Not By Works

[Macabeus]

Amen.....there whole premise falls apart when they tey to use David as an example of a salvation which was, then lost and then regained....

Hebrews states clearly that IF IS WAS POSSIBLE TO LOSE IT IS EQUALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO REGAIN....

This dime store savior and salvation they peddle disgusts me!

Who says David lost his salvation and then regained it?

 

[Macabeus]

He confessed because he was a true child of God, Not in order to stay a child of God, or maintain his salvation.

But as God declared, he had eternal salvation when he was still a you g man keeping watch over the flock. As he called him a man after his own heart, KNOWING he would commit those sins when he said it.

So his being a child of God was the cause and reason of his confession.

AMEN!!! Kind of related to what I’ve been saying for months. Great post, EG!!!!

 

[Macabeus]

The parable of the wheat and tares has nothing to do with anyone going out from us.....

wow man....no wonder you miss the mark with that kind of faux biblical application.....tell you what....cut and past the parable and then highlight where is states the tares were saved and then went out from us and lost salvation.....

We will all wait for you to do this!

the wheat and Tare parable has to do with people who appeared to be Part of the kingdom and actually weren’t. That describes the people who went out. They went out from us but were not of us

In other words, they Claimed to be the real deal, but were not

 

[TooFastTurtle]

The parable of the wheat and tares has nothing to do with anyone going out from us.....

wow man....no wonder you miss the mark with that kind of faux biblical application.....tell you what....cut and past the parable and then highlight where is states the tares were saved and then went out from us and lost salvation.....

We will all wait for you to do this!

No the tares were not saved. Nor were the people in the passage about those who went out..,

Clarification: I did not mean that tares were saved. What I meant was that Macabeus made a good point that the wheat and the tares parable is a good example of people going out from among us, yet they were not of us to begin with.

The tares are visibly part of the church, yet were never saved to begin with (tares).

Hope you understand me better now. I meant that the people who went out from among us are tares who were never saved. That is how I viewed Macabeus as saying it.

 

[Macabeus]

This would only be true if on could fall away from having already recieved salvation.

The author here is talking about those who have an unbelieving heart, but are still going to church, they have not quite received his gift yet, they are still just going through the motions, when the author says they risk falling away, he means they risk falling away from the god who could save them, which if that happens, as has been seen through the ages, your hope of returning is slim, in fact, later this same author says it is impossible to renew them to repentance, or bring them back to the point they are in a position to be saved.

Yes the tares were not regenerate. You are correct.

Yep, the fact that he repented is a huge difference. Pigs stay and live in mud and revel in it. Sheep may fall in, but they at least try to get out. If someone is struggling with sin, that is like a sheep that fell in the mud. Christ will come around to pull them out. If someone says “I’m not saved by works so I’m ok here in the mud”, that is different

The difference is a difference in nature. One walks according to a new nature, and seeks the things of the Spirit. The other seeks the things of the flesh

You can seek the things of the Spirit, and still struggle with sin. But if one is seeking the things of the flesh...fill in the blank

Don’t miss this post.

David was one of God’s sheep. He fell in the mud, but didn’t stay there. Because it is not in the nature of a sheep to stay in the mud. It may take a while to get out, but their nature WANTS out, and God is there to pull them out.

All that needs to be said. 😁

 

[Macabeus]

Clarification: I did not mean that tares were saved. What I meant was that Macabeus made a good point that the wheat and the tares parable is a good example of people going out from among us, yet they were not of us to begin with.

The tares are visibly part of the church, yet were never saved to begin with (tares).

Hope you understand me better now. I meant that the people who went out from among us are tares who were never saved. That is how I viewed Macabeus as saying it.

Excellent post. Glad you clarified

 

[TooFastTurtle]

In other words, they Claimed to be the real deal, but were not

Do you believe it is possible for us to know or have any indicators on who is the wheat and who is the tares?

I see in the parable that Jesus says don't pull up the tares, so you dont by accident also pull out the wheat. Meaning they can look very similar.
On the other hand we also have certain tests in 1&2 John we can use to see who is in the faith and who is not. If someone does not love His brother for example, or does not keep Jesus' commands He has not known Him. All of those passages in 1 John I am sure most here are familiar with.

 

[Macabeus]

Excellent post. Glad you clarified

And you are correct. It also means

Do you believe it is possible for us to know or have any indicators on who is the wheat and who is the tares?

I see in the parable that Jesus says don't pull up the tares, so you dont by accident also pull out the wheat. Meaning they can look very similar.
On the other hand we also have certain tests in 1&2 John we can use to see who is in the faith and who is not. If someone does not love His brother for example, or does not keep Jesus' commands He has not known Him. All of those passages in 1 John I am sure most here are familiar with.

I think we test ourselves, but it is dangerous to test others regeneration. I have been accused literally dozens times of believing in testing others salvation, but it is simply not true. We should not try to judge whether someone else is saved

Now on the other hand, when it comes to discerning a teacher, we can know them by their fruit. But that is not judging in regards to salvation

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Do you believe it is possible for us to know or have any indicators on who is the wheat and who is the tares?

I see in the parable that Jesus says don't pull up the tares, so you dont by accident also pull out the wheat. Meaning they can look very similar.
On the other hand we also have certain tests in 1&2 John we can use to see who is in the faith and who is not. If someone does not love His brother for example, or does not keep Jesus' commands He has not known Him. All of those passages in 1 John I am sure most here are familiar with.

I think john told us who these are, when he said jesus who was to come would baptize with the HS and fire, that in the end, he would seperate the two himself,

The what, thise baptized by the spirit, saved
The chaff, the unsaved, will be baptized by fire,

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Clarification: I did not mean that tares were saved. What I meant was that Macabeus made a good point that the wheat and the tares parable is a good example of people going out from among us, yet they were not of us to begin with.

The tares are visibly part of the church, yet were never saved to begin with (tares).

Hope you understand me better now. I meant that the people who went out from among us are tares who were never saved. That is how I viewed Macabeus as saying it.

I disagree,

I do not see any evidence that the chaff ever even went to church,

 

[Lightskin]

David repented and went through a season of godly sorrow....

Now you’re saying he was a good Christian. Was he a good Christian or a bad Christian? Don’t say both. The answer is, he was and is Christian; loved, cherished, forgiven, redeemed and saved. He stumbled severely, but God was always with him.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Now you’re saying he was a good Christian. Was he a good Christian or a bad Christian? Don’t say both. The answer is, he was and is Christian; loved, cherished, forgiven, redeemed and saved. He stumbled severely, but God was always with him.

Imagine if god never confronted him, imagine how bad it could have gotten,

 

[Hevosmies358]

I do not see any evidence that the chaff ever even went to church,

Oh they do! Try visiting Joel Osteen's "church", they are front row buddy! Same with the catholic church, you can see them postin up right next to the statue of Mary

Hellsong city! Them folks are lining up for those rock conce.. i mean uhh. CHURCHES. Yeah churches. NOT entertainment centres no.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Oh they do! Try visiting Joel Osteen's "church", they are front row buddy! Same with the catholic church, you can see them postin up right next to the statue of Mary

Hellsong city! Them folks are lining up for those rock conce.. i mean uhh. CHURCHES. Yeah churches. NOT entertainment centres no.

I also see them filling up mosques, and pagan temples, and being moved x d with the wheat by going to sporting events, and concerts,

 

[UnderGrace]

I also see them filling up mosques, and pagan temples, and being moved x d with the wheat by going to sporting events, and concerts,

Wheat and tares look almost identical I do not see how an entire different religion could be a tare?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Wheat and tares look almost identical I do not see how an entire different religion could be a tare?

Wheat is fruit

Tare are weeds,

They do not all look similar, thats why many people “weed” their gardens because they can tell the difference

The warning is in uprooting the tare, you damage the wheat,

 

[Macabeus]

Wheat is fruit

Tare are weeds,

They do not all look similar, thats why many people “weed” their gardens because they can tell the different ference

The warning is in uprooting the tare, you damage the wheat,

the Tares appear when the wheat buds/bears fruit. Then the difference is discovered. (Matthew 13:26)

 

[Macabeus]

I disagree,

I do not see any evidence that the chaff ever even went to church,

The fact that they were planted among the wheat and were not apparent until the wheat budded?

A lot depends on what this part means.

 

[UnderGrace]

Wheat is fruit

Tare are weeds,

They do not all look similar, thats why many people “weed” their gardens because they can tell the difference

The warning is in uprooting the tare, you damage the wheat,

To the untrained eye they look similar and the differentiating aspects only occur as they grow to maturity.

I still see no place for other religions in the parable...but if you do that's fine.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

To the untrained eye they look similar and the differentiating aspects only occur as they grow to maturity.

I still see no place for other religions in the parable...but if you do that's fine.

My point was that wheat is any unbeliever, not just false churches, but also false religions and atheists. as the poster i responded to seemed to suggest.