I've been studying the matter of speaking in tongues. 1 Corinthians 14 really seems to cover the matter in depth. And there is some insight in Romans 8 as well...
Here is what I have concluded: The Holy Spirit will intervene for us when we do not know what to pray. Actually, the way it is written, Paul implies that we don't ever really know exactly what to pray for!
Romans 8:26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.
That seems as though it could be a reference to the "prayer language," or to tongues. Paul does not forbid the speaking in tongues in the church--but he unquestionably discourages it.
18I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:
19Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue.
So if someone is going to insist on speaking in tongues while in the church, there should be someone there to tell the congregation what the prayer was. The problem seems to arise when the interpreter indicates that the tongue spoken was a divine message from the Holy Spirit to the congregation. This does not appear to be what Paul would condone as the proper use of tongues.
Some churches believe that divine revelations come through certain of their members in the form of tongues. This does not seem to be supported anywhere in scripture either. When someone stands up during a chruch service and begins speaking in tongues, and another interprets that language as some prophetic message for the church, that does not appear to be the proper use of tongues, and is much more likely just someone uttering psycho-babble and another "interpreting" because that's what Paul says to do. But the thing is, they do not appear to have read and understood all of what Paul had to say about the matter.
Again, there seems to be no scriptural support for the notion that God speaks to us by the use of tongues. (If I'm wrong about that, please refer me to the proper place in scripture and I'll have a look at it). So, tongues are for the purpose of praying "when we do not know what to pray," and preferably when not attending services.
An aside: I think the reason that Jesus Himself never was reported to have spoken in tongues is that He would certainly not have ever been at a loss for words. But of course as mere humans, we do often have trouble with selecting the right words, or singular thing to pray for. A "prayer language" here might be useful. I have never prayed in tongues. But I'm not totally opposed to the idea...
I believe that the tongues spoken of in Acts at Pentecost were divinely inspired so that foreign peoples could hear the gospel in their own language. So in this case, the tongues were of men, not angels; they were foreign languages. It should be mentioned, however, that Paul does refer to "tongues of angels" in 1 Corinthians 13: 1Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
If it were ever expedient and necessary in this day and time, I'm sure the Spirit would do the same thing again, which is to give a person the ability to speak French (for instance) if a French person had never heard the gospel and was in dire need of hearing it right this instant. I think that speaking in tongues in the days of the apostles was much more useful and necessary then than now, because The Word has been communicated all over the world now, and is printed in every conceivable language. What we see in some charismatic churches is much like what must have been going in in the Corinthian church, and which obviously drew Paul's scorn. I'm speaking of an over-zealous wish for the gifts of the Spirit, at the expense of order, and often, it would seem, truth itself.
I do believe that speaking in tongues is a gift of the Spirit. However, it is unfortunate that it appears to be the most easily faked of the gifts. ;)
Dan
Monday, February 5, 2007
Is the Roman Catholic Church Mystery Babylon?
Are there any who have wisdom who do not believe that the Roman Catholic church is indeed Mystery Babylon, the whore depicted in Revelation 17?
http://www.chick.com/information/religions/catholicism/sevenhills.asp
The link above is quite interesting. I imagine this is another can of worms, but the similarities are obvious, AMAZING, and seemingly irrefutable. I researched both sides of this assertion, and those who would oppose this notion seem to have precious little to base their arguments on. It is almost as though they have a "powerful delusion" of sorts. I am not--I should point out--saying that members of the Catholic Church are apostate believers, to the contrary, Christ calls them out in Revelation 18:4-5
4And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.
5For her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities.
So Christ acknowledges that He has people in the Roman Catholic Church, so all would not be doomed to destruction if they heeded His call. All food for thought, of course. But folks--if you'll read and understand the links posted--I think you may come to the same conclusion that I have. It is quite possible that a severely fallen Roman Catholic Church will unite with the Antichrist during the tribulation period.
Dan
http://www.chick.com/information/religions/catholicism/sevenhills.asp
The link above is quite interesting. I imagine this is another can of worms, but the similarities are obvious, AMAZING, and seemingly irrefutable. I researched both sides of this assertion, and those who would oppose this notion seem to have precious little to base their arguments on. It is almost as though they have a "powerful delusion" of sorts. I am not--I should point out--saying that members of the Catholic Church are apostate believers, to the contrary, Christ calls them out in Revelation 18:4-5
4And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.
5For her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities.
So Christ acknowledges that He has people in the Roman Catholic Church, so all would not be doomed to destruction if they heeded His call. All food for thought, of course. But folks--if you'll read and understand the links posted--I think you may come to the same conclusion that I have. It is quite possible that a severely fallen Roman Catholic Church will unite with the Antichrist during the tribulation period.
Dan
Saturday, February 3, 2007
Can you lose your salvation?
Following is a rather lengthy (but quite interesting if I may say so) email conversation I had with a brother in Christ who believes that one can lose his salvation, once being truly saved. I have put together the emails in the order in which they were sent. Some references made in the emails are to matters which were discussed by phone. I have deleted personal information such as phone numbers, last names, etc. in the interest of privacy. Some links in the emails may no longer be reachable. My friend Joseph's words will be in green, and mine will be in blue. Quotes from other writers will be in gray. Inserted notes (where necessary for clarity) will be in black. Please excuse the typos and misplaced indentions, as these emails are as originally sent. I thought some of you might find this discussion enlightening... :)
***************************************************
Summer, 2006...
Mr. Newberry, Hello! My name is Joseph. I am Todd's brother-in-law. I was talking to my sister and she mentioned you are looking for some Bible answers on "once saved-always saved". I have personally studied this subject extensively and I am emailing you to give you a website and some insight on what conclusion I came to. First of all, there is a book by a prominent Baptist Scholar, Dr. Charles Stanley called Eternal Security—Can You Be Sure?. It is in support
of the doctrine of once saved always saved. A rebuttle to this book is given at this web link; http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/read/can_a_christian_ever_be_lost. Both of these resources are a great place to compare the two doctrines. The christian courier website is a great place to search the Church of Christ point of view, which I am in agreement with (go to the home page and type in "eternal security" or "once-saved always saved" to search). Wayne Jackson, owner of this website, can sometimes be not so gentle in his approach to disproving the doctrine of once-saved always saved, but in my study, I have came to the same conclusion that he has-- the once-saved always saved doctrine is incorrect. Please do not hesitate to call me or email me with your questions (**********) again, the http://www.christiancourier.com/ website is a great place to search for answers. Seek and you will find! Joseph
Joseph, Thanks for contacting me. It was very considerate of Todd to forward my concerns on to you. I had mentioned to Todd that the minister at Crossroads COC had not, to my satisfaction, made the case for conditional salvation. I had also asked one of the deacons for
some literature, but they are all apparently very busy out there... no documentation has been forthcoming. I do think the folks at Crossroads are wonderful people, and have truly not found a congregation or ministerial staff as welcoming and nice as the folks there. Anyway, I checked some of the links you provided, and here is my take on the following matters. Feel free to respond to this email by inserting your own observations. It is true that some Bible verses can be interpreted in various ways. But Wayne Jackson says of 1 Corinthians 5:1 the following:
"A Biblical Case"
...there is unequivocal inspired testimony that a believer can lose his soul on account of personal sin. There was a brother in the Corinthian church who was living in fornication with his father’s wife (1 Corinthians 5:1). Paul, by inspiration, states that he had “judged” this wayward man (v. 3). Further, he admonished the saints at Corinth to “put away the wicked man from among
yourselves” (v. 13), which was a command to exercise church discipline. They were to expel the offender from their fellowship. The design of the discipline was to bring the wayward brother to repentance so that his “spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus” (v. 5; cf. 2 Thessalonians 3:6,14-15). The implication is quite plain—if the fornicator did not abandon his evil, he would not be saved in the day of the Lord. If it was impossible for him to be lost, the function/goal of the discipline was misstated.
By reading the verse as it is written, there is no specific mention that the fornicator must abandon his evil or he would not be saved. Jackson is taking some liberties here which do not appear to be there. I believe if it were Paul's intention that the man be made repentant
by being thrown to Satan, Paul would have said as much. I find it odd that Jackson would choose this verse to support the idea of conditional security, then hypothesize about Paul's unwritten intent. Truthfully, this verse is one I hadn't even considered yet which actually seems to very strongly support the notion of eternal security!
But anyway... we can discuss various interpretations of Bible verses and this is indeed instructive, but I would rather just discuss some practical considerations with regard to conditional security...
Okay... :)
I asked a conditional security advocate what it meant to "fall away," as is mentioned in Hebrews 6:4-6. He said that if one became sinful, that he had "fallen away." I asked how much sin one must commit to actually be considered to have fallen away, and he repled "any amount."
(Perhaps this is not your perspective, so I do not presume to put words in your mouth here). Anyway, I asked what happens to a believer if he "falls away," by committing a sin, then dies before repenting of it. I was told that this person would go to hell, since he died in unrepentant sin. I posed the question: "What if you're having a bad day on the highway, and you think spiteful thoughts about another motorist. Since thinking such thoughts is sinful, you are indeed in sin. But then you're struck by another car and you die on the spot. Are you going to hell? The person I asked replied, after a bit of hesitation, "Let's just say I wouldn't want to be there."
And so it would seem (from what I've been shown so far, but you may yet shed better light on the matter) that a person who has conditional salvation might actually die in sin (having not repented prior to dying) and then go to hell in spite of a lifetime of good works. Yes, it would be good to be in constant prayer and asking forgiveness, but many of our sins are sins which we don't even realize we've committed. What if we die in sin?
To me, it is obvious that none of us can live a sin free life, and none can always be on top of one's own sins well enough to always be "prayed up," so to speak. I mentioned Hebrews 6 earlier (phone conversation)... In the eternal security document from Henry Ironside (I think Todd may have forwarded this link to you, but if he didn't I'll be glad to send it) Ironside points out that if the person who believes his salvation is conditional actually does fall away, the Hebrew writer (some believe it was Paul, some don't) says that it is impossible to be brought back, for such would be like crucifying Christ afresh. So if we have truly "fallen away" when we become sinful, are we then toast? Such would appear to be the case, if we're to understand Hebrews as it is written.
In my own studies and observations of Bible scholars, I have noticed that when a verse says something that disagrees with the preconceptions of the scholar, the scholar will typically set up several hoops which must be jumped through, and successive conclusions which must be agreed upon in order to twist the words into a new meaning. Jackson correctly chastises Stanley for "taking several chapters" as he "struggles" with the idea that if a believer stops believing does he then lose his salvation(?)-- But Jackson himself unleashes an avalanch of verbosity here...
http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/read/does_1_cor_315_support_the_doctrine_of_eternal_security as it is his turn to struggle with 1 Cor 3:15 :) ...
Anyway, I did try to phone you this evening but got no answer, and didn't leave a message. (Don't you just hate folks who do that? :P ) ) ... I've got to go help out at our annual Lion's Club carnival now, but should return home by about 10:30 PM and can talk then if you like, or
you can just email me back. My phone is ***********...
Thanks for your time and consideration,
Dan Newberry
----------------------------------------------------------------
HA Ironside sermon link, sent in a seperate email to Joseph: http://bob.vandyke.net/saved.htm
dan,
just skimming through that website (not the HA Ironside link, but another link we were discussing) , i came across this sentence: HOW DO WE KNOW THESE BLESSINGS CANNOT BE LOST? 1. The blessings of salvation cannot be lost because of the nature of salvation: (1) Salvation is eternal...
I agree that salvation is eternal...but i think they are not looking at it correctly. think of it this way, say you had a set of keys that are going to exist forever. however you lost those keys...the keys are still forever, you just dont possess them anymore. therefore, the keys are the ones that are eternal, not your possession of them. just a thought....let me know what you think!
-------------- Original message -------------- From: "daniel a newberry" <dannewberry@earthlink.net>
I understand what you're saying with the key analogy. But by definition, salvation means "saved," and saved means just that--you're not lost. I believe that a person who does not have his salvation at the end of his life can be said to have never been truly saved in the first
place. Again, simply because of the definition of the word. As I put it in my previous email to you: I am still convinced that a person who "gives up his salvation" was never saved in the first place. God, in His foreknowledge, knew this person would head deliberately back into unrepentant sin, so in God's own opinion, this person was never truly saved---simply by the
definition of the word "saved" which means just that; "not lost." As humans, we can suspect and surmise that this person or that person is "saved," but God knows already whether or not that person will go to Heaven or Hell. If we call that person saved for only a season, and then we call him lost becasue he has an adulterous affair--no true change in this person's eternal status has really occurred just because of what we, as humans, have to say about it. The man is either still
saved, or he is not--and truthfully, it may be impossible for us (as humans) to really tell which. This adulterer whom we had always believed was saved may have been (in God's everlasting opinion) never saved. On the other hand, if his heart is truly still with God and he
has simply had a weak moment of humanity (as David did when he took Bathsheba and then subsequently worked to kill her husband) then he, like David, is still saved. In this latter case, God knows that the sinner will be repentant, and not let go of his salvation. I believe it is very possible for folks to walk for a season deep in sin, as David did--and still be saved all the while--and even bare a small amount of fruit. :) This because God knew David's heart. I have a brother-in-law who only recently got out of prison for breaking and entering, and burglary. He is a drug addict, and we pray he will recover. But even during his time in prison, he ministered to other prisoners about God's word--and he'll be the first to tell you that he is a weak sinner, and constantly repenting. I believe someone like him can make it to Heaven, whereas a cold, judging minister who only professes Christ--but does not truly have Him--will end up in Hell. The very second God looks at me or you, and says "This one will be with me in Heaven," then we are from that very second eternally SAVED. :) And If God says otherwise of us, we are not saved and never were. Think of the absurdity of it: God says this week "This man will be with me in
Heaven." And next week he says, "Well scratch that, he's back on the Hell side of the board." (Not trying to sound facetious, but it really is that simple, I believe). So our salvation cannot be lost after it is once proclaimed by God. I will grant you that someone can miss out
on salvation by never picking it up to begin with, but once salvation is actually gained, it cannot be lost. If you have time to mull the above paragraph over, and respond to it that would be great, as it will help me understand your own perspective better. Not to mention the fact that if you find a way to effectively dispute it, you'll get my vote for wordsmith of the century. :D Please be well, and please write back. I do enjoy, very much, this correspondence with you. Yours in Christ, Dan
-------------------------------------------------------------
dan, hope you are well! i have been busy, but i am doing well. i am looking for a nice lazy, relaxing weekend. In your writing below, I agree with the fact someone is not truly saved until he or she enters heaven. For instance, I believe that I am in a saved state, meaning if I die, I will go to heaven, but on the other hand, I am not truly saved yet, because I have not died and gone to heaven. So when the Bible says someone has been saved and they are referring to the someone who is still alive, I believe they are referring to someone being in a current saved state or condition. one cannot be truly saved from Hell fire until he or she comes to the crossroads of
death. another way to look at it, an atheist is lost, i.e. in a lost state. he is not truly lost until he dies. he has time, while he is alive, to repent. so while being lost state, he is not truly lost yet. once he dies, he will truly be lost because he has no opportunity to repent. You stated below that once God decided "this one will be with me in Heaven" that very second we are truly saved. But that suggests that God judges us while we are alive. the Bible says "it is appointed man once to die, then after this the judgement". Therefore, God judges us after we die, not while we are still alive. I dont think God is moving us back and forth from lost to saved during our life journey.
instead, may i suggest that he waits until the end of our lives to make a judgement on whether he says "this man will be with me in heaven" or "this man is on the Hell side of the board". The notion that God moves us back and forth from heaven to hell suggests that God is constantly judging us, but i dont think that is happening. I really appreciate the thought provoking emails you send me. you have been a true blessing for me. i hope to give you a call this weekend
to chat.-------------- Original message -------------- From: "daniel a newberry" <dannewberry@earthlink.net>
-------------- Original message -------------- From: "daniel a newberry" <dannewberry@earthlink.net>
I think I've made myself a bit unclear, and I accept responsibility for that. I have not said that God judges us when He, in His foreknowledge sees where we will be. I'm simply saying that He already knows where we will end up. And if He knows this very second that you and I will be with Him in Heaven, then we are as good as there. And believe me, He knows. :) On the matter of the "saved state..." It is my opinion that God would never, since He has foreknowledge, consider any of us to be in a "saved state." Again, He knows right now whether we are truly saved or truly lost. He also knows the very second that we will die. I'm sure you will agree with that. I know that you are one who loves God and would not deliberately depart from His permissive will, so I don't fear for you at all. But by the "saved state" logic--and I hope you'll forgive me--a prostitute could be said to be in a "celibate state" on her day off. Again, I say we are either saved, truly, or we are truly not saved. Being truly saved only happens once. If a man claims to have been saved, and lost, and then saved again, the only time he was truly saved was the last time; the final time before death. We have been having a discussion on this matter on an internet forum I belong to (it's a hunting and shooting forum, with a Christian category). What has become evident to me is that the folks who believe you can lose your salvation view their relationship with God as a "partnership," where each partner has individual responsibilities in order for the partnership to flourish. This way of believing holds that either partner--either God or you yourself--can dissolve the partnership at any time based on some specific action, or series of actions. Coming from the eternal security perspective, I view it this way: Becoming truly saved puts you into God's hand. It is a lot more than some mutual partnership. It is a "new birth," and you can no more revoke your second birth than you can the first one. You see, when you accept the invitation, you have become a living, breathing, part of the body of Christ. You sense this--you feel it--in the depths of your soul. When you commit yourself to Him, you have become His. You don't even have the freewill to leave any longer. If you feel like you can
still leave His body, I pray that you will have revelation of the Holy Spirit, and so understand that as a saved Christian you have given yourself to Christ when you first trusted in Him and asked to be in Him, and that He be in you. You are no longer your own, though you once
were, now you are not. On the issue of lacking the freewill to leave Christ, while I'm convinced that this is the case (once truly saved) I do not believe that anyone who has a tender heart toward God would ever--even if he did have the freewill after entering the body of Christ--turn around and ask to be excused. It simply would not happen, so the matter is not really worth expounding on further. But we can certainly "fall away" from our fellowship, and lose (in this life) what God wants for us and expects of us. Hebrews is very stern about the matter. But such scripture is where much of the confusion comes from with regard to the permanence of our salvation. (And confusion also comes from a misunderstanding of what the kingdom of Heaven actually is)... But back on point. Aside from losing our own benefits in the abundant life, we also set a bad example to the yet unsaved when we act in sinful ways. But again, the phrase "fall away" cannot refer to losing one's very salvation because if it did, it would make mockery of much of what Christ said in the gospels. Christ even prays for each of us in John chapter 17. In verse 24, his prayer to the Father is that we be with Him. John chapter 17 really speaks
volumes to me. That is the key chapter in all of the gospels, in my opinion, which shows us who Christ really is, and what He really wants. On another matter, I have been considering the message of the parable of the workers in the vineyard, in Matthew chapter 20. The workers who had worked all day long were upset because they were paid the same wages as the ones who only came and worked a little, in the eleventh hour. Even though the early workers agreed to work all day for a denarius, they did not like the fact that those who worked much less than they did were given the same pay. My understanding of this parable is that many will be saved in the last hour, and will gain the same inheritance as those who have worked all along. But many of those who have worked all along will feel as though they deserve more, and perhaps will even feel that their gift has been cheapened by the fact that God gives the same to the eleventh hour workers. It is my belief that God views those who think that their reward should be increased in accordance with the amount of work done as prideful; even self-righteous. Then He says "So the last will be first, and the first will be last." Take care, and be well... and enjoy your weekend. :) Dan
(I sent Joseph another email before his response to the one above, it follows)...
-------------- Original message -------------- From: "daniel a newberry" <dannewberry@earthlink.net>
Joseph, I reviewed my last email response to you and I think it sounded a bit less than cordial. I want to apologize for that. Sometimes emails don't really carry the true emotion of the message, and it can be easy to mistake the writer's disposition. I hope I did not come off as rude, and if I did I apologize for that. I have been sharing our conversations with Todd as well--which I mentioned earlier--and I hope that is okay with you. I hope your weekend is going well, and yes, maybe we can speak by phone sometime this weekend. As mentioned, I have been discussing this matter of eternal versus conditional salvation with some folks at an internet forum, and it has been a spirited debate, to say the least. :) It remains my opinion that the verses which on the surface appear to support conditional salvation are outnumbered 20 to 1 by verses which
indicate we are secure. Perhaps you see it the other way, 20 to 1 in favor of conditional salvation... I don't know. But most of the conditional security believers will readily admit that the preponderance of verses do tilt in favor of eternal security. In my opinion, the verses which indicate something contrary to the majority are those which should be interpreted in the light of the majority. Another thought is that God doesn't really mind either point of view, so long as His people love Him and do not pervert His Word. We might discuss that perspective sometime. I think that both philosophies have a perverted extreme, but meet fairly closely in the middle when you really set down and compare notes. What do you think? Anyway, I did feel inspired of the Holy Spirit to write a response to a conditional salvation believer at the forum I mention. Here is part of that response: I know these things:
I was given to Christ by His Father. Christ prayed (John 17) for me, that I be with Him in Heaven. He has said that no man will snatch me out of His hand, and I believe Him.
I am a man. And once I am committed to Christ's hand, He Himself will not allow me to be wrested from it. Paul put it like: Romans 8:38-39 For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons,[a] neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, 39neither
height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
I ask you, what then can take me from God's hand?
"I myself," the conditional salvation believers will say.
But I am a man too. That logic defies Christ's own words, that no man can snatch me from His hand. And even if I could snatch myself from His hand, who would really be getting the credit or blame for that? Would I do it, totally untempted by Satan? No. So even if I could snatch myself away from God of my own freewill, Satan would be the true snatcher.
And so it should be totally clear that we are entirely safe in Christ--yes, even from ourselves. Like a foolish little child that ran into the woods and became lost, and in danger of death, I'm found by my Father. He has me now. And even if I say:
"Daddy, I want you to let go of me so I can run out and play in the deep woods once again!" My loving Father will say, "No, my child, you are safe here with me."
"But I like playing in the woods Daddy, and I think you're being mean not to let me go. You're a mean daddy and I don't love you anymore and I want you to let me go right this instant!"
Would you let your own child back into the woods? No, you would not, because you are charged with protecting your child. Do you love your child more than God loves you? Are you God's child?
He will never let you go. :)
Be well, you and yours, and go in Christ...
Dan
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
hey dan! no need for apologies! it was just fine. i am not very sensitive when it comes to that stuff. we are both seeking, and i understand the need for frankness, as i have been frank also. i know that sometimes both of us may come across a lil abrasive, but to me, that is just fine. i know where you heart is. i am going to try to think on it some more and reply later today. hope you have a great Lord's day!
(Joseph writes back later)...
...below you say "And so, if the conditional salvationist must poke and prod a person to obey God, what good is that? Obeyance comes from love. Christ says "if you love me you will keep my commands." So the person who truly loves Him will, of that love, keep His commands. It doesn't have to be inspired by fear of Hell. In fact, genuine love cannot be inspired by fear of Hell." i think love can be inspired by fear of Hell. God did say "if you love me, keep my commandments." I believe this is true also, "if you keep my commandments, this means you love me." God loves obedience (1 Samuel 15;22). obedience is how we show God our love, even if inspired by fear of Hell. Why does the Bible even talk about Hell fire if it is not to inspire one to obedience? Look at Simon the Sorcerer in Acts 8. In Verse 13, the Bible says Simon became a Christian "Simon himself believed, and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip." but as we keep reading, Simon took his eyes of God and got a sharp rebuke from Peter, "your money perish with you because you thought that the gift of God could be purchased with oney....repent from your wickedness and pray God the thought of your heart may be forgiven you." (bold my
emphasis) Peter threatens hell fire...why? in order to inspire obedience and repentence. also, notice Simon, a baptized believer was in danger of perishing....conditional salvation, he must repent! i bet simon was scared to death.
i use the example of my parents on Sunday morning. i loved my mom, but she would come in my room on Sunday morning and tell me to get ready for church, but even though i loved my mom, i would just lay there sleeping. but when dad said only once "boy get up" i knew i had to get up right then and there or face punishment. Even today, when i read passages about hell fire, i get scared and it makes me watch my step to make sure i follow God. I believe that this God's intent finally, for tonight, i will talk about one other point.... you said below that the Book of Life is a finished book....i believe it is not!!!!! i am unaware of any verse that alludes to it being finished. on the contrary, if you look in the first 3 chapters of revelation, God is addressing different churches on their status. remember, churches are made up of Christians. in chapter 3 verse 1, he says the church at Sardis is dead. in verse 3, he commands them to remember, hold fast (not an option), and repent. in verse 5 he says "he who overcomes shall be clothed in white garments, and I will not blot out his name from the Book of Life" (bold my emphasis) 2 things to
consider....1)since a name can be blotted out, it shows that the book of life is open for changes and not a finished work and 2) only saved people are written in the Book of Life. therefore, you can easily concl ude that a saved person can become unsaved. that is all i have for tonight...wow, its almost 12! i hope my stuff above helps. take it easy and keep studying. thanks again dan. i
hope all is well with you -------------- Original message -------------- From: "daniel a newberry" <dannewberry@earthlink.net>
------------- Original message -------------- From: "daniel a newberry" <dannewberry@earthlink.net>
Joseph, thank you for the response. Before I continue I want to be sure to emphasize that this discussion is not an attempt to change your perspective, but simply to better reveal to you mine. 1 John 4:18 says... 18There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love.However, I do like your analogy about the difference between how you respond to your mom, and then your dad when you were told to get out of bed. :) Of course your dad would have simply given you punishment commensurate with disobeying him, but your dad would not have disowned you--and certainly would not have taken your life from you--for such an offense. And God will certainly admonish and punish us in this earthly realm. We cannot even be a part to the kingdom of God (kingdom of Heaven) if we are living in sin. But I don't believe He will forsake one of His own, who has already become a part of the body of Christ. In 1 John 5:13 it is written: 13 I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal
life. :) So this verse doesn't support the idea that we do not receive true eternal life until we die. There are other such verses throughout the Bible which speak in the present tense of our salvation. Ones which do not have easily been understood to be addressing congregations or groups wherein there would certainly have been those who fit the description Christ gives us in Luke 8:13; the owners of the stony hearts, where the seed did not take firm root. Simon, in the Acts scripture you mention, was obviously one of these guys.
Compare Luke 8:13 to Acts 8:13. :) Same chapter and verse, same author. And I believe, speaking of the same kind of character. God revealed this curiosity to me the other day. God would never consider such a person truly saved. If we view "fear" as "respect" for God, then I agree there. But I don't agree that once we are saved that we still need to fear Hell. I
believe you told me once in a phone conversation that you wondered if you had died in your college years whether you would have gone to Heaven or not. And you said that later as you prayed and understood, you came to the conclusion that you would have gone to Heaven, even
though you were not living as God would have willed. I think that is exactly right. He never left you, because you are one of His sheep, and were only wayward for a short while. He knew that you would respond to His Spirit and come gladly back into the fold, which is fellowship with Him.
On the matter of Bible verses that are hard to explain, I think in many cases they simply mean what they mean. I believe God's foreknowledge is the reason that He knows who will be with Him and who will not. But He says: "My sheep hear my voice." So if we are indeed one of His
sheep (as I believe you and I both are) then we hear His voice. If we disobey His word after we have become truly born again, there are consequences, but never death. In Christ, we have escaped death. I believe we are blotted out of the "book of the living" as the actual interpretation goes, by dying without Christ. He gives us all an
equal chance, and if we die without Him our names are blotted from that book. The Lamb's Book is a different book (in my view and understanding), or it could simply be viewed as the names of those who were given to Christ by the Father. Christ prays for us in John 17,
so He knew then who we all were. :) If we can fall away from Christ after the Father gave us to Him, and after Christ has then prayed that we not be lost (John 17:24), then Christ's own prayer has been in vain. So in the Revelation verse (3:5) "he who overcomes" is in my view a
metaphor for those of us who accept Christ. That is how we overcome. And what does it say? It says that we will not be blotted out. I believe all of our names have been written in the book of the living, both saved and unsaved, and are only blotted out when we fail to accept Christ before death. He knows right now who we all are, but like in the dog analogy I gave you, that doesn't mean that He is controlling our choices.
This is my perspective, of course, and again, not intended to cause you to change yours. I am coming more and more of the opinion that God does not mind that we view salvation in different ways. And Paul says in Romans 14 that we should accept those whose "faith is weak." There
are folks of weak and strong faith on both sides of this eternal security issue. I know your faith is strong. But Romans 14 tells me that we should essentially not divide the church over matters that are disputable. And if ever there was a disputable matter, this one qualifies! :D
So again, it is with Romans 14 firmly in mind that I continue our discussion.
I hope all is well with you and yours,
Dan
daniel a newberrydannewberry@earthlink.netEarthLink Revolves Around You.
hey dan, just read your email and you make some great points, and i thank you. just a quick reply: you write: This is my perspective, of course, and again, not intended to cause you to change yours. I am coming more and more of the opinion that God does not mind that we view salvation in different ways. And Paul says in Romans 14 that we should accept those whose "faith is weak." There are folks of weak and strong faith on both sides of this eternal security issue. I know your faith is strong. But Romans 14 tells me that we should essentially not divide the church over matters that are disputable. And if ever there was a disputable matter, this one qualifies!
:D So again, it is with Romans 14 firmly in mind that I continue our discussion.
this is how i also view our discussion also. thanks for pointing this out. i have learned a lot from our discussions....how could God not be glorified?!!! i am so thankful that you are studying with me and vice versa. have a great day and i will try to email in length again soon. -
(from Joseph, next email)...
...you say being truly saved happens only once, but at what point does God say we are truly saved? God knows whether we are going to be with him in heaven or not before we are even born, therefore, would it not be safe to say all Christians were never lost? God could say "i
know joseph and dan are going to be in heaven with me before they are even born, therefore, they are at this point truly saved." We could be truly saved before we were ever lost. This is a predestination point of view. if you ever get a chance to read John Calvin's stuff, this a theory he came up with. The way I read it, our relationship with Christ is a mutual relationship. God has always had this characteristic. If you look back at the covenants God made with Israel, its always "i will bless you if you continue to obey me" kind of deal. this same Godly requirement/characteristic is revealed in Col. 1:21-23.... "...yet now hath he (God) reconciled in the body of his (Christ's) flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unproveable
in his (God's) sight: If you continue in the faith grounded and settled, and not be moved away from the hope of the gospel" (Bold is my emphasis.) to enjoy God's reconcilement, we have to "continue in the faith". i think this is very clear. there is no solid Biblical passages that i know of to support that God utilizes his foreknowledge to give us eternal sercurity. Certainly God has the capability to do this, but I dont think he does it. Thanks again for your time in emailing me and your study. get back to me when you get a chance. hope it is cooler weather there than here.
do you golf?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph, hope you're doing well...
I have never taken up golfing, but would probably enjoy it. I do like long range rifle shooting (which is a lot like golf when you think about it, and at least as frustrating I'm sure... :) And my other earthly love is motorcycle riding, which I like to do when the weather is good. It was really hot here today as well. That time of year I guess. :) It is true that God asked the Old Testament subjects to obey him. This was the dispensation of law. I believe that God did this to prove to
mankind that we simply cannot obey. If we could, Christ would never have had to die for our sins, as we would not have ever committed any.
Under the dispensation of Grace, we have Christ as our advocate, and He came for us just like we are--and only asked that we believe. And think about Israel. Even though Israel is in disgusting disobedience to God, is He still blessing them is not not? I say that He is,
even though they disobey. On the matter of predestination (Calvinism)... Remember the analogy of the dogs I talked about. If you were able to have all of the dogs you ever had in your whole life, alive at the same time and in the field... and you would go to the fence and call each dog... you would know which dogs will come right away, and which ones will not come. You would also know that the rabbit beagle would come running to you when he heard your voice, but when a rabbit crosses its path, you know that beagle will be off after that rabbit. But you also know that after he loses the rabbit, he'll be back. Later than the other dogs, and with briars in his nose... but he's back. :) God knows us this way too. He isn't robbing us of our freewill, anymore than the dog owner is robbing those dogs of their freewill--God (like the dog owner) just knows his subjects, and He knows what they'll do. Failing to understand this is where the Calvinists go out in left field and misconstrue predestination to mean that we have no choice in the matter of our salvation. Paul actually says in Romans 8:29 that God did predestinate us: 29For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. So, simply and soley by God's foreknowledge, He is in effect predestinating us, which is what Paul is saying here. But God isn't choosing for us. Mega-huge difference there that Calvinists need to get their minds
around... God gave us to Christ, and in John 17:24 we see Christ praying that we will be with Him. I think that God will grant that prayer. :) By "us" I mean those of us who become born again, as Christ says we must do. So I do think that God knows from our very birth whether we'll ultimately be His or not. The Lamb's Book of Life is written, it is a
finished work. Of course, we have to come to Him, but He knows that we'll do that of our own freewill. I don't believe that God would call us truly saved until we--as He knows we will do--accept His Son. It is something we must do, but until we do it we haven't become born
again. Christ did not call his work finished until it was done, though he of course knew that it would be done. Once we are born again, we are truly His and He will not put us down. Not only that, but He is able to "keep us from falling" after the point when we become saved.
Jude 1:24-25 says 4To him who is able to keep you from falling and to present you before his glorious presence without fault and with great joy— 25 to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and
forevermore! Amen. So, God Himself, through the Holy Spirit, will minister to us and keep born again Christians from falling. The rub comes when someone who is not a true Christian goes off into left field and never comes back. That person may have professed faith, but never truly had it--and never truly loved Christ. You and I would agree that such a person will not be with us in Heaven. The only difference between me and you here is that I would say this person was never saved, and you would say (if I may speak for you) that his person might have been saved at one time. Reading 1 John 2:19 it says: 19They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us. So the person who turned away and never came back--according to John--"did not really belong to us." I agree that we must continue in the faith if we are to share eternity with our Lord. No argument there. But I would simply say that
someone who demonstrates that he isn't continuing in the faith falls into the category described in 1 John 2:19. "...their going showed that none of them belonged to us." I think the real issue with conditional salvation believers (if I may respectfully say this) is that they would warn someone who is falling away from true belief that he or she is in danger of Hell. That part is true enough. But the conditional salvation believer would then go on to persuade that person to do what "has to be done" so that he or she can once again head back toward Heaven. In other words, if you simply obey God, you will be back on the path to Heaven. But you can't force love, and love for God is the root of true salvation, and cheerful obeyance. If your wife truly did not love you--but she merely did all of the things that a good wife ought to do, and went through the physical motions of things designed to make it look as if she loves you. would you be happy? No, I don't think you would. You would know something wasn't right. There would be something missing. It wouldn't be the same. And so, if the conditional salvationist must poke and prod a person to obey God, what good is that? Obeyance comes from love. Christ says
"if you love me you will keep my commands." So the person who truly loves Him will, of that love, keep His commands. It doesn't have to be inspired by fear of Hell. In fact, genuine love cannot be inspired by fear of Hell. Christ did not say "If you keep my commands you will love me." ;) If we are motivated to serve God through fear instead of love, our fear is well founded. If we love Him, we'll keep His commands. He tells us that. Loving Him causes us to keep His commands, to the best of our ability. But keeping all of His commands perfectly (even if we could) would never cause us to love Him. We can't keep all of those commands all of the time, and He knows that. But He is able to keep us from falling from His hand. He has saved us, even from ourselves. And all we must do is truly love Him. The "obey" part comes from the love, and cannot be forced, or else it is worthless. So I say, when the suspected tare is busy showing us that it is probably a tare, we should not try talking it into being a stalk of wheat. Truly, it can't. A tare will never truly obey, because it will never truly love. But a stalk of wheat will love, and then, out from that love, to the best of its ability, obey.
:) Dan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next email from me (Dan) to Joseph...
-------------- Original message -------------- From: "daniel a newberry" <dannewberry@earthlink.net>
Joseph, Hope you and yours are doing well. We went to the lake down at Lake Norman, NC over the weekend. I just got back. Had a fun time. :) I found an interesting verse in 1 Corinthians the other day. It's chapter 11, verse 32: 32When we are judged by the Lord, we are being disciplined so that we will not be condemned with the world. I know that Bob has indicated to me that when Paul talks about us being judged by the Lord, that we are being essentially condemned, and he (Bob) interprets this to mean that we are losing salvation. I don't think this take squares with 1 Corinthians 11:32, however. To me, the verse indicates that Christians are indeed judged by the Lord, but this judging is not to condemn us with the world but simply to correct our bad behavior. In your opinion, at what point does the Lord stop judging us in a chastening, constructive way (?)... and at what point does He consider a previously saved person to be condemned again, and no longer worthy of the chastening described in 1 Corinthians 11:32? Do you think He would give a Christian a few days, a few weeks, or even a few years? God sent Nathan to David to give David inspiration to repent. David did repent, which put him back in good standing with God. Do you think that God would do the same for you or me--at some point before our appointed time to die--if He knew that we would repent? Of course David
was chastened very sternly, as God took his son whom he had conceived with Uriah's wife. (2 Samuel 12). For my part, I don't think God would allow us to die without making a way for us to repent, if indeed He knew that we would repent. On another matter... Moving to the book of Hebrews... : ) The strong verses in Hebrews (especially chapter 6:4-6) indicate to me someone who has blasphemed the Holy Spirit (which I believe means literally insulting the Holy Spirit when He decides that the time has come to extend to a person The Invitation to come to Christ). This is a man who has really never accepted Christ, even though the Holy Spirit has provided all means for him to do so. This man has tasted the Word, but not eaten it. He has been enlightened, but does not himself shine. He has shared in the Holy Spirit (which I believe means he has witnessed the power of the Holy Spirit), but is not indwelled by it... I think that such language in Hebrews was considered necessary, since many of these Jewish folks to whom the letter was written were almost certainly not yet fully committed to Christ. This is my take on
it anyway. What are your thoughts on these matters? Dan daniel a newberrydannewberry@earthlink.netEarthLink Revolves Around You. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mannnn, must be nice to be at lake norman! i am jealous!!! hey, if you ever want to come to ********* to hang out, you are welcome to stay at me casa! i dont know if you are ever up this way, but just wanted to extend the invitation. ********* is a cool place. Me and the lil lady can show you around town if you never have been. I agree with you on I Corinthians 11:32. i am also in disagreement with bob. The way it reads to me is that God is simply, as you put it,
correcting our bad behavior. you wrote: God sent Nathan to David to give David inspiration to repent. David did repent, which put him back in good standing with God. Do you think that God would do the same for you or me--at some point before our appointed time to die--if
He knew that we would repent? Of course David was chastened very sternly, as God took his son whom he had conceived with Uriah's wife. (2 Samuel 12). I do believe God would do the same for you or I. Hopefully you or I wouldn't be hard headed and listen and the Good Lord wouldn't have to spank us too bad! you wrote: In your opinion, at what point does the Lord stop judging us in a chastening, constructive way (?)... and at what point does He consider a
previously saved person to be condemned again, and no longer worthy of the chastening described in 1 Corinthians 11:32? Do you think He would give a Christian a few days, a few weeks, or even a few years? my answer to this is that i dont know when God considers a condemned person saved. i dont think the Bible defines a line for us to cross.
It could be different for each individual. Again i refer to Sampson..the verse reads, am i am paraphrasing "Sampson did not know the Lord had left him." Therefore, i believe that we will not know when we have crossed over the line. I could very well be way off on this, but
this is my current understanding. Hope all is well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
**************************************************************************************************************************
...and that is the end of my and Joseph's email conversation, though we did talk again on the phone. I told him that I don't believe that God leaving Samson in that particular case meant that God had condemned Samson to Hell--only that Samson was no longer being helped by God--a situation we see time and time again with the stubborn Israelites. And born again Christians today can find ourselves out of the company and favor of God, and we will fail (as did Samson) when this happens. Fail, yes. Fall into Hell? I really think not. God loves us much, much more than that. :)
Dan Newberry
***************************************************
Summer, 2006...
Mr. Newberry, Hello! My name is Joseph. I am Todd's brother-in-law. I was talking to my sister and she mentioned you are looking for some Bible answers on "once saved-always saved". I have personally studied this subject extensively and I am emailing you to give you a website and some insight on what conclusion I came to. First of all, there is a book by a prominent Baptist Scholar, Dr. Charles Stanley called Eternal Security—Can You Be Sure?. It is in support
of the doctrine of once saved always saved. A rebuttle to this book is given at this web link; http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/read/can_a_christian_ever_be_lost. Both of these resources are a great place to compare the two doctrines. The christian courier website is a great place to search the Church of Christ point of view, which I am in agreement with (go to the home page and type in "eternal security" or "once-saved always saved" to search). Wayne Jackson, owner of this website, can sometimes be not so gentle in his approach to disproving the doctrine of once-saved always saved, but in my study, I have came to the same conclusion that he has-- the once-saved always saved doctrine is incorrect. Please do not hesitate to call me or email me with your questions (**********) again, the http://www.christiancourier.com/ website is a great place to search for answers. Seek and you will find! Joseph
Joseph, Thanks for contacting me. It was very considerate of Todd to forward my concerns on to you. I had mentioned to Todd that the minister at Crossroads COC had not, to my satisfaction, made the case for conditional salvation. I had also asked one of the deacons for
some literature, but they are all apparently very busy out there... no documentation has been forthcoming. I do think the folks at Crossroads are wonderful people, and have truly not found a congregation or ministerial staff as welcoming and nice as the folks there. Anyway, I checked some of the links you provided, and here is my take on the following matters. Feel free to respond to this email by inserting your own observations. It is true that some Bible verses can be interpreted in various ways. But Wayne Jackson says of 1 Corinthians 5:1 the following:
"A Biblical Case"
...there is unequivocal inspired testimony that a believer can lose his soul on account of personal sin. There was a brother in the Corinthian church who was living in fornication with his father’s wife (1 Corinthians 5:1). Paul, by inspiration, states that he had “judged” this wayward man (v. 3). Further, he admonished the saints at Corinth to “put away the wicked man from among
yourselves” (v. 13), which was a command to exercise church discipline. They were to expel the offender from their fellowship. The design of the discipline was to bring the wayward brother to repentance so that his “spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus” (v. 5; cf. 2 Thessalonians 3:6,14-15). The implication is quite plain—if the fornicator did not abandon his evil, he would not be saved in the day of the Lord. If it was impossible for him to be lost, the function/goal of the discipline was misstated.
By reading the verse as it is written, there is no specific mention that the fornicator must abandon his evil or he would not be saved. Jackson is taking some liberties here which do not appear to be there. I believe if it were Paul's intention that the man be made repentant
by being thrown to Satan, Paul would have said as much. I find it odd that Jackson would choose this verse to support the idea of conditional security, then hypothesize about Paul's unwritten intent. Truthfully, this verse is one I hadn't even considered yet which actually seems to very strongly support the notion of eternal security!
But anyway... we can discuss various interpretations of Bible verses and this is indeed instructive, but I would rather just discuss some practical considerations with regard to conditional security...
Okay... :)
I asked a conditional security advocate what it meant to "fall away," as is mentioned in Hebrews 6:4-6. He said that if one became sinful, that he had "fallen away." I asked how much sin one must commit to actually be considered to have fallen away, and he repled "any amount."
(Perhaps this is not your perspective, so I do not presume to put words in your mouth here). Anyway, I asked what happens to a believer if he "falls away," by committing a sin, then dies before repenting of it. I was told that this person would go to hell, since he died in unrepentant sin. I posed the question: "What if you're having a bad day on the highway, and you think spiteful thoughts about another motorist. Since thinking such thoughts is sinful, you are indeed in sin. But then you're struck by another car and you die on the spot. Are you going to hell? The person I asked replied, after a bit of hesitation, "Let's just say I wouldn't want to be there."
And so it would seem (from what I've been shown so far, but you may yet shed better light on the matter) that a person who has conditional salvation might actually die in sin (having not repented prior to dying) and then go to hell in spite of a lifetime of good works. Yes, it would be good to be in constant prayer and asking forgiveness, but many of our sins are sins which we don't even realize we've committed. What if we die in sin?
To me, it is obvious that none of us can live a sin free life, and none can always be on top of one's own sins well enough to always be "prayed up," so to speak. I mentioned Hebrews 6 earlier (phone conversation)... In the eternal security document from Henry Ironside (I think Todd may have forwarded this link to you, but if he didn't I'll be glad to send it) Ironside points out that if the person who believes his salvation is conditional actually does fall away, the Hebrew writer (some believe it was Paul, some don't) says that it is impossible to be brought back, for such would be like crucifying Christ afresh. So if we have truly "fallen away" when we become sinful, are we then toast? Such would appear to be the case, if we're to understand Hebrews as it is written.
In my own studies and observations of Bible scholars, I have noticed that when a verse says something that disagrees with the preconceptions of the scholar, the scholar will typically set up several hoops which must be jumped through, and successive conclusions which must be agreed upon in order to twist the words into a new meaning. Jackson correctly chastises Stanley for "taking several chapters" as he "struggles" with the idea that if a believer stops believing does he then lose his salvation(?)-- But Jackson himself unleashes an avalanch of verbosity here...
http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/read/does_1_cor_315_support_the_doctrine_of_eternal_security as it is his turn to struggle with 1 Cor 3:15 :) ...
Anyway, I did try to phone you this evening but got no answer, and didn't leave a message. (Don't you just hate folks who do that? :P ) ) ... I've got to go help out at our annual Lion's Club carnival now, but should return home by about 10:30 PM and can talk then if you like, or
you can just email me back. My phone is ***********...
Thanks for your time and consideration,
Dan Newberry
----------------------------------------------------------------
HA Ironside sermon link, sent in a seperate email to Joseph: http://bob.vandyke.net/saved.htm
dan,
just skimming through that website (not the HA Ironside link, but another link we were discussing) , i came across this sentence: HOW DO WE KNOW THESE BLESSINGS CANNOT BE LOST? 1. The blessings of salvation cannot be lost because of the nature of salvation: (1) Salvation is eternal...
I agree that salvation is eternal...but i think they are not looking at it correctly. think of it this way, say you had a set of keys that are going to exist forever. however you lost those keys...the keys are still forever, you just dont possess them anymore. therefore, the keys are the ones that are eternal, not your possession of them. just a thought....let me know what you think!
-------------- Original message -------------- From: "daniel a newberry" <dannewberry@earthlink.net>
I understand what you're saying with the key analogy. But by definition, salvation means "saved," and saved means just that--you're not lost. I believe that a person who does not have his salvation at the end of his life can be said to have never been truly saved in the first
place. Again, simply because of the definition of the word. As I put it in my previous email to you: I am still convinced that a person who "gives up his salvation" was never saved in the first place. God, in His foreknowledge, knew this person would head deliberately back into unrepentant sin, so in God's own opinion, this person was never truly saved---simply by the
definition of the word "saved" which means just that; "not lost." As humans, we can suspect and surmise that this person or that person is "saved," but God knows already whether or not that person will go to Heaven or Hell. If we call that person saved for only a season, and then we call him lost becasue he has an adulterous affair--no true change in this person's eternal status has really occurred just because of what we, as humans, have to say about it. The man is either still
saved, or he is not--and truthfully, it may be impossible for us (as humans) to really tell which. This adulterer whom we had always believed was saved may have been (in God's everlasting opinion) never saved. On the other hand, if his heart is truly still with God and he
has simply had a weak moment of humanity (as David did when he took Bathsheba and then subsequently worked to kill her husband) then he, like David, is still saved. In this latter case, God knows that the sinner will be repentant, and not let go of his salvation. I believe it is very possible for folks to walk for a season deep in sin, as David did--and still be saved all the while--and even bare a small amount of fruit. :) This because God knew David's heart. I have a brother-in-law who only recently got out of prison for breaking and entering, and burglary. He is a drug addict, and we pray he will recover. But even during his time in prison, he ministered to other prisoners about God's word--and he'll be the first to tell you that he is a weak sinner, and constantly repenting. I believe someone like him can make it to Heaven, whereas a cold, judging minister who only professes Christ--but does not truly have Him--will end up in Hell. The very second God looks at me or you, and says "This one will be with me in Heaven," then we are from that very second eternally SAVED. :) And If God says otherwise of us, we are not saved and never were. Think of the absurdity of it: God says this week "This man will be with me in
Heaven." And next week he says, "Well scratch that, he's back on the Hell side of the board." (Not trying to sound facetious, but it really is that simple, I believe). So our salvation cannot be lost after it is once proclaimed by God. I will grant you that someone can miss out
on salvation by never picking it up to begin with, but once salvation is actually gained, it cannot be lost. If you have time to mull the above paragraph over, and respond to it that would be great, as it will help me understand your own perspective better. Not to mention the fact that if you find a way to effectively dispute it, you'll get my vote for wordsmith of the century. :D Please be well, and please write back. I do enjoy, very much, this correspondence with you. Yours in Christ, Dan
-------------------------------------------------------------
dan, hope you are well! i have been busy, but i am doing well. i am looking for a nice lazy, relaxing weekend. In your writing below, I agree with the fact someone is not truly saved until he or she enters heaven. For instance, I believe that I am in a saved state, meaning if I die, I will go to heaven, but on the other hand, I am not truly saved yet, because I have not died and gone to heaven. So when the Bible says someone has been saved and they are referring to the someone who is still alive, I believe they are referring to someone being in a current saved state or condition. one cannot be truly saved from Hell fire until he or she comes to the crossroads of
death. another way to look at it, an atheist is lost, i.e. in a lost state. he is not truly lost until he dies. he has time, while he is alive, to repent. so while being lost state, he is not truly lost yet. once he dies, he will truly be lost because he has no opportunity to repent. You stated below that once God decided "this one will be with me in Heaven" that very second we are truly saved. But that suggests that God judges us while we are alive. the Bible says "it is appointed man once to die, then after this the judgement". Therefore, God judges us after we die, not while we are still alive. I dont think God is moving us back and forth from lost to saved during our life journey.
instead, may i suggest that he waits until the end of our lives to make a judgement on whether he says "this man will be with me in heaven" or "this man is on the Hell side of the board". The notion that God moves us back and forth from heaven to hell suggests that God is constantly judging us, but i dont think that is happening. I really appreciate the thought provoking emails you send me. you have been a true blessing for me. i hope to give you a call this weekend
to chat.-------------- Original message -------------- From: "daniel a newberry" <dannewberry@earthlink.net>
-------------- Original message -------------- From: "daniel a newberry" <dannewberry@earthlink.net>
I think I've made myself a bit unclear, and I accept responsibility for that. I have not said that God judges us when He, in His foreknowledge sees where we will be. I'm simply saying that He already knows where we will end up. And if He knows this very second that you and I will be with Him in Heaven, then we are as good as there. And believe me, He knows. :) On the matter of the "saved state..." It is my opinion that God would never, since He has foreknowledge, consider any of us to be in a "saved state." Again, He knows right now whether we are truly saved or truly lost. He also knows the very second that we will die. I'm sure you will agree with that. I know that you are one who loves God and would not deliberately depart from His permissive will, so I don't fear for you at all. But by the "saved state" logic--and I hope you'll forgive me--a prostitute could be said to be in a "celibate state" on her day off. Again, I say we are either saved, truly, or we are truly not saved. Being truly saved only happens once. If a man claims to have been saved, and lost, and then saved again, the only time he was truly saved was the last time; the final time before death. We have been having a discussion on this matter on an internet forum I belong to (it's a hunting and shooting forum, with a Christian category). What has become evident to me is that the folks who believe you can lose your salvation view their relationship with God as a "partnership," where each partner has individual responsibilities in order for the partnership to flourish. This way of believing holds that either partner--either God or you yourself--can dissolve the partnership at any time based on some specific action, or series of actions. Coming from the eternal security perspective, I view it this way: Becoming truly saved puts you into God's hand. It is a lot more than some mutual partnership. It is a "new birth," and you can no more revoke your second birth than you can the first one. You see, when you accept the invitation, you have become a living, breathing, part of the body of Christ. You sense this--you feel it--in the depths of your soul. When you commit yourself to Him, you have become His. You don't even have the freewill to leave any longer. If you feel like you can
still leave His body, I pray that you will have revelation of the Holy Spirit, and so understand that as a saved Christian you have given yourself to Christ when you first trusted in Him and asked to be in Him, and that He be in you. You are no longer your own, though you once
were, now you are not. On the issue of lacking the freewill to leave Christ, while I'm convinced that this is the case (once truly saved) I do not believe that anyone who has a tender heart toward God would ever--even if he did have the freewill after entering the body of Christ--turn around and ask to be excused. It simply would not happen, so the matter is not really worth expounding on further. But we can certainly "fall away" from our fellowship, and lose (in this life) what God wants for us and expects of us. Hebrews is very stern about the matter. But such scripture is where much of the confusion comes from with regard to the permanence of our salvation. (And confusion also comes from a misunderstanding of what the kingdom of Heaven actually is)... But back on point. Aside from losing our own benefits in the abundant life, we also set a bad example to the yet unsaved when we act in sinful ways. But again, the phrase "fall away" cannot refer to losing one's very salvation because if it did, it would make mockery of much of what Christ said in the gospels. Christ even prays for each of us in John chapter 17. In verse 24, his prayer to the Father is that we be with Him. John chapter 17 really speaks
volumes to me. That is the key chapter in all of the gospels, in my opinion, which shows us who Christ really is, and what He really wants. On another matter, I have been considering the message of the parable of the workers in the vineyard, in Matthew chapter 20. The workers who had worked all day long were upset because they were paid the same wages as the ones who only came and worked a little, in the eleventh hour. Even though the early workers agreed to work all day for a denarius, they did not like the fact that those who worked much less than they did were given the same pay. My understanding of this parable is that many will be saved in the last hour, and will gain the same inheritance as those who have worked all along. But many of those who have worked all along will feel as though they deserve more, and perhaps will even feel that their gift has been cheapened by the fact that God gives the same to the eleventh hour workers. It is my belief that God views those who think that their reward should be increased in accordance with the amount of work done as prideful; even self-righteous. Then He says "So the last will be first, and the first will be last." Take care, and be well... and enjoy your weekend. :) Dan
(I sent Joseph another email before his response to the one above, it follows)...
-------------- Original message -------------- From: "daniel a newberry" <dannewberry@earthlink.net>
Joseph, I reviewed my last email response to you and I think it sounded a bit less than cordial. I want to apologize for that. Sometimes emails don't really carry the true emotion of the message, and it can be easy to mistake the writer's disposition. I hope I did not come off as rude, and if I did I apologize for that. I have been sharing our conversations with Todd as well--which I mentioned earlier--and I hope that is okay with you. I hope your weekend is going well, and yes, maybe we can speak by phone sometime this weekend. As mentioned, I have been discussing this matter of eternal versus conditional salvation with some folks at an internet forum, and it has been a spirited debate, to say the least. :) It remains my opinion that the verses which on the surface appear to support conditional salvation are outnumbered 20 to 1 by verses which
indicate we are secure. Perhaps you see it the other way, 20 to 1 in favor of conditional salvation... I don't know. But most of the conditional security believers will readily admit that the preponderance of verses do tilt in favor of eternal security. In my opinion, the verses which indicate something contrary to the majority are those which should be interpreted in the light of the majority. Another thought is that God doesn't really mind either point of view, so long as His people love Him and do not pervert His Word. We might discuss that perspective sometime. I think that both philosophies have a perverted extreme, but meet fairly closely in the middle when you really set down and compare notes. What do you think? Anyway, I did feel inspired of the Holy Spirit to write a response to a conditional salvation believer at the forum I mention. Here is part of that response: I know these things:
I was given to Christ by His Father. Christ prayed (John 17) for me, that I be with Him in Heaven. He has said that no man will snatch me out of His hand, and I believe Him.
I am a man. And once I am committed to Christ's hand, He Himself will not allow me to be wrested from it. Paul put it like: Romans 8:38-39 For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons,[a] neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, 39neither
height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
I ask you, what then can take me from God's hand?
"I myself," the conditional salvation believers will say.
But I am a man too. That logic defies Christ's own words, that no man can snatch me from His hand. And even if I could snatch myself from His hand, who would really be getting the credit or blame for that? Would I do it, totally untempted by Satan? No. So even if I could snatch myself away from God of my own freewill, Satan would be the true snatcher.
And so it should be totally clear that we are entirely safe in Christ--yes, even from ourselves. Like a foolish little child that ran into the woods and became lost, and in danger of death, I'm found by my Father. He has me now. And even if I say:
"Daddy, I want you to let go of me so I can run out and play in the deep woods once again!" My loving Father will say, "No, my child, you are safe here with me."
"But I like playing in the woods Daddy, and I think you're being mean not to let me go. You're a mean daddy and I don't love you anymore and I want you to let me go right this instant!"
Would you let your own child back into the woods? No, you would not, because you are charged with protecting your child. Do you love your child more than God loves you? Are you God's child?
He will never let you go. :)
Be well, you and yours, and go in Christ...
Dan
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
hey dan! no need for apologies! it was just fine. i am not very sensitive when it comes to that stuff. we are both seeking, and i understand the need for frankness, as i have been frank also. i know that sometimes both of us may come across a lil abrasive, but to me, that is just fine. i know where you heart is. i am going to try to think on it some more and reply later today. hope you have a great Lord's day!
(Joseph writes back later)...
...below you say "And so, if the conditional salvationist must poke and prod a person to obey God, what good is that? Obeyance comes from love. Christ says "if you love me you will keep my commands." So the person who truly loves Him will, of that love, keep His commands. It doesn't have to be inspired by fear of Hell. In fact, genuine love cannot be inspired by fear of Hell." i think love can be inspired by fear of Hell. God did say "if you love me, keep my commandments." I believe this is true also, "if you keep my commandments, this means you love me." God loves obedience (1 Samuel 15;22). obedience is how we show God our love, even if inspired by fear of Hell. Why does the Bible even talk about Hell fire if it is not to inspire one to obedience? Look at Simon the Sorcerer in Acts 8. In Verse 13, the Bible says Simon became a Christian "Simon himself believed, and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip." but as we keep reading, Simon took his eyes of God and got a sharp rebuke from Peter, "your money perish with you because you thought that the gift of God could be purchased with oney....repent from your wickedness and pray God the thought of your heart may be forgiven you." (bold my
emphasis) Peter threatens hell fire...why? in order to inspire obedience and repentence. also, notice Simon, a baptized believer was in danger of perishing....conditional salvation, he must repent! i bet simon was scared to death.
i use the example of my parents on Sunday morning. i loved my mom, but she would come in my room on Sunday morning and tell me to get ready for church, but even though i loved my mom, i would just lay there sleeping. but when dad said only once "boy get up" i knew i had to get up right then and there or face punishment. Even today, when i read passages about hell fire, i get scared and it makes me watch my step to make sure i follow God. I believe that this God's intent finally, for tonight, i will talk about one other point.... you said below that the Book of Life is a finished book....i believe it is not!!!!! i am unaware of any verse that alludes to it being finished. on the contrary, if you look in the first 3 chapters of revelation, God is addressing different churches on their status. remember, churches are made up of Christians. in chapter 3 verse 1, he says the church at Sardis is dead. in verse 3, he commands them to remember, hold fast (not an option), and repent. in verse 5 he says "he who overcomes shall be clothed in white garments, and I will not blot out his name from the Book of Life" (bold my emphasis) 2 things to
consider....1)since a name can be blotted out, it shows that the book of life is open for changes and not a finished work and 2) only saved people are written in the Book of Life. therefore, you can easily concl ude that a saved person can become unsaved. that is all i have for tonight...wow, its almost 12! i hope my stuff above helps. take it easy and keep studying. thanks again dan. i
hope all is well with you -------------- Original message -------------- From: "daniel a newberry" <dannewberry@earthlink.net>
------------- Original message -------------- From: "daniel a newberry" <dannewberry@earthlink.net>
Joseph, thank you for the response. Before I continue I want to be sure to emphasize that this discussion is not an attempt to change your perspective, but simply to better reveal to you mine. 1 John 4:18 says... 18There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love.However, I do like your analogy about the difference between how you respond to your mom, and then your dad when you were told to get out of bed. :) Of course your dad would have simply given you punishment commensurate with disobeying him, but your dad would not have disowned you--and certainly would not have taken your life from you--for such an offense. And God will certainly admonish and punish us in this earthly realm. We cannot even be a part to the kingdom of God (kingdom of Heaven) if we are living in sin. But I don't believe He will forsake one of His own, who has already become a part of the body of Christ. In 1 John 5:13 it is written: 13 I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal
life. :) So this verse doesn't support the idea that we do not receive true eternal life until we die. There are other such verses throughout the Bible which speak in the present tense of our salvation. Ones which do not have easily been understood to be addressing congregations or groups wherein there would certainly have been those who fit the description Christ gives us in Luke 8:13; the owners of the stony hearts, where the seed did not take firm root. Simon, in the Acts scripture you mention, was obviously one of these guys.
Compare Luke 8:13 to Acts 8:13. :) Same chapter and verse, same author. And I believe, speaking of the same kind of character. God revealed this curiosity to me the other day. God would never consider such a person truly saved. If we view "fear" as "respect" for God, then I agree there. But I don't agree that once we are saved that we still need to fear Hell. I
believe you told me once in a phone conversation that you wondered if you had died in your college years whether you would have gone to Heaven or not. And you said that later as you prayed and understood, you came to the conclusion that you would have gone to Heaven, even
though you were not living as God would have willed. I think that is exactly right. He never left you, because you are one of His sheep, and were only wayward for a short while. He knew that you would respond to His Spirit and come gladly back into the fold, which is fellowship with Him.
On the matter of Bible verses that are hard to explain, I think in many cases they simply mean what they mean. I believe God's foreknowledge is the reason that He knows who will be with Him and who will not. But He says: "My sheep hear my voice." So if we are indeed one of His
sheep (as I believe you and I both are) then we hear His voice. If we disobey His word after we have become truly born again, there are consequences, but never death. In Christ, we have escaped death. I believe we are blotted out of the "book of the living" as the actual interpretation goes, by dying without Christ. He gives us all an
equal chance, and if we die without Him our names are blotted from that book. The Lamb's Book is a different book (in my view and understanding), or it could simply be viewed as the names of those who were given to Christ by the Father. Christ prays for us in John 17,
so He knew then who we all were. :) If we can fall away from Christ after the Father gave us to Him, and after Christ has then prayed that we not be lost (John 17:24), then Christ's own prayer has been in vain. So in the Revelation verse (3:5) "he who overcomes" is in my view a
metaphor for those of us who accept Christ. That is how we overcome. And what does it say? It says that we will not be blotted out. I believe all of our names have been written in the book of the living, both saved and unsaved, and are only blotted out when we fail to accept Christ before death. He knows right now who we all are, but like in the dog analogy I gave you, that doesn't mean that He is controlling our choices.
This is my perspective, of course, and again, not intended to cause you to change yours. I am coming more and more of the opinion that God does not mind that we view salvation in different ways. And Paul says in Romans 14 that we should accept those whose "faith is weak." There
are folks of weak and strong faith on both sides of this eternal security issue. I know your faith is strong. But Romans 14 tells me that we should essentially not divide the church over matters that are disputable. And if ever there was a disputable matter, this one qualifies! :D
So again, it is with Romans 14 firmly in mind that I continue our discussion.
I hope all is well with you and yours,
Dan
daniel a newberrydannewberry@earthlink.netEarthLink Revolves Around You.
hey dan, just read your email and you make some great points, and i thank you. just a quick reply: you write: This is my perspective, of course, and again, not intended to cause you to change yours. I am coming more and more of the opinion that God does not mind that we view salvation in different ways. And Paul says in Romans 14 that we should accept those whose "faith is weak." There are folks of weak and strong faith on both sides of this eternal security issue. I know your faith is strong. But Romans 14 tells me that we should essentially not divide the church over matters that are disputable. And if ever there was a disputable matter, this one qualifies!
:D So again, it is with Romans 14 firmly in mind that I continue our discussion.
this is how i also view our discussion also. thanks for pointing this out. i have learned a lot from our discussions....how could God not be glorified?!!! i am so thankful that you are studying with me and vice versa. have a great day and i will try to email in length again soon. -
(from Joseph, next email)...
...you say being truly saved happens only once, but at what point does God say we are truly saved? God knows whether we are going to be with him in heaven or not before we are even born, therefore, would it not be safe to say all Christians were never lost? God could say "i
know joseph and dan are going to be in heaven with me before they are even born, therefore, they are at this point truly saved." We could be truly saved before we were ever lost. This is a predestination point of view. if you ever get a chance to read John Calvin's stuff, this a theory he came up with. The way I read it, our relationship with Christ is a mutual relationship. God has always had this characteristic. If you look back at the covenants God made with Israel, its always "i will bless you if you continue to obey me" kind of deal. this same Godly requirement/characteristic is revealed in Col. 1:21-23.... "...yet now hath he (God) reconciled in the body of his (Christ's) flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unproveable
in his (God's) sight: If you continue in the faith grounded and settled, and not be moved away from the hope of the gospel" (Bold is my emphasis.) to enjoy God's reconcilement, we have to "continue in the faith". i think this is very clear. there is no solid Biblical passages that i know of to support that God utilizes his foreknowledge to give us eternal sercurity. Certainly God has the capability to do this, but I dont think he does it. Thanks again for your time in emailing me and your study. get back to me when you get a chance. hope it is cooler weather there than here.
do you golf?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph, hope you're doing well...
I have never taken up golfing, but would probably enjoy it. I do like long range rifle shooting (which is a lot like golf when you think about it, and at least as frustrating I'm sure... :) And my other earthly love is motorcycle riding, which I like to do when the weather is good. It was really hot here today as well. That time of year I guess. :) It is true that God asked the Old Testament subjects to obey him. This was the dispensation of law. I believe that God did this to prove to
mankind that we simply cannot obey. If we could, Christ would never have had to die for our sins, as we would not have ever committed any.
Under the dispensation of Grace, we have Christ as our advocate, and He came for us just like we are--and only asked that we believe. And think about Israel. Even though Israel is in disgusting disobedience to God, is He still blessing them is not not? I say that He is,
even though they disobey. On the matter of predestination (Calvinism)... Remember the analogy of the dogs I talked about. If you were able to have all of the dogs you ever had in your whole life, alive at the same time and in the field... and you would go to the fence and call each dog... you would know which dogs will come right away, and which ones will not come. You would also know that the rabbit beagle would come running to you when he heard your voice, but when a rabbit crosses its path, you know that beagle will be off after that rabbit. But you also know that after he loses the rabbit, he'll be back. Later than the other dogs, and with briars in his nose... but he's back. :) God knows us this way too. He isn't robbing us of our freewill, anymore than the dog owner is robbing those dogs of their freewill--God (like the dog owner) just knows his subjects, and He knows what they'll do. Failing to understand this is where the Calvinists go out in left field and misconstrue predestination to mean that we have no choice in the matter of our salvation. Paul actually says in Romans 8:29 that God did predestinate us: 29For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. So, simply and soley by God's foreknowledge, He is in effect predestinating us, which is what Paul is saying here. But God isn't choosing for us. Mega-huge difference there that Calvinists need to get their minds
around... God gave us to Christ, and in John 17:24 we see Christ praying that we will be with Him. I think that God will grant that prayer. :) By "us" I mean those of us who become born again, as Christ says we must do. So I do think that God knows from our very birth whether we'll ultimately be His or not. The Lamb's Book of Life is written, it is a
finished work. Of course, we have to come to Him, but He knows that we'll do that of our own freewill. I don't believe that God would call us truly saved until we--as He knows we will do--accept His Son. It is something we must do, but until we do it we haven't become born
again. Christ did not call his work finished until it was done, though he of course knew that it would be done. Once we are born again, we are truly His and He will not put us down. Not only that, but He is able to "keep us from falling" after the point when we become saved.
Jude 1:24-25 says 4To him who is able to keep you from falling and to present you before his glorious presence without fault and with great joy— 25 to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and
forevermore! Amen. So, God Himself, through the Holy Spirit, will minister to us and keep born again Christians from falling. The rub comes when someone who is not a true Christian goes off into left field and never comes back. That person may have professed faith, but never truly had it--and never truly loved Christ. You and I would agree that such a person will not be with us in Heaven. The only difference between me and you here is that I would say this person was never saved, and you would say (if I may speak for you) that his person might have been saved at one time. Reading 1 John 2:19 it says: 19They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us. So the person who turned away and never came back--according to John--"did not really belong to us." I agree that we must continue in the faith if we are to share eternity with our Lord. No argument there. But I would simply say that
someone who demonstrates that he isn't continuing in the faith falls into the category described in 1 John 2:19. "...their going showed that none of them belonged to us." I think the real issue with conditional salvation believers (if I may respectfully say this) is that they would warn someone who is falling away from true belief that he or she is in danger of Hell. That part is true enough. But the conditional salvation believer would then go on to persuade that person to do what "has to be done" so that he or she can once again head back toward Heaven. In other words, if you simply obey God, you will be back on the path to Heaven. But you can't force love, and love for God is the root of true salvation, and cheerful obeyance. If your wife truly did not love you--but she merely did all of the things that a good wife ought to do, and went through the physical motions of things designed to make it look as if she loves you. would you be happy? No, I don't think you would. You would know something wasn't right. There would be something missing. It wouldn't be the same. And so, if the conditional salvationist must poke and prod a person to obey God, what good is that? Obeyance comes from love. Christ says
"if you love me you will keep my commands." So the person who truly loves Him will, of that love, keep His commands. It doesn't have to be inspired by fear of Hell. In fact, genuine love cannot be inspired by fear of Hell. Christ did not say "If you keep my commands you will love me." ;) If we are motivated to serve God through fear instead of love, our fear is well founded. If we love Him, we'll keep His commands. He tells us that. Loving Him causes us to keep His commands, to the best of our ability. But keeping all of His commands perfectly (even if we could) would never cause us to love Him. We can't keep all of those commands all of the time, and He knows that. But He is able to keep us from falling from His hand. He has saved us, even from ourselves. And all we must do is truly love Him. The "obey" part comes from the love, and cannot be forced, or else it is worthless. So I say, when the suspected tare is busy showing us that it is probably a tare, we should not try talking it into being a stalk of wheat. Truly, it can't. A tare will never truly obey, because it will never truly love. But a stalk of wheat will love, and then, out from that love, to the best of its ability, obey.
:) Dan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next email from me (Dan) to Joseph...
-------------- Original message -------------- From: "daniel a newberry" <dannewberry@earthlink.net>
Joseph, Hope you and yours are doing well. We went to the lake down at Lake Norman, NC over the weekend. I just got back. Had a fun time. :) I found an interesting verse in 1 Corinthians the other day. It's chapter 11, verse 32: 32When we are judged by the Lord, we are being disciplined so that we will not be condemned with the world. I know that Bob has indicated to me that when Paul talks about us being judged by the Lord, that we are being essentially condemned, and he (Bob) interprets this to mean that we are losing salvation. I don't think this take squares with 1 Corinthians 11:32, however. To me, the verse indicates that Christians are indeed judged by the Lord, but this judging is not to condemn us with the world but simply to correct our bad behavior. In your opinion, at what point does the Lord stop judging us in a chastening, constructive way (?)... and at what point does He consider a previously saved person to be condemned again, and no longer worthy of the chastening described in 1 Corinthians 11:32? Do you think He would give a Christian a few days, a few weeks, or even a few years? God sent Nathan to David to give David inspiration to repent. David did repent, which put him back in good standing with God. Do you think that God would do the same for you or me--at some point before our appointed time to die--if He knew that we would repent? Of course David
was chastened very sternly, as God took his son whom he had conceived with Uriah's wife. (2 Samuel 12). For my part, I don't think God would allow us to die without making a way for us to repent, if indeed He knew that we would repent. On another matter... Moving to the book of Hebrews... : ) The strong verses in Hebrews (especially chapter 6:4-6) indicate to me someone who has blasphemed the Holy Spirit (which I believe means literally insulting the Holy Spirit when He decides that the time has come to extend to a person The Invitation to come to Christ). This is a man who has really never accepted Christ, even though the Holy Spirit has provided all means for him to do so. This man has tasted the Word, but not eaten it. He has been enlightened, but does not himself shine. He has shared in the Holy Spirit (which I believe means he has witnessed the power of the Holy Spirit), but is not indwelled by it... I think that such language in Hebrews was considered necessary, since many of these Jewish folks to whom the letter was written were almost certainly not yet fully committed to Christ. This is my take on
it anyway. What are your thoughts on these matters? Dan daniel a newberrydannewberry@earthlink.netEarthLink Revolves Around You. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mannnn, must be nice to be at lake norman! i am jealous!!! hey, if you ever want to come to ********* to hang out, you are welcome to stay at me casa! i dont know if you are ever up this way, but just wanted to extend the invitation. ********* is a cool place. Me and the lil lady can show you around town if you never have been. I agree with you on I Corinthians 11:32. i am also in disagreement with bob. The way it reads to me is that God is simply, as you put it,
correcting our bad behavior. you wrote: God sent Nathan to David to give David inspiration to repent. David did repent, which put him back in good standing with God. Do you think that God would do the same for you or me--at some point before our appointed time to die--if
He knew that we would repent? Of course David was chastened very sternly, as God took his son whom he had conceived with Uriah's wife. (2 Samuel 12). I do believe God would do the same for you or I. Hopefully you or I wouldn't be hard headed and listen and the Good Lord wouldn't have to spank us too bad! you wrote: In your opinion, at what point does the Lord stop judging us in a chastening, constructive way (?)... and at what point does He consider a
previously saved person to be condemned again, and no longer worthy of the chastening described in 1 Corinthians 11:32? Do you think He would give a Christian a few days, a few weeks, or even a few years? my answer to this is that i dont know when God considers a condemned person saved. i dont think the Bible defines a line for us to cross.
It could be different for each individual. Again i refer to Sampson..the verse reads, am i am paraphrasing "Sampson did not know the Lord had left him." Therefore, i believe that we will not know when we have crossed over the line. I could very well be way off on this, but
this is my current understanding. Hope all is well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
**************************************************************************************************************************
...and that is the end of my and Joseph's email conversation, though we did talk again on the phone. I told him that I don't believe that God leaving Samson in that particular case meant that God had condemned Samson to Hell--only that Samson was no longer being helped by God--a situation we see time and time again with the stubborn Israelites. And born again Christians today can find ourselves out of the company and favor of God, and we will fail (as did Samson) when this happens. Fail, yes. Fall into Hell? I really think not. God loves us much, much more than that. :)
Dan Newberry
Taking liberties with scripture...
As I mentioned in my profile page, I like open discussion Bible studies, and try to participate in as many as I can. I enjoy sharing The Word with others, and working together to build up the Body of Christ. I have close friends in just about every mainstream denomination you can name--and I have been blessed to know and learn from them all. I don't like conflict in the study of God's Word, and strive to avoid it. A good study group will have participants who often must "agree to disagree" on a particular matter. I think that the apostle Paul addresses these "disputable matters" splendidly in Romans Chapter 14--one of my favorite chapters in all of the Bible. We will not always agree on the little stuff--and that's fine.
This much said, I must admit to being bothered by the tendency for some folks to bend scripture to suit a denominational or personal doctrine. I've seen this happen far too often, and it is my opinion that folks should be called to task for doing such. An example: Many who believe that it is sinful to drink wine (you'll find most of these in the Church of God, Pentecostal Holiness, and Southern Baptist denominations) tend to warp the Word in order to bolster their belief in teetotalling. We can discuss this matter at length here in the future, but suffice it now to say that drinking wine, so long as one does not drink to drunkeness, is not a sin.
Other subject matter where you'll often see scripture taken out of context or misunderstood is the subject of tongues. There are folks on both sides of this issue of tongues who twist The Word to prop up their own understanding of the matter. That would be a good area of discussion for us to explore here as well. :)
I think one day when all of us Christians finally enter the physical presence of Christ, we may all feel a bit foolish about some of the doctrine we thought was so vital to our salvation and good standing with Him.
Dan
This much said, I must admit to being bothered by the tendency for some folks to bend scripture to suit a denominational or personal doctrine. I've seen this happen far too often, and it is my opinion that folks should be called to task for doing such. An example: Many who believe that it is sinful to drink wine (you'll find most of these in the Church of God, Pentecostal Holiness, and Southern Baptist denominations) tend to warp the Word in order to bolster their belief in teetotalling. We can discuss this matter at length here in the future, but suffice it now to say that drinking wine, so long as one does not drink to drunkeness, is not a sin.
Other subject matter where you'll often see scripture taken out of context or misunderstood is the subject of tongues. There are folks on both sides of this issue of tongues who twist The Word to prop up their own understanding of the matter. That would be a good area of discussion for us to explore here as well. :)
I think one day when all of us Christians finally enter the physical presence of Christ, we may all feel a bit foolish about some of the doctrine we thought was so vital to our salvation and good standing with Him.
Dan
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)