Loss of salvation???

[Caveman]

I don't understand what you mean here. I'm simply asking you to better explain how your system works. How do men become "Blessed recipients"?

I will...not now so how about you explain with the same Scriptural clarity how your Greek Gospel grants Salvation.

 

[studier]

you answer my retorts for a change...

You're proposing what looks like a hybrid theology that remains unclear on some primary points. I'd like you to explain how your system works.

In this last post I've only asked if you composed the paraphrased translation you provided. If I translate I'm happy to acknowledge and explain it. If I quote a published translation I try to always identify the version I post. I'm simply asking you to identify the source of the work you posted.

 

[studier]

One is Salvational His work and the other relational our work He has given (cooperative work) no bearing on Salvation

"how exactly are men entered into the covenant or saved in your system? How do men become "Blessed recipients"?

At the cross...atonement = justification

So all men are saved and entered into covenant without condition?

 

[studier]

I take notice how you bristle at the Gospel being Christ alone...because like the pharisee's loved their tradition over Gods Torah, people so want to have something to do with their receiving or keeping their Salvation... and the Greek Gospel provides it in abundance.; but recognize it is a different Gospel than Christ crucified.

I'm asking you to clarify your system, not bristling.

 

[Caveman]

So all men are saved and entered into covenant without condition?

not trying to duck you obviously...tried to answer most of your responses, but I am tired and have to be somewhere tomorrow and I don't want to get into the quagmire of having to go into detail that is required to satisfy you now.

I'm asking you to clarify your system, not bristling. I know...

So peace to you for now...

 

[studier]

I will...not now so how about you explain with the same Scriptural clarity how your Greek Gospel grants Salvation.

Why "not now"? Why won't you be clear on how your system works and who are the "Blessed recipients" of it?

I think you mentioned before that 1% of people may understand your system or be "Blessed recipients". I simply don't understand how anyone becomes such.

 

[Caveman]

Why "not now"? Why won't you be clear on how your system works and who are the "Blessed recipients" of it?

I think you mentioned before that 1% of people may understand your system or be "Blessed recipients". I simply don't understand how anyone becomes such.

because going directly to sleep..

 

[studier]

not trying to duck you obviously...tried to answer most of your responses, but I am tired and have to be somewhere tomorrow and I don't want to get into the quagmire of having to go into detail that is required to satisfy you now.

I'm asking you to clarify your system, not bristling. I know...

So peace to you for now...

No, obviously you're not trying to duck me.

Sleep tight.

 

[studier]

because going directly to sleep..

When you awake and get back to a keyboard, please explain how we become and who becomes a "Blessed recipient" of the cross of Christ.

I'd also like to know who wrote that recast of 1Pet.

Thanks.

 

[Jordon]

Hebrew...see post 4087

Yes, yes yes...I know the consensus view is Greek no doubt...that's what all the scholars say, and we know experts are never wrong.

"Gentiles may have rewritten the narrate of original NT Hebrew writings.

Ignoring the inherent NT internal evidence that brings into question some serious problems with the Greek without any critical thought and accepting the consensus scholarly view because they "know" is not unlike believing Mayorkas that the border was closed though millions of aliens infiltrated our country, like the 50 intelligence officials who claimed Hunters laptop was Russian disinformation or how 2/3's of the country bought into everyone needed the Covid shot."

If the New Testament Greek were truly original, why it would contain such errors as we see in Matthew and 1 John. On top of that, the Greek (and later English) tradition deliberately replaced YHVH with “Lord,” which obscures the Hebraic voice behind the text.

If we recognize errors in the Greek like those in Matthew and 1 John, or the substitution of YHVH with “Lord” — and acknowledge that its underlying voice is Hebraic, then we can treat it as a translation rather than the original writings. From that perspective, the Gospel becomes unmistakably clear: it has always been Christ + Nothing.

If I tried to argue strictly from the Greek New Testament — assuming it was itself a translation from an earlier Hebrew NT — it would be like rewriting the NT in a “Caveman” dialect, suppressing the original Scriptures, and then forcing all exegesis to be done verse by verse from that Caveman version. The result would be endless debates: Caveman purists defending “OSAS” against others who found Caveman verses that seemed to contradict it. The loop would never end, because the argument would be trapped inside the Caveman translation itself.

Instead, if NT Caveman (Greek) is a translation from earlier Hebrew then we should step back and look at what we know of God’s nature from the beginning: His covenants, His cutting a New Covenant because the Old was a covenant of death (since we could not keep it), and the thread of His unilateral salvation woven throughout the Bible.

That broader witness shows us His consistent plan along with the Hebraic linguistic construct that entirely permeates NT Caveman (Greek).

NT Greek is an entirely different Gospel than the Hebraic Gospel; a Salvation dependent on me vs on Christ crucified.

Greek distorts the pure Gospel. Salvation is not “offered” or “conditional”, it is Finished and Gifted to us Freely by God’s Covenantal Love, Grace and Mercy, without any human (Greek) qualifiers at the cross.

The True Gospel is as follows:

Christ Alone = Christ Crucified = Atonement = Justification = Sanctification = Glorification

Greek skewed minds cannot accept the True Gospel because theirs is a foreign Gospel, one contrary to “Christ crucified”.

there's no proof what so ever that the original manuscripts of the nt where ever wrote in Hebrew. There's only roof of them being written in Greek.

 

[Musicmaster]

Catch my transition from OC to NC commands?

Would you mind answering my question?

Do you believe those commandments have anything to do with your salvation? If so, why?

Mm

 

[Musicmaster]

I understand the interpretive systems and their arguments and claimed realities.

There are false allegations from both sides.

You're creating a false dichotomy in your last paragraph and along with it putting forth one of those false allegations.

Are you sayingnthere is a third pathway?

1) Saved by grace through faith
2) Saved by grace plus you gotta live it
3) ...

If that was a false allegations, which I have verified exists ou t there in the beliefs of some, please back up your claim.

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

Which of these theories below?

This theory...
this endless loop of OSAS Scriptural evidence that supports and Scriptural evidence that is counter will go on and on endlessly?

This theory...
MM & Kroogz get it right 99%?

This theory...
Christ Alone = Christ Crucified = Atonement = Justification = Sanctification = Glorification?

Or

This theory...
This is the Simple Gospel of Salvation...everything else is distortion?

Thanks, Caveman. You bring up some good points.

Generally speaking, I'm still waiting for the salvation-loss supporters out there to tell/show me how they know they're saved right now; given that they have not yet shown to us any defining point for such an alleged loss. None of them seems to possess the intestinal fortitude to define that line so that any one of us can understand where that ellusive point lies. All their rhetorical meanderings through scripture leads only to a mine field with unseen and contrived salvation-loss mines just waiting to be triggered and detonated.

Therein is the reason I question their salvation on the basis of their fallacious, works-based interpretational model and given that they alone stand in that mine field, stepping gingerly through life while never able to show to anyone else that they are saved in the moment apart from mere claims to the affirmative.

They talk much about their security in Christ but never dare show to anyone else where that deadly line rests. In other words, their sharing of the Kingdom Gospel they preach, and are accursed, directed toward unbelievers makes their sharing and testimony utterly without merit for the security they claim to be enjoying. It's a dichotomy, as @studier so aptly pointed out in relation to my statements, and yet he too has yet to show to us all anything that shows his beliefs are not themselves riddled with exacting elements of dichotomy.

Why would anyone want to become a believer in a religion that has no defining boundaries? The salvation-loss gang have nothing more substantial than their feelings and emotions as their perceived evidence for them being saved in this moment to qualify as ministers of their beliefs.

Salvation loss people, please stop dodging the bullet and show to us, from scripture, a solid definition for where that line for loss of salvation allegedly rests, and how you people know you're saved right now...without elusive and emotive argumentation please...

MM

 

[Jordon]

Thanks, Caveman. You bring up some good points.

Generally speaking, I'm still waiting for the salvation-loss supporters out there to tell/show me how they know they're saved right now; given that they have not yet shown to us any defining point for such an alleged loss. None of them seems to possess the intestinal fortitude to define that line so that any one of us can understand where that ellusive point lies. All their rhetorical meanderings through scripture leads only to a mine field with unseen and contrived salvation-loss mines just waiting to be triggered and detonated.

Therein is the reason I question their salvation on the basis of their fallacious, works-based interpretational model and given that they alone stand in that mine field, stepping gingerly through life while never able to show to anyone else that they are saved in the moment apart from mere claims to the affirmative.

They talk much about their security in Christ but never dare show to anyone else where that deadly line rests. In other words, their sharing of the Kingdom Gospel they preach, and are accursed, directed toward unbelievers makes their sharing and testimony utterly without merit for the security they claim to be enjoying. It's a dichotomy, as @studier so aptly pointed out in relation to my statements, and yet he too has yet to show to us all anything that shows his beliefs are not themselves riddled with exacting elements of dichotomy.

Why would anyone want to become a believer in a religion that has no defining boundaries? The salvation-loss gang have nothing more substantial than their feelings and emotions as their perceived evidence for them being saved in this moment to qualify as ministers of their beliefs.

Salvation loss people, please stop dodging the bullet and show to us, from scripture, a solid definition for where that line for loss of salvation allegedly rests, and how you people know you're saved right now...without elusive and emotive argumentation please...

MM

well if you know your Good you know and if you know your bad you know, Romans 2:15.

It's not rocket science

However you are putting to much of burden on yourself m, favoring ideas that lean on there own standing, isn't wise at all.

Salvation loss people isn't just down to them having a personal agenda against people like you do, it's about them being in fear also.

To bad you quite often forget that when you've got your mighty sword out

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Isn’t it hypocritical to bypass the issues I’ve raised? I especially don’t need CRFTD creds to make my point.

I have addressed what few points you've made, and you ignored them.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Josephus testified that Jews preserved their language despite centuries of conquest, and the Maccabees resisted Hellenization to keep Hebrew and Aramaic alive. Greek was the missionary tool, not the mother tongue of the Gospel.

Only the educated were fluent in Hebrew. The NT authors were all common folk, besides Paul. You still haven't addressed the issue of Targumists being used in Palestine during that time. You simply ignored it when I brought up the issue.

Also you keep conflating Aramaic with Hebrew; they are not the same. And you have not addressed the issue that Aramaic thinkers/speakers would have translated their Semitic worldview into their Greek writings.

And you get defensive and abusive when confronted with your neglect of these things

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

These examples in Matthew 23:2–3 and John 1:1 as well as replacing YHVH with Lord show that the Greek New Testament carries marks of translation rather than original composition.

It has been explained that Matthew 23:2-3 makes perfect sense in Greek. And your John 1:1 point doesn't make any sense. The word was not the son before he became flesh.

The Jews themselves changed YHWH to lord. YHWH was changed to lord in the Septuagint, which Jews wrote centuries before Christ. That is why NT writers used that term. Even now Jewish bibles replace YHWH with lord.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

CRFTD…ever the sage, though clarity and insight rarely follow.”

Caveman... ever the proselytizing polemicist and never does constructive conversation follow

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

You, I we...could not be faithful in the Old Covenant and you are not faithful in the New Covenant...His was faithful in the Old and He is in the New...we are the Blessed recipients who hopefully cooperate with the Transformation He is making in us.... thankful we should be that's it.

Many people were faithful under the old covenant.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

You look up the Scriptures...I know you know them...Christ slain from the foundation of the world, Christ died for the ungodly; Christ made atonement which meant Justification and those He justified He glorified.

Christ was not slain from the foundation of the world. You're misreading that text. From the foundation of the world names were written in the book of life of the lamb who was slain. This verse clarifies the confusion

The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is. Revelation 17:8​