The Commandments should not be followed ... Part 2

[moondweller]

Pax:

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.”

The English word “apostasy” is a transliteration of the Greek word “apostasia.” Hence, apostasy must be understood by the context in which it is used in Scripture.

Paul, in 2 Thess. 2:3, is not describing an individual believer who has “fallen away” from his faith in Christ. But in the Greek it is “ê apostasia” (he apostasia), with a definite article. IOW, he is saying “the/a departure,” or “the/a falling away” or “defection” comes first.

Paul is not describing in that passage a believer who once believed and fell away, thereby losing his salvation. But a future event just prior to the coming of the “Day of the Lord.”

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.”

The word used is parapipto. But people in that passage were never true believers (cf. 6:9).

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.

Again: parapipto?

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.

Not one of them is addressing true believers, Pax. I’m not the one doing the manipulating.

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

You’ve yet to present, Scripturally, where it is recorded that God justifies Abraham upon belief in Him as He did in Gen. 15:6. As I keep pointing out to you, Pax, it’s the ONLY place recorded in Scripture.

You want from me an exegesis on your eisegesis? Now that’s a novel idea.

 

[Pax]

The English word “apostasy” is a transliteration of the Greek word “apostasia.” Hence, apostasy must be understood by the context in which it is used in Scripture.

Paul, in 2 Thess. 2:3, is not describing an individual believer who has “fallen away” from his faith in Christ. But in the Greek it is “ê apostasia” (he apostasia), with a definite article. IOW, he is saying “the/a departure,” or “the/a falling away” or “defection” comes first.

Paul is not describing in that passage a believer who once believed and fell away, thereby losing his salvation. But a future event just prior to the coming of the "Day of the Lord."The word used is parapipto. But people in that passage were never true believers (cf. 6:9).Again: *parapipto?*Not one of them is addressing true believers, Pax. I’m not the one doing the manipulating.You’ve yet to present, Scripturally, where it is recorded that God justifies Abraham upon belief in Him as He did in Gen. 15:6. As I keep pointing out to you, Pax, it’s the ONLY place recorded in Scripture.

You want from me an exegesis on your eisegesis? Now that’s a novel idea.

You don’t know what you’re talking about when it comes to apostasy. Only a believer can apostatize.

Likewise, I told you earlier in the thread to go back and reference my posts 34,35 and 37 for the full explanation and all of the scriptures concerning Abraham. I then challenged you to logically and exegetically refute the presentation. You have not done this. Instead, you are simply repeating a statement that refutes absolutely nothing. Please do what is needed or concede the point.

 

[moondweller]

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:

“Abide in Me” is NOT positional doctrine. Col. 3:1-3 is positional and is not obtained nor maintained through the efforts of the believer. It is the work of God alone, not man (Eph. 2:10; 2 Cor. 5:17).

**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:

Again, this has nothing to do with the believer’s spiritual position now in the resurrected Christ. Such a spiritual position is derived from dying with Christ, once for all, and being raised to new life in Him. This is ALL of grace and totally the work of God.

John 15 says nothing about damnation. It speaks of the uselessness of the unfruitful branch, but the idea of eternal damnation is all yours. That the the dried up branches are, metaphorically, burned, does not demand this to mean Hell fire.

The gospel of Jesus Christ is not about being saved from Hell through “fruit bearing” (works). Though this fits in perfectly with the Catholic message, it’s not at all Biblical.

 

[Pax]

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.

But people in that passage were never true believers (cf. 6:9).Again: *parapipto?*Not one of them is addressing true believers, Pax.

That is the most illogical response I have ever seen. There is nothing in the passage to suggest that the people in question are not true believers. You are making that up out of whole cloth.

 

[Pax]

“Abide in Me” is NOT positional doctrine. Col. 3:1-3 is positional and is not obtained nor maintained through the efforts of the believer. It is the work of God alone, not man (Eph. 2:10; 2 Cor. 5:17).Again, this has nothing to do with the believer’s spiritual position now in the resurrected Christ. Such a spiritual position is derived from dying with Christ, once for all, and being raised to new life in Him. This is ALL of grace and totally the work of God.

John 15 says nothing about damnation. It speaks of the uselessness of the unfruitful branch, but the idea of eternal damnation is all yours. That the the dried up branches are, metaphorically, burned, does not demand this to mean Hell fire.

The gospel of Jesus Christ is not about being saved from Hell through “fruit bearing” (works). Though this fits in perfectly with the Catholic message, it’s not at all Biblical.

There is nothing in scipture to support your “positional” canard. This is pure sophistry. Your personal view, if it were true, would make huge amounts of scripture absolutely meaningless.

 

[sandusky]

Pax:

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).

I don’t know about Gray, but as Henry doesn’t support Mike, neither does he support you.

Henry Hebrews 6:**These lengths hypocrites may go, and, after all, turn apostates. Now hence observe, [1.] These great things are spoken here of those who may fall away; yet it is not here said of them that they were truly converted, or that they were justified; there is more in true saving grace than in all that is here said of apostates. [2.] This therefore is no proof of the final apostasy of true saints. These indeed may fall frequently and foully, but yet they will not totally nor finally from God; the purpose and the power of God, the purchase and the prayer of Christ, the promise of the gospel, the everlasting covenant that God has made with them, ordered in all things and sure, the indwelling of the Spirit, and the immortal seed of the word, these are their security. But the tree that has not these roots will not stand.**You guys must be getting bad info from some RC apologetics website, ISTM, because Henry doesn’t support either of you.

Pax:

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.

Actually, I think it’s you are dodging, and, IMO, are being dishonest by quoting protestant sources you say support you, when they clearly don’t.

 

[Pax]

Moon,

Let’s look at Hebrews and see if it is talking about “believers.”

We know the author is talking to and teaching Christian believers because of the verses that precede the subject verses. For example:

Heb 2: 1. “ THEREFORE WE must pay the closer attention to what we have heard, lest **we **drift away from it. For if the message declared by angels was valid and every transgression or disobedience received a just retribution, how shall **we **escape if we neglect such a great salvation? It was declared at first by the Lord, and it was attested to us by those who heard him, while God also bore witness by signs and wonders and “

The author over and over uses the word** “we” **and continues to do so in the letter. While there are many things to quote in Hebrews, we can get to the heart of the matter by focusing on some things in Chapter five that clearly establish that the author is addressing believing Christians. Hebrews 5:12-14 says, “For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need some one to teach you again the first principles of God’s word. You need milk, not solid food; for every one who lives on milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a child. But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their faculties trained by practice to distinguish good from evil.”

Now please notice that the author tells those receiving his letter that by now they ought to be teachers, but that they are immature. He does not say that they are non-believers. Instead, the criticism of immaturity is explained by the fact that they are “unskilled in the word of righteousness.” They still need practice to distinguish good from evil, even though they should already be passed that. It is then that chapter six begins and the author warns these same people of apostasy. Right after the warning the author returns to exhorting them saying, “And we desire each one of you to show the same earnestness in realizing the full assurance of hope until the end, so that you may not be sluggish, but imitators of those who through faith and patience inherit the promises.”[Hebrews 6:11-12]

Besides ignoring the clear words of scripture, you ignore the fact that someone cannot commit apostasy unless they are a believer. Apostasy is the public abandoning of your faith for another. The Romans persecuted Christians with torture and death. If you committed apostasy and swore the appropriate oaths against Jesus in favor of the Emperor, the Romans would spare your life. Some chose martyrdom and some chose apostasy. You claim that apostates were not true believers, but that is a myth and is not supported by scripture.

You cannot fall away from something that you did not already believe. Logic, linguistics, hermeneutics, and history deny your thinking.

 

[Pax]

I don’t know about Gray, but as Henry doesn’t support Mike, neither does he support you:These lengths hypocrites may go, and, after all, turn apostates. Now hence observe, [1.] These great things are spoken here of those who may fall away; yet it is not here said of them that they were truly converted, or that they were justified; there is more in true saving grace than in all that is here said of apostates. [2.] This therefore is no proof of the final apostasy of true saints. These indeed may fall frequently and foully, but yet they will not totally nor finally from God; the purpose and the power of God, the purchase and the prayer of Christ, the promise of the gospel, the everlasting covenant that God has made with them, ordered in all things and sure, the indwelling of the Spirit, and the immortal seed of the word, these are their security. But the tree that has not these roots will not stand.You guys must be getting bad info from some RC apologetics website, ISTM, because Henry doesn’t support either of you.
Actually, I think it’s you are dodging, and, IMO, are being dishonest by quoting protestant sources you say support you, when they clearly don’t.

What I quoted is directly from the commentary itself. Now, if the commentary goes on to say what you quoted then it obviously contradicts itself. I can certainly look up what you quoted because I have the commentary. Either way, my case is made. The commentary says what I quoted which is significant. If it contradicts itself by making the claim that these were not truly converted then it is worthless in an argument against me because nowhere in the scriptures does it indicate that they were not believers. My previous post demonstrates that they were.

 

[Pax]

Sandusky,

Here is the complete text from my cd copy of Henry’s Concise Commentary:

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)
The apostle expresses satisfaction, as to the most of them. (9, 10)
And encourages them to persevere in faith and holiness. (11-20)

Text: - Ver. 1-8 Every part of the truth and will of God should be set before all who profess the gospel, and be urged on their hearts and consciences. We should not be always speaking about outward things; these have their places and use, but often take up too much attention and time, which might be better employed. The humbled sinner who pleads guilty, and cries for mercy, can have no ground from this passage to be discouraged, whatever his conscience may accuse him of. Nor does it prove that any one who is made a new creature in Christ, ever becomes a final apostate from him. The apostle is not speaking of the falling away of mere professors, never convinced or influenced by the gospel. Such have nothing to fall away from, but an empty name, or hypocritical profession. Neither is he speaking of partial declinings or backslidings. Nor are such sins meant, as Christians fall into through the strength of temptations, or the power of some worldly or fleshly lust. But the falling away here mentioned, is an open and avowed renouncing of Christ, from enmity of heart against him, his cause, and people, by men approving in their minds the deeds of his murderers, and all this after they have received the knowledge of the truth, and tasted some of its comforts. Of these it is said, that it is impossible to renew them again unto repentance. Not because the blood of Christ is not sufficient to obtain pardon for this sin;but this sin, in its very nature, is opposite to repentance and every thing that leads to it. If those who through mistaken views of this passage, as well as of their own case, fear that there is no mercy for them, would attend to the account given of the nature of this sin, that it is a total and a willingrenouncing of Christ, and his cause, and joining with his enemies, it would relieve them from wrong fears. We should ourselves beware, and caution others, of every approach near to a gulf so awful as apostacy; yet in doing this we should keep close to the word of God, and be careful not to wound and terrify the weak, or discourage the fallen and penitent. Believers not only taste of the word of God, but they drink it in. And this fruitful field or garden receives the blessing. But the merely nominal Christian, continuing unfruitful under the means of grace, or producing nothing but deceit and selfishness, was near the awful state above described; and everlasting misery was the end reserved for him. Let us watch with humble caution and prayer as to ourselves.
9, 10 There are things that are never separated from salvation; things that show the person to be in a state of salvation, and which will end in eternal salvation. And the things that accompany salvation, are better things than ever any dissembler or apostate enjoyed. The works of love, done for the glory of Christ, or done to his saints for Christ’s sake, from time to time,as God gives occasion, are evident marks of a man’s salvation; and more sure tokens of saving grace given, than the enlightenings and tastings spoken of before. No love is to be reckoned as love, but working love; and no works are right works, which flow not from love to Christ.
11-20 The hope here meant, is a sure looking for good things promised, through those promises, with love, desire, and valuing of them. Hope has its degrees, as faith also. The promise of blessedness God has made to believers, is from God’s eternal purpose, settled between the eternal Father, Son, and Spirit. These promises of God may safely be depended upon; for here we have two things which cannot change, the counsel and the oath of God, in which it is not possible for God to lie; it would be contrary to his nature as well as to his will. And as He cannot lie; the destruction of the unbeliever, and the salvation of the believer, are alike certain. Here observe, those to whom God has given full security of happiness, have a title to the promises by inheritance. The consolations of God are strong enough to support his people under their heaviest trials. Here is a refuge for all sinnerswho flee to the mercy of God, through the redemption of Christ, according to the covenant of grace, laying aside all other confidences. We are in this world as a ship at sea, tossed up and down, and in danger of being cast away. We need an anchor to keep us sure and steady. Gospel hope is our anchor in the storms of this world. It is sure and stedfast, or it could not keep us so. The free grace of God, the merits and mediation of Christ, and the powerful influences of his Spirit, are the grounds of this hope, and so it is a stedfast hope. Christ is the object and ground of the believer’s hope. Let us therefore set our affections on things above, and wait patiently for his appearance, when we shall certainly appear with him in glory.

I am not dishonest and I did not get this from a Catholic website or source.

 

[sandusky]

Pax:

What I quoted is directly from the commentary itself. Now, if the commentary goes on to say what you quoted then it obviously contradicts itself.

The point is that the commentary contradicts you, Pax; it doesn’t contradict itself.

Pax:

I can certainly look up what you quoted because I have the commentary.

In the future, you might want to do that to begin with; it saves having to backtrack when it’s shown that your citing of the author doesn’t support you.

Pax:

The commentary says what I quoted which is significant.

Only in that it supports what I’m saying, and what moondweller is saying.

Pax:

If it contradicts itself by making the claim that these were not truly converted then it is worthless in an argument against me because nowhere in the scriptures does it indicate that they were not believers.

Sure it does; Scripture says that those who are Christ’s will never perish; therefore, neither will they apostatize—as Henry says, that’s impossible.

Pax:

My previous post demonstrates that they were.

Then, ISTM, you’re contradicting the Lord Himself.

Pax:

Here is the complete text from my cd copy of Henry’s Concise Commentary:

What I posted is from complete commentary.unabridged,

 

[moondweller]

Hi MD, I hope your weekend was fruitful

Thanks! “Fruitful?” Well, let Mikeledes know that I haven’t yet been thrown into the Lake of Fire.

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

Well, if you’re “being saved,” then you’re not saved, and if you’re hoping “to be saved,” then most certainly you’re not saved.

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.

So this “grace” that’s “alive” in you is some sort of cosmic, foreign object implanted within you by God? A source of divine energy maybe? Yet Scripture doesn’t describe “grace” in such a manner.

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

So, when do you plan on “accepting” it? Now, the difference between you and me is that I HAVE eternal life through faith in Christ (according to Christ Himself and Apostolic teaching), whereas you plan to “accept it” hopefully some time in the future.

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.

This sounds more like it’s taken away based on poor performance on your part, rather than you actually “rejecting” it yourself. In truth, it sounds more like you’re working for it, which then makes it a wage, or a reward, rather than a true gift. Actually, you’re the one being rejected, not you the gift.

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”?

Well, one is not saved by wishing. Nor is one saved by conduct. “Believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved…”

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.You too want from me an exegesis on his eisegesis. I’ll reply the same to you. That’s a novel idea. It is recorded that God justified Abraham, and that through belief in Him, in only one place: Gen. 15:6. Even James cites that one and only passage, as does Paul. There simply is no other. Argue against this simple fact, till you fingers turn to nubs, but this fact you’ll never change. That’s the beauty of written Revelation.

 

[Pax]

The point is that the commentary contradicts you, Pax; it doesn’t contradict itself.

In the future, you might want to do that to begin with; it saves having to backtrack when it’s shown that your citing of the author doesn’t support you.

Only in that it supports what I’m saying, and what moondweller is saying.

Sure it does; Scripture says that those who are Christ’s will never perish; therefore, neither will they apostatize—as Henry says, that’s impossible.

Then, ISTM, you’re contradicting the Lord Himself.

What I posted is from Henry’s unabridged, complete commentary.

The Concise Commentary agrees with me and that is what I quoted from. Now, if Protestant Commentaries don’t coincide with one another that is another issue. That problem is in your camp and is your problem, not mine.

 

[Pax]

Then, ISTM, you’re contradicting the Lord Himself.
]

Baloney!

 

[Pax]

It is recorded that God justified Abraham, and that through belief in Him, in only one place: Gen. 15:6. Even James cites that one and only passage, as does Paul. There simply is no other. Argue against this simple fact, till you fingers turn to nubs, but this fact you’ll never change. That’s the beauty of written Revelation.

You’ve been proven wrong but you’ve said it again without presenting the necessary refutation. I gave you all of the written word of God on Abraham. Go back to the three posts I gave to you and learn the truth.

 

[moondweller]

There is nothing in scipture to support your “positional” canard. This is pure sophistry. Your personal view, if it were true, would make huge amounts of scripture absolutely meaningless.

If the believer’s heavenly position now in the resurrected Christ is fabricated and misleading, then that’s not my doing, but the Holy Spirit’s who revealed it in His inspired Scriptures.

However, it is most certainly true, and contrary to what you say, the truth of this revealed fact causes huge amounts of Scripture to become exceedingly meaningful. What it does is expose the meaninglessness of all works “gospels.”

 

[sandusky]

The Concise Commentary agrees with me and that is what I quoted from.

You would do well to familarize yourself with the unconcise commentary that I’ve linked for you, Pax, and to familarize yourself with the precepts of Calvinism, which doesn’t support you at all.

Pax:

Now, if Protestant Commentaries don’t coincide with one another that is another issue. That problem is in your camp and is your problem, not mine.

Stick with the unabridged, unconcise, complete Henry commentary.

 

[Pax]

The point is that the commentary contradicts you, Pax; it doesn’t contradict itself.

In the future, you might want to do that to begin with; it saves having to backtrack when it’s shown that your citing of the author doesn’t support you.

Only in that it supports what I’m saying, and what moondweller is saying.

Sure it does; Scripture says that those who are Christ’s will never perish; therefore, neither will they apostatize—as Henry says, that’s impossible.

Then, ISTM, you’re contradicting the Lord Himself.

What I posted is from Henry’s unabridged, complete commentary.

Did you read the complete text of what I posted from Henry’s Concise Commentary?

 

[Pax]

If the believer’s heavenly position now in the resurrected Christ is fabricated and misleading, then that’s not my doing, but the Holy Spirit’s who revealed it in His inspired Scriptures.

However, it is most certainly true, and contrary to what you say, the truth of this revealed fact causes huge amounts of Scripture to become exceedingly meaningful. What it does is expose the meaninglessness of all works “gospels.”

It is your doing when you add all kinds of erroneous ideas that do not coincide with scripture.

 

[Pax]

You would do well to familarize yourself with the unconcise commentary that I’ve linked for you, Pax, and to familarize yourself with the precepts of Calvinism, which doesn’t support you at all.
Stick with the unabridged, unconcise, complete Henry commentary.

That is not my problem. I quoted a protestant source in “good faith.” If some of your protestant commentaries cause you heart burn then all the better.

Frankly, I think that your quotes from the unabridged are simply bogus opinions driven by doctrine. I think my presentation in an earlier post on Hebrews proves the point.

I think I’ll skip your recommendations on commentaries. The one’s that I have from Protestant sources were picked at random, and they seemed to take an even handed look at the message in Hebrews without the doctrinal lens driving the view.

You are free to disagree, but you have to admit that I wasn’t being dishonest.

 

[Pax]

You would do well to… familarize yourself with the precepts of Calvinism, which doesn’t support you at all.

I am quite familiar with the precepts of Calvinism, and you are right…it doesn’t support me at all.

I would be greatly disturbed if it did. I am not interested in agreeing with Calvinism. Calvinism is not the apostolic teaching of the Church. That’s why it’s called “Calvinism.”