It Is satanic Heresy to Deny Eternal Security

[Atwood]

Atwood:
"whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved"
"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you shall be saved."

What hinders you from calling out now for salvation in faith?

Why do you applying to yorself those certain verses????

Whosoever is addressed to whosoever. It would be ridiculous not to apply the scripture.

"Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things that were heard, lest haply we drift away from them. For if the word spoken through angels proved stedfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompense of reward; how shall we escape, if we neglect so great a salvation? which having at the first been spoken through the Lord, was confirmed unto us by them that heard;"

"Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of the prophecy, and keep the things that are written therein:"

"Now these things happened unto them by way of example; and they were written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the ages are come.
"
He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says"

"All scripture is expired by God and profitable"


Is it your problem that you fail to apply scripture to yourself?

Why do you go on saying insults without any Bible proof? Anyone can sling insults; but it proves nothing.

Where does the Bible use the word "sacrament"? What leads you to suppose that I have "sacraments"?

I am an orthodox - so I know what is true and genuin christianity is, and how terrible and bloody (martyrous) and full of inner lobour the way to the Kingdom of Lord is.

What is your Bible proof for your claims? Why do you just go on saying things? Do you suppose you will be believed just because you claim superiority? Have you even read the Bible through once?
How does being orthodox guarantee that you know things?

Ἦν δὲ ἄνθρωπος ἐκ τῶν Φαρισαίων, Νικόδημος ὄνομα αὐτῷ, ἄρχων τῶν Ἰουδαίων· 2 οὗτος ἦλθεν πρὸς αὐτὸν νυκτὸς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, Ῥαββί, οἴδαμεν ὅτι ἀπὸ θεοῦ ἐλήλυθας διδάσκαλος· οὐδεὶς γὰρ δύναται ταῦτα τὰ σημεῖα ποιεῖν ἃ σὺ ποιεῖς, ἐὰν μὴ ᾖ ὁ θεὸς μετ᾿ αὐτοῦ. 3 ἀπεκρίθη Ἰησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω σοι, ἐὰν μή τις γεννηθῇ ἄνωθεν, οὐ δύναται ἰδεῖν τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ. 4 λέγει πρὸς αὐτὸν [ὁ] Νικόδημος, Πῶς δύναται ἄνθρωπος γεννηθῆναι γέρων ὤν; μὴ δύναται εἰς τὴν κοιλίαν τῆς μητρὸς αὐτοῦ δεύτερον εἰσελθεῖν καὶ γεννηθῆναι; 5 ἀπεκρίθη Ἰησοῦς, Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω σοι, ἐὰν μή τις γεννηθῇ ἐξ ὕδατος καὶ πνεύματος, οὐ δύναται εἰσελθεῖν εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ. 6 τὸ γεγεννημένον ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς σάρξ ἐστιν, καὶ τὸ γεγεννημένον ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος πνεῦμά ἐστιν. 7 μὴ θαυμάσῃς ὅτι εἶπόν σοι, Δεῖ ὑμᾶς γεννηθῆναι ἄνωθεν. 8 τὸ πνεῦμα ὅπου θέλει πνεῖ καὶ τὴν φωνὴν αὐτοῦ ἀκούεις, ἀλλ᾿ οὐκ οἶδας πόθεν ἔρχεται καὶ ποῦ ὑπάγει· οὕτως ἐστὶν πᾶς ὁ γεγεννημένος ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος. 9 ἀπεκρίθη Νικόδημος καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, Πῶς δύναται ταῦτα γενέσθαι; 10 ἀπεκρίθη Ἰησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, Σὺ εἶ ὁ διδάσκαλος τοῦ Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ταῦτα οὐ γινώσκεις; 11 ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω σοι ὅτι ὃ οἴδαμεν λαλοῦμεν καὶ ὃ ἑωράκαμεν μαρτυροῦμεν, καὶ τὴν μαρτυρίαν ἡμῶν οὐ λαμβάνετε. 12 εἰ τὰ ἐπίγεια εἶπον ὑμῖν καὶ οὐ πιστεύετε, πῶς ἐὰν εἴπω ὑμῖν τὰ ἐπουράνια πιστεύσετε; 13 καὶ οὐδεὶς ἀναβέβηκεν εἰς τὸν οὐρανὸν εἰ μὴ ὁ ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καταβάς, ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου . 14 καὶ καθὼς Μωϋσῆς ὕψωσεν τὸν ὄφιν ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ, οὕτως ὑψωθῆναι δεῖ τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, 15 ἵνα πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων ἐν αὐτῷ ἔχῃ ζωὴν αἰώνιον.


16 Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον, ὥστε τὸν υἱὸν τὸν μονογενῆ ἔδωκεν, ἵνα πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν μὴ ἀπόληται ἀλλ᾿ ἔχῃ ζωὴν αἰώνιον. 17 οὐ γὰρ ἀπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν εἰς τὸν κόσμον ἵνα κρίνῃ τὸν κόσμον, ἀλλ᾿ ἵνα σωθῇ ὁ κόσμος δι᾿ αὐτοῦ. 18 ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν οὐ κρίνεται· ὁ δὲ μὴ πιστεύων ἤδη κέκριται, ὅτι μὴ πεπίστευκεν εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ μονογενοῦς υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ

 

[Atwood]

Of course, we all know that everything that everyone doesn't agree with is heresy. Therefore, all things are heresy.

It is very Christian to call everything that you disagree with heresy.

Sarcasm, you know, like (1 Kings 18:27) [SUP]27 [/SUP]It came about at noon, that Elijah mocked them and said, “Call out with a loud voice, for he is a god; either he is occupied or gone aside, or is on a journey, or perhaps he is asleep and needs to be awakened.”

Good morning, Timeline.

I love the Elijah stories. IMHO, the most entertaining stories in the Bible are the Elijah-Elisha-Jehu sequence starting around 1 Kings 17 and going on into 2 Kings. And I also love Mendelssohn's Oratorio, the Elijah.

No, every error is not a heresy; that is an error so serious that it defines a man as non-Christian, an error so serious that such a man should be excommunicated.

Christians disagree on the form of church government -- no heresy there. They disagree on eschatology (rapture, trib, millennium) -- no heresy there. IMHO, the only place where there is lock-step doctrinal unity is in cults.

But there are some basic doctrines (fundamentals) which are essential.
1) The Trinity,
2) The Lord Jesus is God and man,
3) substitutionary atonement,
4) Bible is word of God
5) justification by faith.

I recognize anyone as a Christian who trusts the Lord Jesus as his only and sufficient Savior, having "Jesus" adequately (if not perfectly) defined.

But I will not recognize anyone as a Christian who denies that he trusts the Lord Jesus as His Savior (meaning the Lord Jesus is going to get Him to Heaven -- new earth, eternal life; agreement on Heaven vs New Earth is not essential).

Some believe in annihilationism, which is a doctrinal error, but not something to excommunicate over.

So no, not every error is heresy. If so, we would all be heretics.

The plan of salvation is of a different nature from tolerable difference of opinion. Salvation is a basic doctrine. One who teaches a false gospel is a heretic.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Why do you applying to yorself those certain verses????

so whosoever does not include you and me? since when?

Why do not you like to consider about yourselves the verses about false teachers and wolvs in ovine pelage????

we do consider them. why do you think we are teaching against them.

Your poor and primitive teaching about false salvation is only illussion.

You neither have Holy Spirit nor true Blood and Flesh of Lord in your sacraments.

actually, yes we do. we have the true flesh and blood which jesus said whoever eats, will endure forever, never hunger, never thirst, never die, live forever, has eternal life, and be raised on the last day,

your eating a wafer and drinking a cup which gives you non of what jesus promised. thats why you do not have the holy spirit. your still trying to earn it. and why you keep eating and drinking the same wafer and cup which Jesus himself said if you partake of it once, yo uwill live forever, there is no power in your eucharist because the blood and body is not there.

that is a false teaching and wolf in sheeps clothing!

the rest of your post is nothing but an attack with no basis of fact so will be ignored.

 

[GrandHoboMaster]

Atwood. It is not me, who need to prove whatsoever. But you.

So you neither possess apostolic teaching, nor have any hierarhy rooted up to apostols!!!

Remember the story about self-ordained pseudo-christians Acts 19:13-16

13 But some itinerant Jewish exorcists too tried pronouncing the name of the Lord Jesus over people who were possessed by evil spirits; they used to say, 'I adjure you by the Jesus whose spokesman is Paul.'
14 Among those who did this were seven sons of Sceva, a Jewish chief priest.
15 The evil spirit replied, 'Jesus I recognise, and Paul I know, but who are you?'
16 and the man with the evil spirit hurled himself at them and overpowered first one and then another, and handled them so violently that they fled from that house stripped of clothing and badly mauled.

You, with your falseful recently-made doctrine and your arrogant pretext on the perfomnce of apostolic words on you, - are absolutely in the same position as those jews.

The orthodox churches kept the same apostolic teaching which christianity has from the early ages. And its hierarhy descented to apostols (look in the begining of the same 19 chapter for understanding how the Holy Spirit was passed from disciples of Jesus through generations).

We should not prove anything to anybody. And we know exactly that finally even Roman church will return to the orthodox confession (when two witnesses will lead Vatican).

But, it is you = self-ordained mutated christians who felt from the church itself, but discovered an easiest way to salvation.
You have to prove if you have authority to preach to another people the newly-constructed way to salvation.

In true, that is the way to hell. And you will be named as false teachers in the Doomsday.

Your primitive illussion deceives firstly yourselves. And you are eager to invole others in such selfdeception.
Your own doctrin OSAS is satanic heresy.

 

[Apostol2013]

Dead:

The gospel is not "hold fast, don't deny Him, don't take the mark, then you will be saved." False gospel.mi

The gospel is

Sirs, what must I do to be saved?
Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved.

No ifs, ands, or buts.

I urge you to trust Christ to get you to Heaven today. Throw yourself wholly on His grace, don't imagine that He only offers you the status of possible-salvation. He is the Savior. Trust Him fully now.

Its repent and be baptized each and one of you and receive the gift of the holy Ghost

 

[Atwood]

Atwood. It is not me, who need to prove whatsoever. But you.

How do you figure that? Whoever makes an assertion has a burden to prove it, if he wants to be believed. You need a "Thus saith the Lord," since you are not the Lord yourself.

You remind me of Job where it says sarcastically in debate: "Surely you are the people and wisdom will die with you!"

So you neither possess apostolic teaching, nor have any hierarhy rooted up to apostols!!!

False. I have the Word of God, all produced by God Himself through men guided by the Holy Spirit, and some of these men are apostles.

Hierachy? I have the indwelling Holy Spirit and claim to have the gift of teaching. As 1 John says for all Christians, I have an anointing.

Remember the story about self-ordained pseudo-christians Acts 19:13-16

You would do well to take that to heart about yourself. Your quotation proves that false-religious teachers exist, but it proves nothing about myself. I don't try to do exorcism, Hobo.

Why do you try to make the debate about me and claim, I am wrong because you say it? Do you think your arrogant claims will persuade anyone? You have to prove things from God's word, Hobo.

The orthodox churches kept the same apostolic teaching which christianity has from the early ages. And its hierarhy descented to apostols [sic] (look in the begining of the same 19 chapter for understanding how the Holy Spirit was passed from disciples of Jesus through generations).

What you don't seem to get, Hobo, is that your arrogantly saying things proves nothing. Prove it from the Word of God ("It is written") as the Lord Jesus even did, or recant.
If you want to make an argument from John 19, quote your verses and make your points.

We should not prove anything to anybody. And we know exactly that finally even Roman church will return to the orthodox confession (when two witnesses will lead Vatican).

So people should just bow down to you and accept you as an authority? You reject the nobel Bereans who confirmed what Paul the Apostle taught from scripture?

And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Beroea: who when they were come thither went into the synagogue of the Jews. Now these were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of the mind, examining the Scriptures daily, whether these things were so.

Your bluster and accept-it-because-I-say-so, goes nowhere, Hobo, as neither do you insults. You go on & on just saying things. Beware of the sin of "railing judgment."

I stand ready to establish what I believe and teach from God's word, and then give proof to the one who asks it. And I am willing to change my ideas if God's word says so.


But Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing judgment, but said, The Lord rebuke you. But these rail at whatsoever things they know not: and what they understand naturally, like the creatures without reason, in these things are they destroyed.

 

[Cassian]

Atwood. It is not me, who need to prove whatsoever. But you.

How do you figure that? Whoever makes an assertion has a burden to prove it, if he wants to be believed. You need a "Thus saith the Lord," since you are not the Lord yourself.

You remind me of Job where it says sarcastically in debate: "Surely you are the people and wisdom will die with you!"



False. I have the Word of God, all produced by God Himself through men guided by the Holy Spirit, and some of these men are apostles.

Hierachy? I have the indwelling Holy Spirit and claim to have the gift of teaching. As 1 John says for all Christians, I have an anointing.



You would do well to take that to heart about yourself. Your quotation proves that false-religious teachers exist, but it proves nothing about myself. I don't try to do exorcism, Hobo.

Why do you try to make the debate about me and claim, I am wrong because you say it? Do you think your arrogant claims will persuade anyone? You have to prove things from God's word, Hobo.



What you don't seem to get, Hobo, is that your arrogantly saying things proves nothing. Prove it from the Word of God ("It is written") as the Lord Jesus even did, or recant.
If you want to make an argument from John 19, quote your verses and make your points.



So people should just bow down to you and accept you as an authority? You reject the nobel Bereans who confirmed what Paul the Apostle taught from scripture?

And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Beroea: who when they were come thither went into the synagogue of the Jews. Now these were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of the mind, examining the Scriptures daily, whether these things wereso.

Your bluster and accept-it-because-I-say-so, goes nowhere, Hobo, as neither do you insults. You go on & on just saying things. Beware of the sin of "railing judgment."

I stand ready to establish what I believe and teach from God's word, and then give proof to the one who asks it. And I am willing to change my ideas if God's word says so.


But Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing judgment, but said, The Lord rebuke you. But these rail at whatsoever things they know not: and what they understand naturally, like the creatures without reason, in these things are they destroyed.

One would think you were a Christian Science believer. I had a client that was and we discussed often what she believed. She said the very same things you are saying. Which is very logical because both of you are sola scripturists. It is YOUR personal interpretation that stands against anyone else's opinion. Thus your and her opinions become infallible.
The truth of the matter you could not prove her incorrect to save your life. She could not prove the same for herself.
At the end of the day it is each man for himself and what he has constructed is his truth. Which we know now, after 500 years, are thousands of infallible truths.
You have essentially made the Bible a source of ideas to create personal idealogies and couch them in biblical terminology.

 

[Atwood]

in some manuscripts, not the oldest manuscripts.-atwood

oh no, more codex vaticanus/ sinaiticus... the two most flawed parchments ever to pretend to be NT...

you do realize that your two "old manuscripts" not only disagree with thousands of other manuscripts but they don't even agree with each other right? they literally are each alone in the world.. and the Sinaiticus has been altered repeatedly.. via it's own website..

What is your proof for bad-mouthing those very ancient mss? I present the evidence:

7.53–8.11

{A} omit 7.53–8.11 P66, 75 ℵ A[SUP]vid[/SUP] B C[SUP]vid[/SUP] L N T W D Q Y 0141 33 157 565 1241 1333✱ 1424✱ Lect ita, f, l, q syrc, s, p, h (but added in some late mss. of syrp, h) copsa, pbo, bopt, ach2 armmss geo slav Diatessaron Origen Chrysostom Cyril; Tertullian Cyprian

Omitted by p66 and p75 -- two super-old papyri. No papyrus has it.
Omitted by these unicial manuscripts (not just Sinaiticus = ℵ and Vaticanus = B) ℵ A[SUP]vid[/SUP] B C[SUP]vid[/SUP] L N T W D Q Y 0141
Omitted by later minuscule mss 33 157 565 1241 1333✱ 1424✱
Omitted by ancient translations: copsa, pbo, bopt, ach2armmssgeoslav
Omitted by Tatian's Diatessaron (ancient harmony, dated c 160–175)
Omitted by "Church Fathers": Origen, John Chrysostom, Cyril, Tertullian, Cyprian. (I think Augustine is cited both for omission and inclusion)

[

// include 7.53–8.11D180205579597700892100610101071124312921342 (1424mg) 1505Byz [(Fgap7.28–8.10 ) GH M] itaur, c, d, e, ff2, j, r1vgsyrpalcopboptslavmssmgApostolic Constitutionsvid mssacc. toDidymus; AmbrosiasterAmbrosePacianRufinus Greek and Latin mssacc. toJeromeJeromeFaustus-Milevis

D is considered a rather unreliable uncial, as it has big differences with other texts. Byz is the Byzantine text type, such as in the KJV, late minuscule manuscripts.

// include 7.53–8.11 with asterisks or obeli [marks evidently indicating doubtful]
(E include so only 8.2–11) S 28 1424mg

// include only 8.3–11 (L with asterisks) ℓ 184 ℓ 211 ℓ 387 ℓ 514 ℓ 751 ℓ 773 ℓ 890 ℓ 1780 (these lectionaries are in footnotes 1–7 of chapter 8 = Lectpt)
[Lectionaries are readings, like for daily reading, not actual manuscripts of John]

// include 7.53–8.11 after Lk 21.38 ƒ13,
[family 13, a group of latter minuscule manuscripts]
// include after Jn 7.36 225,

// include after Jn 21.25 (with critical note) 1;

// include 8.3–11 after Lk 24.53 1333c [/quote]

Surely this is an apocryphal story, added in after John wrote it. Some added it to Luke, instead of to John. It also does not ring true theologically.

 

[Atwood]

This system fouled up spacing, so I repost here:

What is your proof for bad-mouthing those very ancient mss? I present the evidence:

7.53–8.11


Omitted by p66 and p75 -- two super-old papyri. No papyrus has it.
Omitted by these unicial manuscripts (not just Sinaiticus = ℵ and Vaticanus = B) ℵ A[SUP]vid[/SUP] B C[SUP]vid[/SUP] L N T W D Q Y 0141
Omitted by later minuscule mss 33 157 565 1241 1333✱ 1424✱
Omitted by ancient translations: copsa, pbo, bopt, ach2armmssgeoslav
Omitted by Tatian's Diatessaron (ancient harmony, dated c 160–175)
Omitted by "Church Fathers": Origen, John Chrysostom, Cyril, Tertullian, Cyprian. (I think Augustine is cited both for omission and inclusion)

// include 7.53–8.11 with asterisks or obeli [marks evidently indicating doubtful]
(E include so only 8.2–11) S 28 1424mg
---------------------------
// include 7.53–8.11 D 180 205 579 597 700 892 1006 1010 1071 1243 1292 1342 (1424mg) 1505 Byz

[(F gap 7.28–8.10 ) G H M ]

itaur, c, d, e, ff2, j, r1 vg syr pal cop bopt
Apostolic Constitutions vid mss acc. to Didymus;
Ambrosiaster Ambrose Pacian Rufinus
Greek and Latin mss acc. to Jerome Jerome
Faustus-Milevis Augustine

D is considered a rather unreliable uncial, as it has big differences with other texts. Byz is the Byzantine text type, such as in the KJV, late minuscule manuscripts.

-------------

// include only 8.3–11 (L with asterisks) ℓ 184 ℓ 211 ℓ 387 ℓ 514 ℓ 751 ℓ 773 ℓ 890 ℓ 1780 (these lectionaries are in footnotes 1–7 of chapter 8 = Lectpt)
[Lectionaries are readings, like for daily reading, not actual manuscripts of John]

// include 7.53–8.11 after Lk 21.38 ƒ13,
[family 13, a group of latter minuscule manuscripts]
// include after Jn 7.36 225,

// include after Jn 21.25 (with critical note) 1;

// include 8.3–11 after Lk 24.53 1333c

Surely this is an apocryphal story, added in after John wrote it. Some added it to Luke, instead of to John. It also does not ring true theologically.
[/QUOTE]

I corrected the include data above; for some reason this word processor jammed the numbers together:'


// include 7.53–8.11 D 180 205 579 597 700 892 1006 1010 1071 1243 1292 1342 (1424mg) 1505Byz

[(F gap 7.28–8.10 ) G H M ]

itaur, c, d, e, ff2, j, r1 vg syrpal copbopt slav mssmg
Apostolic Constitutions[SUP][SUB]vid[/SUB][/SUP] mssacc. to Didymus;
Ambrosiaster Ambrose Pacian Rufinus
Greek and Latin mss acc. to Jerome Jerome
Faustus-Milevis Augustine

 

[Atwood]

Atwood. It is not me, who need to prove whatsoever. But you.

Cassian, if I make an assertion, feel free to ask me for proof.
If you make an assertion, be ready to prove it.
Whoever makes the assertion has the burden of proof.
If you think that a poster here can announce how he is superior to others and we must accept whatever he says, just because he says it, you are mistaken.
Nobel Bereanism, Cassian.

One would think you were a Christian Science believer. I had a client that was and we discussed often what she believed. She said the very same things you are saying

Now you do need to prove that one. Chr Scientists deny that evil exists. Their system is non-Christian. I certainly go to doctors and send my family to them. This is nonsense, a red-herring, and a straw man. And I don't believe they taught Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved. What I teach is Bible, not Mary Baker Eddy. Focus on the word; let's stay off irrelevant rabbit paths. The curse that is causeless, alighteth not.

Which is very logical because both of you are sola scripturists.

Now let's see you prove that one. How can the Chr Scientists who follow a cult woman, Mary Baker Eddy with a sacred book by her, be sola scripturists?

If we both believe that the 66 books are God's Word, don't we have enough common ground to debate from the text, without bringing in this straw woman? You raise dust instead of focusing on truth.

As to sola scriptura, no one has ever successfully added one newer page to the Bible since the last book of the NT was written. You bring in a straw man sola scriptura, as I never said that. But I will tell you my POV:

God's Word exists outside the 66 books, as God has had many conversations within the Trinity and with angels, on a continuing basis, none of which is in the Bible, and none of which is available to us. My POV is that
the only Word of God which is readily available to men in general is the Bible.

If you have something else, bring it forth and prove that it is God's Word.

It is YOUR personal interpretation that stands against anyone else's opinion.

Now let's see you prove that one. Prove that I am the only one who reads eternal security in the Bible. But since the truth is repeated so many times in the Bible, it is not my opinion, but a fact. You can read the texts and make up your own mind. I say, "It is written," and that settles all.

Thus your and her opinions become infallible.

Now prove that one. And prove that I agree with Mary Baker Eddy. This is garbage. And you cannot quote me on claiming infallibility. If you want to read something that approaches a claim to infallibility, read posts where no scripture is used, but it is just I say so. Anyone can read how you go on and on just saying things without Bible proof.

If you wish to know about salvation, do as I have done. Get your Bible out and mark all the passages on the subject.

Here it is God's word:

Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved.

Beware of scoffing and deeming yourself unworthy of eternal life, when a gracious Lord offers it to him who will drop his self-righteous pride, and trust in the crucified One.

My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand.

All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out.

 

[GrandHoboMaster]

Atwood, you have just only various self-made manipulations with the Word of Lord. = false conclusions and wrong interpritantions.

And what you suppose to be the Holy Spirit dwelling inside of you, is not the Comforter sent from Father to apostols, and passsed to christians through hierarhy.
But proud spirit inspired by the father of lies.

And it teach you to be stubborn in lie, which lead your soul in hell

You have perverted initial christian approach about the way to salvation till sole primitive statement: I am saint (saved=saint) because I have accepted trust in Lord Jesus with whole my heart, and He has saved me (and futher: whoever join my group also will be a saved elective saint)

And while you proclaim yourself saved saints, trying to intrude upon others such conception, your souls is destined to remain prey of devils.

Whatsoever logical argument is useless to open your eyes. For you are nursing yourself with idea (inspired by satan) that you are saved already.

Go ahead with your self-confidence. The outer darkness is awaiting for you.

 

[Angela53510]

I'm skipping most of the posts, just to add that I went to churches for many years that believed you could lose your salvation. It was a very judgmental and negative environment. People were sinning on Saturday and getting re-saved on Sunday. Or so they thought.

But I kept holding onto God's promises and reading the Bible. After reading it about 50 times, plus in Greek and Hebrew, I came to realize that Arminianism was a heresy, and that it was a doctrine of condemnation.

Like the OP from Romans 8, I have found this passage and many other verses support eternal security. Of course, you must be really walking with God. God must have really saved you. A sinner's prayer at a crusade or church is not necessarily my definition of salvation.

Like Bonhoeffer, I believe justification is only by faith.

"Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ." Romans 5:1

But also like Bonhoeffer, I believe we must obey the living Lord we follow and serve! If we aren't follow the Lord, are we truly saved in the first place? Grace is free, but it is costly!

I wonder why this topic just keeps coming up over and over again?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I'm skipping most of the posts, just to add that I went to churches for many years that believed you could lose your salvation. It was a very judgmental and negative environment. People were sinning on Saturday and getting re-saved on Sunday. Or so they thought.

But I kept holding onto God's promises and reading the Bible. After reading it about 50 times, plus in Greek and Hebrew, I came to realize that Arminianism was a heresy, and that it was a doctrine of condemnation.

Like the OP from Romans 8, I have found this passage and many other verses support eternal security. Of course, you must be really walking with God. God must have really saved you. A sinner's prayer at a crusade or church is not necessarily my definition of salvation.

Like Bonhoeffer, I believe justification is only by faith.

"Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ." Romans 5:1

But also like Bonhoeffer, I believe we must obey the living Lord we follow and serve! If we aren't follow the Lord, are we truly saved in the first place? Grace is free, but it is costly!

I wonder why this topic just keeps coming up over and over again?

because it concerns the gospel of Christ, they way to heaven, and it is the most damaging to satan and his army.. Satan hates this truth, because those who come to a saving grace knowledge and recieve it are lost to him forever.

 

[Atwood]

Atwood, you have just only various self-made manipulations with the Word of Lord. = false conclusions and wrong interpritantions.

And what you suppose to be the Holy Spirit dwelling inside of you, is not the Comforter sent from Father to apostols, and passsed to christians through hierarhy.
But proud spirit inspired by the father of lies.

And it teach you to be stubborn in lie, which lead your soul in hell

You have perverted initial christian approach about the way to salvation till sole primitive statement: I am saint (saved=saint) because I have accepted trust in Lord Jesus with whole my heart, and He has saved me (and futher: whoever join my group also will be a saved elective saint)

And while you proclaim yourself saved saints, trying to intrude upon others such conception, your souls is destined to remain prey of devils.

Whatsoever logical argument is useless to open your eyes. For you are nursing yourself with idea (inspired by satan) that you are saved already.

Go ahead with your self-confidence. The outer darkness is awaiting for you.

Good post. Salvation is a free gift;
but discipleship costs everything.

 

[Atwood]

Atwood, you have just only . . .
whoever join my group will be a saved elective saint

My group is the holy catholic universal Church, the Body of Christ. You can only enter it by baptism of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 12:13), and you can only get this baptism by trusting Christ as your Savior.

The dogmatic I-say-so (with no scripture, but with insults -- railing accusations) is self-evidently fallacious, which anyone can see.

Put these in you pipe and smoke them:

My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand.

All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out.

I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand.

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.

And who has also put his seal on us and given us his Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee.

For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.

I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life.

For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.

And I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ.

For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God,

Whoever believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself. Whoever does not believe God has made him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has borne concerning his Son. And this is the testimony, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. Whoever has the Son has life; whoever does not have the Son of God does not have life. I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life.

 

[Atwood]

View attachment 79994View attachment 79995View attachment 79994View attachment 79996

here are some photos of one of the "oldest manuscripts" Codex Sinaiticus.

Thanks for the manuscripts. Sinaiticus is the oldest or one of the oldest relatively complete codexes of the Bible (including an ancient Greek translation of the OT).

However, there are older papyri, but no papyrus has the entire NT.

Thanks again for the posting.

 

[phil112]

atwood, maybe you should make your posts longer and your font even bigger. Surely that will make you right, in spite of the word of God to the contrary. Yeah, that's the ticket.

 

[Atwood]

atwood, maybe you should make your posts longer and your font even bigger. Surely that will make you right, in spite of the word of God to the contrary. Yeah, that's the ticket.

Phil, I don't know what your stance is theologically or religiously. But I will observe that it seems every time I debate with unbelievers, they cannot stop themselves from making personal attacks instead of addressing the issue.

But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace.

Who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who died—more than that, who was raised—who is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us.

For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.

For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.


But our citizenship is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will transform our lowly body to be like his glorious body, by the power that enables him even to subject all things to himself.

In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit,

For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”

For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.


For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.


But whoever drinks of the water that I will give him will never be thirsty again. The water that I will give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life.”


Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life.

Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.


Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.

 

[Cassian]

Atwood,

Cassian, if I make an assertion, feel free to ask me for proof.
If you make an assertion, be ready to prove it.
Whoever makes the assertion has the burden of proof.
If you think that a poster here can announce how he is superior to others and we must accept whatever he says, just because he says it, you are mistaken.
Nobel Bereanism, Cassian.

I have no illusion that you might accept anything other than your personal interpretation. But I can assure you that there have been many over the last 2000 years who have rejected the Gospel of Christ as it was delievered even by the Apostles. I cannot make you do anything. Christ uses His Word through the Holy spirit to lead men to Christ by accepting His Gospel. He does not work to lead men to accept some watered down, man made philosophical religion. A religion that is competing with hundreds of other men's personal interpretations.
Become a Berean is what you need to do.

Now you do need to prove that one. Chr Scientists deny that evil exists. Their system is non-Christian. I certainly go to doctors and send my family to them. This is nonsense, a red-herring, and a straw man. And I don't believe they taught Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved. What I teach is Bible, not Mary Baker Eddy. Focus on the word; let's stay off irrelevant rabbit paths. The curse that is causeless, alighteth not.

Where do you think Eddy got here ideas just like you. Why do you think you, her, Russell, Stone, Campbell, even Calvin, Luther all use the same words, use the same text but somehow you all come up with different sectarian interpretations as to what it means. If her system is non-christian, so is yours. YOu use the same method, scripture to determine your faith, you both even claim the Holy Spirit.

The ONLY difference is that you are both different and neither of you can disprove the other by using scripture.

Now let's see you prove that one. How can the Chr Scientists who follow a cult woman, Mary Baker Eddy with a sacred book by her, be sola scripturists?

Have you ever heard of Calvin, Joseph Smith, even Luther had his commentaries. I don't know any sola scripturist that developed a relation based on scripture who did not have a book, commentary to support his view. You aught to be more honest and write one of your own.

You even made a direct plea for sola scriptura in this post and you have made several others. YOu use scripture ONLY and it is YOUR interpretation of that text that matters. Just like all the others. Not only that but each makes his interpretation infallible which is why there are so many.

Now let's see you prove that one. Prove that I am the only one who reads eternal security in the Bible. But since the truth is repeated so many times in the Bible, it is not my opinion, but a fact. You can read the texts and make up your own mind. I say, "It is written," and that settles all.

And so does the Unitarian, so does the dispensationalist, so does Russel and the Jehovah Witnesses. Even Arius and Nestorius proved their view from scripture.
You prove you point of view the same way they do, by proof texting and redefining terms, to fit a presupposition. Hey, the practice has been around for 500 years and man has gotton it down to a science. The ONLY person who developed OSAS is Calvin and many have followed him as others do other leaders of certain suppostions. What is new and different about that?

Now prove that one. And prove that I agree with Mary Baker Eddy

That is the whole point. Within just 20 years of the start of the Reformation you have two major totally conflicting interpretations of scripture. Luther and Calvin. They are not even close to being the same. And from that point on it was a free for all. The fact that one does not agree is exactly why and how we have thousands of distinct interpretations of scripture. Everyone of them is based on that person's personal, intellectual opinion, and best efforts of exegisis.

If you want to read something that approaches a claim to infallibility, read posts where no scripture is used, but it is just I say so. Anyone can read how you go on and on just saying things without Bible proof.

Using scripture does not help the method of sola scriptura.

Scripture proof of what it meant existed long before sola scripturist came on the scene. Proving from scripture is quite meaningless considering the milieu it has spawned. You have got to have your head in the sand to think that scripture could possibly have that many meanings and interpretations.

If you wish to know about salvation, do as I have done. Get your Bible out and mark all the passages on the subject.

and add to the confusion and become another sola scripturist with my private, personal religion.

My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand.

All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out.

that text has never had the predestinarian supposition imposed over it until Calvin came along. He comes 1500 years after the Gospel of Christ was given, established. believed and practiced. It is NOT in scripture, but imposed upon scripture.
However, you are a free man. You certainly are free to choose what you believe. Every man will give an account of the grace and knowledge that was given to him.

 

[Deadtosin]

"What is your proof for bad-mouthing those very ancient mss? I present the evidence:"- Atwood

I presented my proof in the photos of the sinaiticus, you can see different inks, you can see different letters over older letters that are clearly not what was rewritten and you can even see new writings crammed onto the edges. The other one is in the Vatican, need I say more? God provided thousands of matching ancient manuscripts (some dating prior to your 300-400 AD)

Once again, your "old writings" DO NOT EVEN AGREE WITH EACH OTHER!!! I rest my case.