glad you can read minds.
you ought to set up a booth at your local mall and charge folks for telling them what they think....
How We Can Tell If We Possess The Agape of God
- Thread starter Phoneman-777
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
glad you can read minds.
you ought to set up a booth at your local mall and charge folks for telling them what they think....
The tares are not Saints - they are hypocrites who gave the appearance of wheat but are later revealed to be otherwise. Matthew 24:12 is dealing with Saints.
While it is true that "cold agape" is not specifically called "dead agape", it's certainly must be a state of "insufficiently" (2 Kings 4:34 KJV; Revelation 3:16 KJV) when even "lukewarmness" falls short, right? What else could "cold agape" imply but "dead agape"?
The truth is that most of us had no problem accepting these "many" were lost until I pointed out that they can only be Saints because the wicked cannot possess or exercise "agape" -- because John says the "agape of God" is demonstrated by keeping the commandments (1 John 5:2-3 KJV) but Paul says the wicked can't keep them, even if they wanted to (Romans 8:7 KJV).
Then why do you have such a hard time accepting that the "many" are Saints that wind up lost because their once hot agape has turned cold.......which is worse than the lukewarmness that leaves the Laodiceans spiritually "wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked" ("nakedness" being also a euphemism for being in a lost condition)?
how many times must I tell you - i am not a "salvation by works" or a "retention of salvation by works" proponent?
We either accept, reject, or accept then later reject salvation - all of which are internal, cognitive choices we make, after which our outward, physical works are the manifest evidence.
Do you agree or disagree?
i agree.
but, you see, salvation is by trust and faith in Christ only.
that will produce external good works and good behavior. but, if the occasional bad behavior on the outside occur, that does not mean a change of belief on the inside.
there is this thing called a sin nature we are all born with.
does that go away when one choses Christ as Savior?
as i recall, you have not yet said so.
so, sin nature gone or not?
The way you wrote this is comical. It’s as if you’re taking us through the thought process of how you perceive people will be reading your post and coming to an epiphany.
This I will say. Reading Matthew 24 in its entirety makes you want to make sure that you will not be taking a “portion with the hypocrites” where there will be “weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
I do consider that Jesus often personified the perfection required under the Law in order to be saved and do wonder if that is the case here (including Matthew 25; since the parable is spoken before His death and resurrection). If you take what He is saying here, one might think philanthropy is the means to salvation. These people loved (the sheep) and these people didn’t (the goats).
The passages here seem self-reflective. “Am I a genuine believer and do my works, my fruit, bear witness to the truth of my repentance?” Self examination.
It doesn't say love of God ... it says love.
Agape is God's love the only experience we have of it is when He pours it into our hearts, it's not ours it's His.
I never said "occasional bad behavior" changes belief on the inside - this describes the Just Man who falls 7 times and rises again, each time more determined to choose Jesus over sin.
I say "habitual, known, deliberate bad behavior" by the impenitent Presumptuous Man who demands a cover of mercy for it will be eternally lost, as says the Scripture.
Of course the sin nature is still there, it's just that the true, Christ-indwelt Christian is not a slave to it.
So, why do so many claim they can't keep the Ten Commandments? The same reason cheating husbands can't stay faithful to a good wife: they don't love the one they profess to love and is why many in church today praising Jesus and waving their hands at this very moment are no more saved than the worst sinner who openly opposes the authority of God.
Not comical - totally accurate. OSAS Licensees and Antinomianists never had a problem concluding Jesus is contrasting the fate of those in Mathew 24:12 KJV whose love grows cold through widely practiced iniquity...with those who endure to the end and saved in verse 13, meaning those in 12 are lost.The way you wrote this is comical. It’s as if you’re taking us through the thought process of how you perceive people will be reading your post and coming to an epiphany.
This I will say. Reading Matthew 24 in its entirety makes you want to make sure that you will not be taking a “portion with the hypocrites” where there will be “weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
I do consider that Jesus often personified the perfection required under the Law in order to be saved and do wonder if that is the case here (including Matthew 25; since the parable is spoken before His death and resurrection). If you take what He is saying here, one might think philanthropy is the means to salvation. These people loved (the sheep) and these people didn’t (the goats).
The passages here seem self-reflective. “Am I a genuine believer and do my works, my fruit, bear witness to the truth of my repentance?” Self examination.
Until they find out the "many" in verse 12 are Saints, that is - and instead of admitting Saints can be lost, the ensuing Cognitive Dissonance results in the most asinine reasoning for why the "many" are Saints which won't be lost at all or that the "many" are actually wicked can possess and practice "agape".
Is not "agape" the highest from of love which comes only from God? Are you saying the wicked can manifest such love, having no connection to God?
Do you understand that "agape" is shown by the keeping of the commandments (1 John 5:3 KJV), which the wicked cannot keep (Romans 8:7 KJV) and thus show they have not received it from God???
Can you see the "many" are actually Saints whose agape grows cold and dead, and will be lost?
I'm not going to continue this silly dance. I have stated my position clearly.
You can't have it both ways. If you're not willing to accept the "many" are Saints, then you believe they are wicked and that the wicked can partake of "agape" love...I'm pretty sure you're all alone in that belief.
Wrong, though exactly what I expected you to say.
Go and read up on the fallacy of the excluded middle, also called the false dichotomy.
"Saint" doesn't explicitly appear in Matthew 24 and the concept of what a saint is varies. I'm not sure I fully understand your meaning of saint here but if a saint is the wheat in parable of the tares, while it's true that the tares are not wheat, the wheat are also not tares (and I assume couldn't suddenly become one). Tares are entirely subject to fire but wheat are subject to purification and salvation.
"And when Elisha was come into the house, behold, the child was dead, and laid upon his bed. He went in therefore, and shut the door upon them twain, and prayed unto the Lord. And he went up, and lay upon the child, and put his mouth upon his mouth, and his eyes upon his eyes, and his hands upon his hands: and stretched himself upon the child; and the flesh of the child waxed warm. Then he returned, and walked in the house to and fro; and went up, and stretched himself upon him: and the child sneezed seven times, and the child opened his eyes." - 2 Kings 32-35
The 2 Kings 4:34 reference is puzzling because that part of 2 Kings 4 is talking about something akin to CPR performed on a child. "flesh of the [formly dead] child waxed warm." I see the possible connection but it's not clear in 2 Kings 4 at what point the child returned to life (after the prayer and before being warmed? Or after being warmed? Or after the last stretch?). If we're trying to look at 2 Kings 4's usage of "warm" as a means of gauging the presence of life, it isn't necessarily the case that "warm = alive".
"And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God; I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked [...] be zealous therefore, and repent." Revelation 3:14-17&19b KJV
Lukewarm meaning "insufficient" in at least the sense of not meeting the glory of God, but there is additional context in the passages around Rev 3:16. Even the church of the Laodiceans is not necessarily voided of their salvation as a result of their falsely founded pride and contentment. In order to better themselves, God tells them to repent. This seems to be more of a theme of losing ones way rather than an explicit ejection from salvation.
1 Corinthians 13:8 tells us that "agape never fails". I find it hard to reconcile "agape never fails" with the interpretation of Mat 24:12 as "agape that has died".
If we interpret Mat 24:12's "love waxed cold" as "agape that has lost much of its expressed intensity" it seems to be much more compatible with 1 Cor 13:8.
It's YOU who is saying the wicked who have no connection with God can manifest agape love, or they were saved and then they were not and perhaps then they were again ... what a mess.
You do not keep the commandments, cannot keep it perfectly nobody [apart from one] ever has. If you break one law you are guilty of all, the law can't bend, it cannot make exceptions or it could no longer be law. It does not accept doing your best.
We keep God's commandments they are not burdensome, the commandments of Moses were burdensome. Peter said they were a yoke which neither the fathers or they were able to bear.
This is God's commandment, Receive the Holy Spirit by hearing with faith and not by obedience to the law.
This is why 7th dayers have no witness of the Holy Spirit ... I've met a ton of them, they do not have the witness.
I say the love of many which we see already is growing cold does not refer to the church.
Nope.
In fact, the Greeks ((whose word this is)) understood philia, 'brotherly love' to be the higher sort.