Yes.
Of course, if I use it to print out the passages I cite, you might need to ask CC for a speed reading course :^)
Yes.
That is a somewhat problematic intention.(I envision my role to be that of editing everyone's translation and commentary into a conflated version that makes everyone happy :^)
For me, it is concerning that any reborn sinner would interpret,as a Christian, that what God said is irrevocable, eternal salvation, actually is so. And that is so by either man or God's free will choice.Isn't it obvious to you that even some who read that someone can fall away does not mean they think that all will?
Well, the loss of salvation crowd is typically focused on others and their failings.They have it all figured out for themselves.I would wonder how anyone could ever insist,but they do none the less, that their will to return to damnation is always in all ways going to be mightier than Gods will to eternally redeem and save them to life.
just imagine, if we lost salvation....... We would be asking the evangelist, "who is this Jesus you speak of?"For me, it is concerning that any reborn sinner would interpret,as a Christian, that what God said is irrevocable, eternal salvation, actually is so. And that is so by either man or God's free will choice.
And,where would the peace in Christ be?just imagine, if we lost salvation....... We would be asking the evangelist, "who is this Jesus you speak of?"
Loss of salvation means loss of EVERYTHING.
Matt 11:30And,where would the peace in Christ be?
Think of that school of thought that insists we must work to retain our salvation. Which discounts the work Jesus did for us on the cross.
Both ideologies, salvation insecurity,works salvation, vacate any chance for peace in Christ. Because both ideologies are egocentric. Man's authority.
Which lead to thinking , am I doing enough to keep myself saved?
Note the text not there in the continuation of that verse?Matt 11:30
“For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.”
That is a somewhat problematic intention.
I am not familiar with Bob Wilkin.
My question and reference to our resource website was prompted by FRB72 saying "I am neither a Calvinist or an Arminian".
When one is familiar with the Free Grace tradition it can also be clear how that tradition does what other traditions do and reads some of its interpretations into what Heb6 is saying.
I find it interesting that the context of Hebrews is of shaky Hebrew Christians who are at the milk stage, needing to be reminded of what Jesus accomplished for them. They are reminded of the rebellion at Kadesh Barnea and the failure of the Hebrews to enter into the land the Lord had bid them enter by faith.
In that context, a 1st Century Jewish believer who fell away and put the gospel to an open shame would be someone who returned to the sacrificial system out of religious peer pressure, rather than trusting in Jesus’s perfect sacrifice.
Those who hold to the idea that once someone “falls away” it is impossible to restore them must give an account of the sinful man thrown out of the Corinthians church due to gross sexual misconduct. In a contradictory turn of events to the supposed fiery doom intended for such a man, he is both restored and other believers exhorted to lift him up rather than condemn him.
Are these verses from Philippians 2 Calvinist or Arminian?
12Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; 13for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure.
My answer would be both and neither.
Both positions are simply man-made interpretations of a selection of verses which taken to their conclusions mishandle the text, the revealed character of God and clear theology on the nature of our blood-bought salvation.
One answer is neither,
the Calvinist answer is to ignore v.12 and say v.13 determines election,
and the Arminian answer is both: God both works and enables souls to cooperate with His will--or not.
All answers are "man-made interpretations".
So, do you tie the danger for the Jewish Christian to being the same danger for the Gentile (and or Jewish) Christian Paul is dealing with in Galatians?
Then, does Hebrews mean something different that the Corinthian issue, or do we let Corinthians explain away and override all the very harsh sounding consequences in Hebrews and Galatians?
Exactly.And we can draw a parallel every time a believer says we can lose salvation......It puts The Lord Jesus Christ to open shame.I find it interesting that the context of Hebrews is of shaky Hebrew Christians who are at the milk stage, needing to be reminded of what Jesus accomplished for them. They are reminded of the rebellion at Kadesh Barnea and the failure of the Hebrews to enter into the land the Lord had bid them enter by faith.
In that context, a 1st Century Jewish believer who fell away and put the gospel to an open shame would be someone who returned to the sacrificial system out of religious peer pressure, rather than trusting in Jesus’s perfect sacrifice.
Those who hold to the idea that once someone “falls away” it is impossible to restore them must give an account of the sinful man thrown out of the Corinthians church due to gross sexual misconduct. In a contradictory turn of events to the supposed fiery doom intended for such a man, he is both restored and other believers exhorted to lift him up rather than condemn him.
I have spent time in the Methodist church as well as the CofE before becoming “non-denominational”.
I have heard the Arminian interpretation for a long time and it seems to me that it ignores the completed work of Jesus and the sealing of the Holy Spirit.
The hard Calvinist perspective seems to equate our unregenerate free will to that of a stone, making evangelism and apologetics seem irrelevant.
The image that came to me when trying to figure out the Philippians passage was of an electric bike with pedals. Somewhere in the black box our free will to pedal meets the power of the battery, making the journey far easier than it might otherwise be. I am satisfied to not know what happens in the black box of the bike in the same way as I am satisfied that God can reconcile free will and predestination in his attributes. I don’t expect or need to understand HOW He does it as I lack those divine capacities to comprehend it.