right in court; no sin that ever they have been guilty of shall come against them, to condemn them. The book is crossed, the bond cancelled, the judgment vacated, the attainder reversed; and they are no longer dealt with as criminals, but owned and loved as friends and favourites. Blessed is the man whose iniquity is thus forgiven. None are thus justified but those that are effectually called. Those that stand it out against the gospel call abide under guilt and wrath.

IV. Whom he justified those he also glorified. The power of corruption being broken in effectual calling, and the guilt of sin removed in justification, all that which hinders is taken out of the way, and nothing can come between that soul and glory. Observe, It is spoken of as a thing done: He glorified, because of the certainty of it; he hath saved us, and called us with a holy calling. In the eternal glorification of all the elect, God’s design of love has its full accomplishment. This was what he aimed at all along—to bring them to heaven. Nothing less than that glory would make up the fulness of his covenant relation to them as God; and therefore, in all he does for them, and in them, he has this in his eye. Are they chosen? It is to salvation. Called? It is to his kingdom and glory. Begotten again? It is to an inheritance incorruptible. Afflicted: It is to work for them this exceeding and eternal weight of glory. Observe, The author of all these is the same. It is God himself that predestinated, calleth, justifieth, glorifieth; so the Lord alone did lead him, and there was no strange God with him. Created wills are so very fickle, and created powers so very feeble, that, if any of these did depend upon the creature, the whole would shake. But God himself hath undertaken the doing of it from first to last, that we might abide in a constant dependence upon him and subjection to him, and ascribe all the praise to him—that every crown may be cast before the throne. This is a mighty encouragement to our faith and hope; for, as for God, his way, his work, is perfect. He that hath laid the foundation will build upon it, and the top-stone will at length be brought forth with shoutings, and it will be our eternal work to cry, Grace, grace to it.**IOW, Henry’s position is that God does not “unjustify” those He has justified.

From there, Henry continues with the subsequent verses which he titles: the believer’s triumph (Rom 8:31-39).

This thread is about “commandment keeping. If you want to discuss OSAS, here are some threads on that topic: here, here, and here.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

I don’t think you’ve read Matthew Henry, Mike, because he doesn’t help you at all; read him. Here are some from him on Jn 15:Under pt 1:

(1.) The doom of the unfruitful (v. 2): They are taken away. [1.] It is here intimated that there are many who pass for branches in Christ who yet do not bear fruit. Were they really united to Christ by faith, they would bear fruit; but being only tied to him by the thread of an outward profession, though they seem to be branches, they will soon be seen to be dry ones. Unfruitful professors are unfaithful professors; professors, and no more. It might be read, Every branch that beareth not fruit in me, and it comes much to one; for those that do not bear fruit in Christ, and in his Spirit and grace, are as if they bore no fruit at all, (Hos. x. 1). [2.] It is here threatened that they shall be taken away, in justice to them and in kindness to the rest of the branches. From him that has not real union with Christ, and fruit produced thereby, shall be taken away even that which he seemed to have, (Luke viii. 18). Some think this refers primarily to Judas.Read Henry above.

This is certainly a stretch on the passage, a reading into it a preconceived notion that salvation cannot be lost. The claim “were they really true branches” is a concept inserted into the text. Jesus was speaking directly to the Apostles here. There is no grounds to go around claiming fake branches and real branches.
Two texts to consider:
John 13: 6He came to Simon Peter, who said to him, “Lord, are you going to wash my feet?” 7Jesus replied, “You do not realize now what I am doing, but later you will understand.”
8"No," said Peter, “you shall never wash my feet.”
Jesus answered, “Unless I wash you, you have no part with me.”

Look what Jesus said to a saved man. Jesus THREATENED an already saved man. If OSAS were true then Jesus lied or was not really serious.

Lk 13: 6Then he told this parable: “A man had a fig tree, planted in his vineyard, and he went to look for fruit on it, but did not find any. 7So he said to the man who took care of the vineyard, ‘For three years now I’ve been coming to look for fruit on this fig tree and haven’t found any. Cut it down! Why should it use up the soil?’
8” ‘Sir,’ the man replied, 'leave it alone for one more year, and I’ll dig around it and fertilize it. 9If it bears fruit next year, fine! If not, then cut it down.’

If this was a fake tree then this parable is utterly meaningless. What was the gardener doing looking for apples on fake plastic tree, and why was he watering and fertilizing it? The only thing that makes sense is if this was a genuine tree that stubbornly refused to produce fruit.

 

[sandusky]

This is certainly a stretch on the passage, a reading into it a preconceived notion that salvation cannot be lost. The claim “were they really true branches” is a concept inserted into the text. Jesus was speaking directly to the Apostles here. There is no grounds to go around claiming fake branches and real branches.

The reason for my post with respect to Henry is whether or not his position supports the RC position; as I’ve shown, I don’t think that it does, and, ISTM from your response, neither do you.

 

[moondweller]

ryanoneil:

What about this use of pisteuo?
But Jesus did not commit himself unto them, because he knew all men, (John 2:24)

Yes. A good translation here is as the NASB puts it: “…and Jesus was not entrusting Himself to them.” Keep in mind, ryan, context determines how a word is used. A word is not always used the same in every context. That’s the way it is in all languages. Get yourself a Greek lexicon and you’ll see how a word is translated differently based on the context. It’s no different in the English language.

Although I agree true belief is an inward commitment to the One believed on. The believer entrusts himself to Christ both to save and to keep him according to Divine grace, knowing that all requirements for his salvation were met, once for all, by his Substitute.

Does that mean: to willfully believe is a state of obedience?

Yes. It’s called “the obedience of faith.” To turn grace into works is disobedience, and is devoid of faith.

and “A stone that will make people stumble, and a rock that will make them fall.” They stumble by disobeying the word, as is their destiny. (1 Pet 2:8) Does this mean: to obey the word is to not stumble?

It’s right there in the context, ryan. Verse seven:"This precious value, then, is for you who believe (Gr. pisteuo); but for those who disbelieve (Gr. apeitheo),…"pisteuo: to have faith (in, upon, or with respect to, a person or thing), that is, credit; by implication to entrust (especially one’s spiritual well being to Christ): - believe (-r), commit (to trust), put in trust with.

apeitheo: to disbelieve (wilfully and perversely): - not believe, disobedient, obey not, unbelieving.

1 Pet. 2:7 speak of the believer vs. the unbeliever; the believing vs. the unbelieving; the trusting vs. the non-trusting. Jesus was the choice Stone on whom they were to believe.

You’re trying to pervert “faith” into a works, ryan. Try as you will, Scripture won’t allow it.

 

[moondweller]

Odell:

Never said I didn’t Are you implying that believing in the son is all that the fathers will is? No both fath and love

You are saved “through faith” not love.

Catholics teach that the fathers will is faith working threw love if you have that then good but if you just have faith without the other part of the fathers will LOVE then your no different than the demons

Demons have nothing to do with faith in Christ or, salvation faith. It’s stated by James that they believe God is one (monotheists) and shutter. What does this have to do with salvation faith, faith in Christ.

Where these works based on love or are they hey look at what I did God let me into heaven?

Salvation is not based on works, period. Whether done in love or for selfish motives. God saves the sinner who entrusts himself to the finished work of the Redeemer. For this reason Paul said to the Philippian jailer, “Believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved…”

So you are going to go so far as to say that the demons don’t belive Jesus is lord?

Demons don’t “believe in” Jesus. They have no faith unto salvation. However, in the end they, along with all created intelligences, will bow the knee and confess that Jesus is Lord, to the glory of the Father (Phil. 2:10-11). But such confession is not salvation, nor is it “belief in” Christ.

If you don’t know, or are unable to comprehend the difference between demonic belief and salvation faith, then you are in deep doo-doo, my friend.