Once saved always saved (OSAS) debunked
- Thread starter ResidentAlien
- 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.
E
There you go trying to insert your good deeds in the salvation process again
once again the law requires perfection. If your going to work to earn salvation that is the mark you must reach
unfortunately for you the Bible says all
Have sinned and missed the mark
You have only one Hope and that is Gods love and mercy. Take it while you can. Or reject it. The choice is up to you
once again the law requires perfection. If your going to work to earn salvation that is the mark you must reach
unfortunately for you the Bible says all
Have sinned and missed the mark
You have only one Hope and that is Gods love and mercy. Take it while you can. Or reject it. The choice is up to you
-
1
-
1
-
1
- Show all
FreeGrace2 said:
In the parable of the 4 soils, it is instructive that only the first soil didn't produce a plant. The 3 others all did. The difference is that soil 2 and 3 didn't produce fruit, for various reasons. I believe the production of plants implies and represents new life, since the seed germinated and became a plant.
I must disagree. There are plants that are NOT in season and have no fruit. They are still alive. It is the plant that is the issue in the parable. Jesus' point was about plants that are expected to produce fruit, obviously. And Jesus gave reasons why some plants don't produce fruit.
The fact that the seed produced plants in 3 soils proves that Jesus was referring to SAVED PEOPLE. The unsaved soil had NO plants, because the birds (Satan) took the seeds away.
How is that a fallacy? Why are there so many commands/exhortations for believers to live holy lives then?
James wasn't even discussing "saving faith". He was discussing that believers NEED TO demonstrate their faith to others so that others can see their faith. He even gave an example in 2:15,16. And v.18 has the endquote in the wrong place. It should be at the very end of the verse. iow, the "someone" says all of the verse, not just where the endquote was improperly placed.
In fact, the verse makes no sense where the endquote has been placed.
No, works are commanded of the fruit. Review John 15. Jesus told the 11 that ONLY WHEN they are abiding in Him will they be able to produce fruit. What's the flip side? If they don't abide, they won't/can't produce fruit. Was Jesus actually insinuating that these 11 could lose their salvation and then be unable to produce fruit? Of course not. He was speaking about being IN fellowship with Him. iow, following His commands, being obedient to the Scripture.
This is a Calvinistic twist of the truth. When Jesus said the second believed for a while, He didn't say or insinuate that they weren't saved.
In fact, ALL faith in Christ saves. Jesus said in John 5:24 that those who believe (present tense) HAVE (possess - present tense) eternal life So, from this we know that from the MOMENT one believes in Christ, they possess eternal life, and the result is that they shall never perish, per Jn 10:28 (Jesus' words).
Luke described Simon the SAME WAY he described the others who responded to his message. Why do you believe all the others were saved, but poor ol' Simon wasn't.
Why judge his salvation on what he did? Are we saved by what we do? No. We are saved by trusting in the work of Christ. And Simon did that, because Luke SAID he did.
What you are doing is denying what Luke SAID.
Yes, believers can be poisoned by bitterness and bound by iniquity, sadly. Do you really think that telling poor ol' Simon to "repent of your wickedness" would get him saved? I hope not.
Peter's rebuke was appropriate for a believer but NOT an unbeliever. An unbeliever needs to believe the gospel, which Peter was very good at preaching. But Peter didn't preach the gospel to him, but rather exhorted that believer to repent of his sin.
You bet I do. And I also call what Simon did sinful. And he needed to be rebuked, which he was. What Peter didn't do was preach the gospel to him, which would have been very appropriate for an unbeliever.
So you are second guessing Luke then. Luke didn't wink or put quote marks around "believed" when describing Simon. So why do you?
Don't you believe what Luke wrote? Don't you believe the Holy Spirit inspired Luke to write what he did?
Don't you believe that believers can be filled with bitterness and iniquity?
In the parable of the 4 soils, it is instructive that only the first soil didn't produce a plant. The 3 others all did. The difference is that soil 2 and 3 didn't produce fruit, for various reasons. I believe the production of plants implies and represents new life, since the seed germinated and became a plant.
I must disagree. There are plants that are NOT in season and have no fruit. They are still alive. It is the plant that is the issue in the parable. Jesus' point was about plants that are expected to produce fruit, obviously. And Jesus gave reasons why some plants don't produce fruit.
The fact that the seed produced plants in 3 soils proves that Jesus was referring to SAVED PEOPLE. The unsaved soil had NO plants, because the birds (Satan) took the seeds away.
How is that a fallacy? Why are there so many commands/exhortations for believers to live holy lives then?
James wasn't even discussing "saving faith". He was discussing that believers NEED TO demonstrate their faith to others so that others can see their faith. He even gave an example in 2:15,16. And v.18 has the endquote in the wrong place. It should be at the very end of the verse. iow, the "someone" says all of the verse, not just where the endquote was improperly placed.
In fact, the verse makes no sense where the endquote has been placed.
No, works are commanded of the fruit. Review John 15. Jesus told the 11 that ONLY WHEN they are abiding in Him will they be able to produce fruit. What's the flip side? If they don't abide, they won't/can't produce fruit. Was Jesus actually insinuating that these 11 could lose their salvation and then be unable to produce fruit? Of course not. He was speaking about being IN fellowship with Him. iow, following His commands, being obedient to the Scripture.
This is a Calvinistic twist of the truth. When Jesus said the second believed for a while, He didn't say or insinuate that they weren't saved.
In fact, ALL faith in Christ saves. Jesus said in John 5:24 that those who believe (present tense) HAVE (possess - present tense) eternal life So, from this we know that from the MOMENT one believes in Christ, they possess eternal life, and the result is that they shall never perish, per Jn 10:28 (Jesus' words).
Luke described Simon the SAME WAY he described the others who responded to his message. Why do you believe all the others were saved, but poor ol' Simon wasn't.
Why judge his salvation on what he did? Are we saved by what we do? No. We are saved by trusting in the work of Christ. And Simon did that, because Luke SAID he did.
What you are doing is denying what Luke SAID.
Yes, believers can be poisoned by bitterness and bound by iniquity, sadly. Do you really think that telling poor ol' Simon to "repent of your wickedness" would get him saved? I hope not.
Peter's rebuke was appropriate for a believer but NOT an unbeliever. An unbeliever needs to believe the gospel, which Peter was very good at preaching. But Peter didn't preach the gospel to him, but rather exhorted that believer to repent of his sin.
You called that saved? 
So you are second guessing Luke then. Luke didn't wink or put quote marks around "believed" when describing Simon. So why do you?
Don't you believe what Luke wrote? Don't you believe the Holy Spirit inspired Luke to write what he did?
Don't you believe that believers can be filled with bitterness and iniquity?
To mailmandan,
My reply to your post requires 2 posts. Here goes:
This is a specious argument. The Bible NEVER teaches any of this. When the Bible says someone believes, it means they got saved. Every time. Even in the case of Simon.
First, you're trying to compare apples with oranges. There is no comparison between the human race and the angelic race.
Second, the demons believe from EXPERIENCE and not from FAITH. Can you discern between the 2? Some people learn from experience, like not touching a hot stove (idiots). Others trust their parents and know from faith that one should not touch a hot stove.
One thing is very clear: demons are NOT trusting (faith) that God is One. They KNOW it because they were created in heaven and saw it with their own eyes.
To use v.19 as some kind of "unsaving faith" is really missing the point.
And I just explained why they aren't. And salvation isn't even the issue in v.19, so James was NOT even referencing "saving faith".
What the demons believe (know to be true) is that "God is One". They witnessed it. That's why they believe it.
v.19 has NOTHING to do with saving faith or salvation at all.
This is true. There are believers who do not grow up in their salvation. In fact, Peter exhorted believers to grow in their faith. 1 Pet 2:2
No, the Bible does not. So I challenge you to prove your claim with verses. And Simon doesn't prove your case.
Well, another poorly understood passage. I'm not blaming you, but all those poorly prepared pastors who failed to read carefully.
Let's start here:
13 The Pharisees challenged him, “Here you are, appearing as your own witness; your testimony is not valid.”
14 Jesus answered, “Even if I testify on my own behalf, my testimony is valid, for I know where I came from and where I am going. But you have no idea where I come from or where I am going.
This is the beginning of a long dialogue between Jesus and UNBELIEVING Jews. They (unbelievers) say something, and Jesus responds to what they say. That's the pattern in ch 8.
v.19 starts with "they", which refers to these Pharisees. In fact, EVERY mention of "they" refers to Pharisees. v.21 - them (Pharisees), v.11 (the Jews-Pharisees),v.25 they (Pharisees) v.27 they, v.33 they.
OK, that's the pattern. Now, let's examine what John, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit wrote:
30 Even as he spoke, many believed in him.
31 To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples.
32 Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”
Here, John makes clear that "many in that crowd believed in Him". iow, they got saved by believing Him to be the Messiah.
And John makes clear who Jesus speaks to in v.31 by saying "to the Jews who had believed Him". That is clear. So, here we see that there was a smaller group in the larger crowd of unbelieving Pharisees who DID believe in Him. And it is to THAT smaller group that Jesus addresses in v.32. iow, IF these new believers hold to His teachings they are REALLY His disciples and ONLY then will they know the truth, which will set them free (of the Pharisees false teaching and religion).
Then comes v.33 where we again come to another "they said". Who said? The new believers? No, the unbelieving Pharisees. When they heard Jesus speak of being set free, they butted in with a lie about never having been slaves to anyone. Right. Sure. They just forgot the 430 years in Egypt.
So, from v.33 on, Jesus is again responding to the unbelieving Jews. This is proved from v.45 - Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me!
So you are faced with a contradiction in John's writing. If you believe what he wrote in v.30,31, applies to v.45, you have a direct contradiction.
The ONLY solution is to realize that those in v.30,31 are NOT who Jesus was talking to in v.33-59.
The key here is that Jesus clearly stated that they "do not believe". He never used the commonly used and unbiblical words like "shallow faith, dead faith, temporary faith, or any of the other misguided wording.
Are you insinuating that human works are involved? I hope not.
Of course that's not saving faith. One must believe that Jesus did it on their behalf. That He died for their sins, and they MUST trust that He will save them.
OK, now we're back to James. The demons believe that be cause they have experienced that. There is NO TRUST in what the demons believe. Please understand that.
Well, there you go. Belief is trust. No human works at all. It's pure trust. That is saving faith, my friend.
My reply to your post requires 2 posts. Here goes:
This is a specious argument. The Bible NEVER teaches any of this. When the Bible says someone believes, it means they got saved. Every time. Even in the case of Simon.
First, you're trying to compare apples with oranges. There is no comparison between the human race and the angelic race.
Second, the demons believe from EXPERIENCE and not from FAITH. Can you discern between the 2? Some people learn from experience, like not touching a hot stove (idiots). Others trust their parents and know from faith that one should not touch a hot stove.
One thing is very clear: demons are NOT trusting (faith) that God is One. They KNOW it because they were created in heaven and saw it with their own eyes.
To use v.19 as some kind of "unsaving faith" is really missing the point.
And I just explained why they aren't. And salvation isn't even the issue in v.19, so James was NOT even referencing "saving faith".
What the demons believe (know to be true) is that "God is One". They witnessed it. That's why they believe it.
v.19 has NOTHING to do with saving faith or salvation at all.
This is true. There are believers who do not grow up in their salvation. In fact, Peter exhorted believers to grow in their faith. 1 Pet 2:2
No, the Bible does not. So I challenge you to prove your claim with verses. And Simon doesn't prove your case.
Well, another poorly understood passage. I'm not blaming you, but all those poorly prepared pastors who failed to read carefully.
Let's start here:
13 The Pharisees challenged him, “Here you are, appearing as your own witness; your testimony is not valid.”
14 Jesus answered, “Even if I testify on my own behalf, my testimony is valid, for I know where I came from and where I am going. But you have no idea where I come from or where I am going.
This is the beginning of a long dialogue between Jesus and UNBELIEVING Jews. They (unbelievers) say something, and Jesus responds to what they say. That's the pattern in ch 8.
v.19 starts with "they", which refers to these Pharisees. In fact, EVERY mention of "they" refers to Pharisees. v.21 - them (Pharisees), v.11 (the Jews-Pharisees),v.25 they (Pharisees) v.27 they, v.33 they.
OK, that's the pattern. Now, let's examine what John, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit wrote:
30 Even as he spoke, many believed in him.
31 To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples.
32 Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”
Here, John makes clear that "many in that crowd believed in Him". iow, they got saved by believing Him to be the Messiah.
And John makes clear who Jesus speaks to in v.31 by saying "to the Jews who had believed Him". That is clear. So, here we see that there was a smaller group in the larger crowd of unbelieving Pharisees who DID believe in Him. And it is to THAT smaller group that Jesus addresses in v.32. iow, IF these new believers hold to His teachings they are REALLY His disciples and ONLY then will they know the truth, which will set them free (of the Pharisees false teaching and religion).
Then comes v.33 where we again come to another "they said". Who said? The new believers? No, the unbelieving Pharisees. When they heard Jesus speak of being set free, they butted in with a lie about never having been slaves to anyone. Right. Sure. They just forgot the 430 years in Egypt.
So, from v.33 on, Jesus is again responding to the unbelieving Jews. This is proved from v.45 - Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me!
So you are faced with a contradiction in John's writing. If you believe what he wrote in v.30,31, applies to v.45, you have a direct contradiction.
The ONLY solution is to realize that those in v.30,31 are NOT who Jesus was talking to in v.33-59.
The key here is that Jesus clearly stated that they "do not believe". He never used the commonly used and unbiblical words like "shallow faith, dead faith, temporary faith, or any of the other misguided wording.
Are you insinuating that human works are involved? I hope not.
Of course that's not saving faith. One must believe that Jesus did it on their behalf. That He died for their sins, and they MUST trust that He will save them.
OK, now we're back to James. The demons believe that be cause they have experienced that. There is NO TRUST in what the demons believe. Please understand that.
Well, there you go. Belief is trust. No human works at all. It's pure trust. That is saving faith, my friend.
On Simon the sorcerer. Is he really saved? Here are some reasons why i believe he was not.
1. Simon's heart. Per Peter, his heart is not right in the sight of God. People may have seen his faith, his baptism but God did not sees him of repentant heart vv21-22. God sees the heart and for with the heart man believeth unto righteousness Rom. 10:10
2. Simon's spirit. Peter understand, he was in a bitter spirit, which is not a kind of those who have been freed by the Holy Spirit like in Acts 2:41 where believing souls were glad enough.
3. Simon's sins. The bond of iniquity is an indicative that his sins are not forgiven not only because he offered the money. If that case, Peter should advised him to confess his sin but Peter said he needs to repent.
1. Simon's heart. Per Peter, his heart is not right in the sight of God. People may have seen his faith, his baptism but God did not sees him of repentant heart vv21-22. God sees the heart and for with the heart man believeth unto righteousness Rom. 10:10
2. Simon's spirit. Peter understand, he was in a bitter spirit, which is not a kind of those who have been freed by the Holy Spirit like in Acts 2:41 where believing souls were glad enough.
3. Simon's sins. The bond of iniquity is an indicative that his sins are not forgiven not only because he offered the money. If that case, Peter should advised him to confess his sin but Peter said he needs to repent.
-
1
- Show all
All of this points to Simon's sins. However, Jesus died for all sins, and all people. So sin cannot be an issue in salvation.
Peter's response to Simon would have been very inappropriate to an unsaved person. But it was very appropriate to a saved person.
And Luke under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit had Luke describe Simon the exact same way as he described the many people who responded to Philip's message. "They believed and were baptized".
Why would the Holy Spirit allow Luke to contradict himself or be inaccurate about anything while writing Scripture? That doesn't make sense.
Peter's response to Simon would have been very inappropriate to an unsaved person. But it was very appropriate to a saved person.
And Luke under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit had Luke describe Simon the exact same way as he described the many people who responded to Philip's message. "They believed and were baptized".
Why would the Holy Spirit allow Luke to contradict himself or be inaccurate about anything while writing Scripture? That doesn't make sense.
E
I am judging your motive, your words and your gospel. Not you
You don;t like being told what the law really says, Thats not my fault. Your the one trying to push a law that was given to condemn you where you stand, If your going to keep pumping it up. It will keep condemning you.
You don;t like being told what the law really says, Thats not my fault. Your the one trying to push a law that was given to condemn you where you stand, If your going to keep pumping it up. It will keep condemning you.
-
1
-
1
-
1
- Show all
We both have the right to state our interpretations of scripture, and we both can say we think that an interpretation is wrong, but it is against the Lord's way to judge the person or even to say you have entered their mind. That is for the occult to do.
I truly believe that humans can deny the Lord, and I truly believe scripture tells us this is so. I am sorry if that offends you. You have every right to your interpretation of scripture and to state what you believe that is. You have no right to try to enter my mind or to judge me. If you insist on doing it, so be it. Go ahead, it is between you and the Lord, not you and me.
1 Timothy 4:1 Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons,
Hebrews 6:4-6 For it is impossible, in the case of those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have shared in the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, and then have fallen away, to restore them again to repentance, since they are crucifying once again the Son of God to their own harm and holding him up to contempt.
Hebrews 10:10 By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus once for all time.
Hebrews 10:14 For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified.
Either the Word is true or it is not. I truly believe that the cross worked and that grace supercedes/is greater than sin. To say that a born again believer needs to get saved again is saying that Jesus has to get back on the cross and die again. As long as Jesus is alive the believer is alive!
Hebrews 10:14 For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified.
Either the Word is true or it is not. I truly believe that the cross worked and that grace supercedes/is greater than sin. To say that a born again believer needs to get saved again is saying that Jesus has to get back on the cross and die again. As long as Jesus is alive the believer is alive!
Yes, sin was dealt with by Christ because he became the propitiation of our sins. Sin was dealt at Calvary but you cannot have forgiveness without repentance and faith. Peter said to him “repent” a usual type of preaching of John the Baptist against unbelieving Pharisees and many religious people of his days. It was also the preaching of the Apostles (Peter, James, John…Paul) Acts 2:38 Acts 20:21 and was the preaching of Christ himself Luke 5:32. It would be appropriate when Peter says he needs to ‘confess” his sins (1John 1:9) but it isn’t going that way as per scripture. The heart is deceitful above all things and who can’t know it? Only Peter perceived it and Uke the writer wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
Let the context determine the meaning. Let Peter described who Simon was. Just trying to observe why Luke needed to separate Simon’s belief “also” from the people’s belief when at the same time they heard Philipp’s preaching.
Yes, Luke under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit is teaching us that some believe are not qualified as saving faith. Even the gospel is being faked and propagated and believed. Even the very gospel can be believed in vain. 1 Cor. 15:2. Even, Satan can transform as light. Of course, I believe what scripture sayeth as it is and there are no contradictions between the writer Luke and what Peter says. Does this make sense?
God bless
Let the context determine the meaning. Let Peter described who Simon was. Just trying to observe why Luke needed to separate Simon’s belief “also” from the people’s belief when at the same time they heard Philipp’s preaching.
Yes, Luke under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit is teaching us that some believe are not qualified as saving faith. Even the gospel is being faked and propagated and believed. Even the very gospel can be believed in vain. 1 Cor. 15:2. Even, Satan can transform as light. Of course, I believe what scripture sayeth as it is and there are no contradictions between the writer Luke and what Peter says. Does this make sense?
God bless
God gives all people the opportunity to bow the knee to Lord Jesus in this life time. It need not be literal. It's a heart attitude. A friend of mine was advised that she should "bow the knee to Jesus" a few months ago. Her knees are shot so it is physically not possible.
Satan's forces never get that choice. Every person will bow the knee, either by choice or by compulsion. Satan and his forces will submit to Christ because they have no choice. Since they are spirit beings, "bow the knee" is symbolic.
Satan's forces never get that choice. Every person will bow the knee, either by choice or by compulsion. Satan and his forces will submit to Christ because they have no choice. Since they are spirit beings, "bow the knee" is symbolic.
E
they can deny the lord. But scripture says if they do. THEY WERE NEVER OF THE LORD
1 Tim 4: 1 is happening in the United States as we speak. We used to be a lord fearing country. But we (the people) have departed the faith and are doing just what paul said (not individual s walking away from salvation. But as a people walking away from the faith)
Heb 6 says it is impossible. That if a person falls away, to restor them to truth. It rejects this saved one day lost the next saved the next day. It was written to people who under law thought salvation could be lost and regained. It was against people like you.
You keep wanting to push law. And mans righteousness, and keep rejecting the righteousness of Christ and HIS PROMISE based on HIS WORK.
If your going to do that, People will come against your teachings. You must be prepaired for that and stop getting so angry. Try to listen once in awhile. Maybe you will see something
1 Tim 4: 1 is happening in the United States as we speak. We used to be a lord fearing country. But we (the people) have departed the faith and are doing just what paul said (not individual s walking away from salvation. But as a people walking away from the faith)
Heb 6 says it is impossible. That if a person falls away, to restor them to truth. It rejects this saved one day lost the next saved the next day. It was written to people who under law thought salvation could be lost and regained. It was against people like you.
You keep wanting to push law. And mans righteousness, and keep rejecting the righteousness of Christ and HIS PROMISE based on HIS WORK.
If your going to do that, People will come against your teachings. You must be prepaired for that and stop getting so angry. Try to listen once in awhile. Maybe you will see something
Of course. Acts 10:43 says so.
Faith and repentance are not the same thing. The Bible says that Simon believed. Are you going to believe the Bible or not?
Peter was not evangelizing Simon. He was rebuking Simon for his sins. And yes, believer's sins need to be repented of.
I did. And I noted that Peter DIDN'T say he wasn't saved. That's your twist on what Peter said.
How did Luke "separate" Simon's belief from everyone else's. The text already did that.
Acts 8-
5 Philip went down to a city in Samaria and proclaimed the Messiah there.
6 When the crowds heard Philip and saw the signs he performed, they all paid close attention to what he said.
7 For with shrieks, impure spirits came out of many, and many who were paralyzed or lame were healed.
8 So there was great joy in that city.
9 Now for some time a man named Simon had practiced sorcery in the city and amazed all the people of Samaria. He boasted that he was someone great,
10 and all the people, both high and low, gave him their attention and exclaimed, “This man is rightly called the Great Power of God.”
11They followed him because he had amazed them for a long time with his sorcery.
12 But when they believed Philip as he proclaimed the good news of the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
13 Simon himself believed and was baptized. And he followed Philip everywhere, astonished by the great signs and miracles he saw.
See? v.6 mentions the crowds (red words) who hear Philip preach.
v.9 singles out Simon (blue words) as a sorcerer in that city, who amazed the people with his sorcery.
Green words describe the crowds AND Simon the very same way. You have no point.
You are simply reading INTO the text your own opinion. The Bible says none of that.
Simon believed and was baptized. Period. Those who believe ARE saved. You can take that to the bank.
Huh? In Acts 8?
Did you exegete that verse? Do you know what "in vain" means?
Saving faith (in fact, faith in anything or anyone) has an object and a purpose. There is no faith apart from these 2 things.
There's no reason to have faith in or believe in someone/thing without a purpose.
The phrase "in vain" means without reason. Or purpose. There HAS to be a reason or purpose for trusting in Jesus. Just believing that He lived and existed in Palestine in the First Century is not saving faith.
No, he doesn't "transform" as light. Read the verse again. 2 Cor 11:14 - And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.
There's a big difference between transforming and masquerading.
Of course there is no contradiction between any Scripture. And Peter was not treating Simon as an unbeliever, as you presume.
Simon believed. He was saved. If the text mentioned that Simon "believed in vain", then you'd have a point.
But you don't.
Faith and repentance are not the same thing. The Bible says that Simon believed. Are you going to believe the Bible or not?
Peter was not evangelizing Simon. He was rebuking Simon for his sins. And yes, believer's sins need to be repented of.
I did. And I noted that Peter DIDN'T say he wasn't saved. That's your twist on what Peter said.
How did Luke "separate" Simon's belief from everyone else's. The text already did that.
Acts 8-
5 Philip went down to a city in Samaria and proclaimed the Messiah there.
6 When the crowds heard Philip and saw the signs he performed, they all paid close attention to what he said.
7 For with shrieks, impure spirits came out of many, and many who were paralyzed or lame were healed.
8 So there was great joy in that city.
9 Now for some time a man named Simon had practiced sorcery in the city and amazed all the people of Samaria. He boasted that he was someone great,
10 and all the people, both high and low, gave him their attention and exclaimed, “This man is rightly called the Great Power of God.”
11They followed him because he had amazed them for a long time with his sorcery.
12 But when they believed Philip as he proclaimed the good news of the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
13 Simon himself believed and was baptized. And he followed Philip everywhere, astonished by the great signs and miracles he saw.
See? v.6 mentions the crowds (red words) who hear Philip preach.
v.9 singles out Simon (blue words) as a sorcerer in that city, who amazed the people with his sorcery.
Green words describe the crowds AND Simon the very same way. You have no point.
You are simply reading INTO the text your own opinion. The Bible says none of that.
Simon believed and was baptized. Period. Those who believe ARE saved. You can take that to the bank.
Huh? In Acts 8?
Did you exegete that verse? Do you know what "in vain" means?
Saving faith (in fact, faith in anything or anyone) has an object and a purpose. There is no faith apart from these 2 things.
There's no reason to have faith in or believe in someone/thing without a purpose.
The phrase "in vain" means without reason. Or purpose. There HAS to be a reason or purpose for trusting in Jesus. Just believing that He lived and existed in Palestine in the First Century is not saving faith.
No, he doesn't "transform" as light. Read the verse again. 2 Cor 11:14 - And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.
There's a big difference between transforming and masquerading.
Of course there is no contradiction between any Scripture. And Peter was not treating Simon as an unbeliever, as you presume.
Simon believed. He was saved. If the text mentioned that Simon "believed in vain", then you'd have a point.
But you don't.
This statement by you explains a lot.
You don’t understand what Jesus is teaching in the parable, for starters.
These folks in verse 13, who believe for awhile, are being persecuted BECAUSE they are Christians, which contextually refers to being persecuted by unbelieving Jews.
They turn away from Christ and give in to the temptation to save their lives so they can live for a little while longer.
Let’s put it to in a different perspective.
If a person enlists in the army and goes through boot camp, and is shipped off to war, and once n battle the person deserts the army to save his life so he can live a little longer, does that mean he was never in the army?
By saying deserts the army, he is by default “in the army”.
It’s very simple.
But the ones on the rock are those who, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, who believe for a while and in time of temptation fall away.
Luke 8:13
These folks who were being persecuted for BEING CHRISTIANS willingly and knowingly DEPARTED FROM CHRIST; renouncing Him as Lord and Messiah to save their lives from death and suffering.
WAKE UP!
JPT
-
3
- Show all
Yes, these folks rejected the gift of eternal life because they were being persecuted as Christians, and wanted the persecution to stop and therefore save their lives.
But the ones on the rock are those who, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, who believe for a while and in time of temptation fall away.
Luke 8:13
These folks who were being persecuted for BEING CHRISTIANS willingly and knowingly DEPARTED FROM CHRIST; renouncing Him as Lord and Messiah to save their lives from death and suffering.
JPT
-
2
- Show all
LOL!!!
- Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar?
The work Abraham did was to obey God to offer his son Isaac on the altar.
Where were the “others” Abraham was supposedly demonstrating his faith to?
Men do not justify us.
God and God alone is the one who justifies us, when we obey Him.
This is why it’s called the obedience of faith.
But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith: Romans 16:26
Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” And he was called the friend of God. You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.
Likewise, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way?
For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.
James 2:21-26
-
2
- Show all