Loss of salvation???

[Ouch]

Will you?

I'm not the one who is lying, and when someone shows them I'm not the one who REFUSES to repent.

You should worry about yourself your walk is between you and JESUS ALONE.

FYI, I have obey JESUS and was baptized in JESUS name and JESUS has filled me with HIS spirit.

That is one reason I'm here, JESUS is ALIVE and I wan't eveyone to know it.

Please be humble.

 

[mailmandan]

The dividing line between saved and unsaved is belief, not obedience.

John 3:18 - He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Works-salvationists may say wait a minute and cite John 3:36 in the NASB and "stress" the word "obey" to imply that we are saved "by" obedience/works which "follow" believing and even refer to that "as" believing. In regard to "does not obey the Son" in the New American Standard translation of the Bible, this does not mean that receiving eternal life is received based on the merits of our obedience/works which "follow" believing in the Son but obey by choosing to believe in the Son.

If John wanted to make obedience the central theme in salvation here, he would have said: "He who believes and obeys the Son has eternal life," but that is not what John said. To obey the Son here is to choose to believe in the Son.

The King James Version renders this same verse as: He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that "believeth not the Son" shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. The NIV says "rejects the Son" and the HCSB says, "refuses to believe in the Son." To refuse to believe in the Son is to disobey, rebel, be disloyal and refuse conformity. Strong’s definition of apeitheo is "to disbelieve willfully and perversely." *In the context of 3:36, to "not obey the Son" means to reject the Son by refusing to believe in the Son.

 

[studier]

Amen! Either we are depending 100% on Jesus' finished work of redemption as the ALL-sufficient means of our salvation or else we are 100% lost. (Acts 10:43; 13:38-39; 15:7-9; Romans 1:16; 3:24-26; 4:5-6; 1 Corinthians 1:18-21; 15:1-4; 2 Corinthians 5:21 etc..).

Is depending 100% an action? Is depending 100% volitional? How does one participate 0%?

 

[Wansvic]

Water baptism...
John the Baptist was an OT believer, not Church.

Peter wanted to carry over into the Church age the dietary mandates found in the Law, but the Lord told him to stop.

About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, ​

Peter went up on the roof to pray. He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and ​

while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. He saw heaven opened and ​

something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. It contained ​

all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles and birds. Then a voice told him,​

“Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.”​

​

“Surely not, Lord!” Peter replied. “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.”​

​

The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”​

​

Acts 10:9-15​

​

They all had to be taught the new way of life in Christ!

The vision pertained to the Gentiles.

 

[studier]

John 3:18 - He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Works-salvationists may say wait a minute and cite John 3:36 in the NASB and "stress" the word "obey" to imply that we are saved "by" obedience/works which "follow" believing and even refer to that "as" believing. In regard to "does not obey the Son" in the New American Standard translation of the Bible, this does not mean that receiving eternal life is received based on the merits of our obedience/works which "follow" believing in the Son but obey by choosing to believe in the Son.

If John wanted to make obedience the central theme in salvation here, he would have said: "He who believes and obeys the Son has eternal life," but that is not what John said. To obey the Son here is to choose to believe in the Son.

The King James Version renders this same verse as: He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that "believeth not the Son" shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. The NIV says "rejects the Son" and the HCSB says, "refuses to believe in the Son." To refuse to believe in the Son is to disobey, rebel, be disloyal and refuse conformity. Strong’s definition of apeitheo is "to disbelieve willfully and perversely." *In the context of 3:36, to "not obey the Son" means to reject the Son by refusing to believe in the Son.

Strong's complete definition is "ἀπειθέω apeithéō, ap-i-theh'-o; from G545; to disbelieve (wilfully and perversely):—not believe, disobedient, obey not, unbelieving.

BDAG Lexicon which is considered the favored lexical resource today defines apeitheō as:
[BDAG] ἀπειθέω • ἀπειθέω (opp. πείθομαι; s. ἀπείθεια) impf. ἠπείθουν; 1 aor. ἠπείθησα (for ἀπιθέω [Hom.] since Aeschyl., Pla.+) disobey, be disobedient

I just looked (again) at 10 Greek lexicons and every one of them either states that disobey is the definition or includes disobedience as Strong's does.

There really is no reason to not just stick with "disobeys" as the proper translation and leave it at that. This verse clearly contrasts faith and disobedience and thus faith parallels obedience - faith & disobedience are antonyms - faith and obedience are logically synonyms.

You're inserting the opinion that the Text says obeying follows believing.

 

[Musicmaster]

The vision pertained to the Gentiles.

Whatever...

MM

 

[Just_A__Follower]

Bad.
Unless you're reformed.
All other Christians believe in a synergistic relationship....

which is the right way of having a relationship.

A one sided relationship
is not a relationship....
because you are not relating to the other person.

Bad? I’m not saying the relationship is one sided. I’m saying the merit of salvation is one-sided. I actively trust, love, and obey, but I don’t rely on those things as why God saves me.

I’m like a child that is helping his daddy work on the truck. Is the child contributing to fixing the truck? No. And many times the child just get in the way. But the daddy and child still enjoy their time together and love is shared between them. The daddy 100% fixes the truck and the child gets to turn some bolts and learn while also spending quality time with his best friend. The success of the repair does not depend on the child.

 

[studier]

Bad? I’m not saying the relationship is one sided. I’m saying the merit of salvation is one-sided. I actively trust, love, and obey, but I don’t rely on those things as why God saves me.

I’m like a child that is helping his daddy work on the truck. Is the child contributing to fixing the truck? No. And many times the child just get in the way. But the daddy and child still enjoy their time together and love is shared between them. The daddy 100% fixes the truck and the child gets to turn some bolts and learn while also spending quality time with his best friend. The success of the repair does not depend on the child.

We're not trucks. The truck is passive in being repaired. The volitional child is not 100% passive in being repaired. The merit is Christ's and the child actively and cooperatively participates as required.

 

[Just_A__Follower]

We're not trucks. The truck is passive in being repaired. The volitional child is not 100% passive in being repaired. The merit is Christ's and the child actively and cooperatively participates as required.

Did I say I was like a truck? Maybe you should reread.

 

[studier]

John 3:18 - He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Works-salvationists may say wait a minute and cite John 3:36 in the NASB and "stress" the word "obey" to imply that we are saved "by" obedience/works which "follow" believing and even refer to that "as" believing. In regard to "does not obey the Son" in the New American Standard translation of the Bible, this does not mean that receiving eternal life is received based on the merits of our obedience/works which "follow" believing in the Son but obey by choosing to believe in the Son.

If John wanted to make obedience the central theme in salvation here, he would have said: "He who believes and obeys the Son has eternal life," but that is not what John said. To obey the Son here is to choose to believe in the Son.

The King James Version renders this same verse as: He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that "believeth not the Son" shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. The NIV says "rejects the Son" and the HCSB says, "refuses to believe in the Son." To refuse to believe in the Son is to disobey, rebel, be disloyal and refuse conformity. Strong’s definition of apeitheo is "to disbelieve willfully and perversely." *In the context of 3:36, to "not obey the Son" means to reject the Son by refusing to believe in the Son.

The logic here seems to create a logical conflict:

Premise 1: obedience/works 'follow' believing (a sequence).

Premise 2: to obey in John 3:36 'is to choose to believe' (thereby equating the two and making them simultaneous).

The Conflict: A thing cannot be a subsequent result of itself. If 'obeying' is the 'choice to believe,' then obedience cannot 'follow' believing as a separate result.

 

[studier]

Did I say I was like a truck? Maybe you should reread.

I read it. You have God saving a truck.

 

[Just_A__Follower]

I read it. You have God saving a truck.

It was a basic analogy of a father and child working together but the child not contributing to the outcome. You may have read too far into it.

 

[Cameron143]

Repairing the engine, the inward parts, is done by the mechanic alone. Turning the ignition once this is accomplished is the work of the individual. Before the repair, the ignition wouldn't work. After, it does.

We go into the repair shop a clunker. We come out a Maserati.

 

[kinda]

Repairing the engine, the inward parts, is done by the mechanic alone. Turning the ignition once this is accomplished is the work of the individual. Before the repair, the ignition wouldn't work. After, it does.

We go into the repair shop a clunker. We come out a Maserati.

Can you tell me which mechanic you goto? I would like that Maserati for my next car repair. Seems like a good deal.

 

[Just_A__Follower]

Can you tell me which mechanic you goto? I would like that Maserati for my next car repair. Seems like a good deal.

Maseratis are over priced and over rated. I would rather come out a 67-72 Chevy c10.

 

[kinda]

Maseratis are over priced and over rated. I would rather come out a 67-72 Chevy c10.

You could sell the Maserati and buy two chevy. Got to find this marvelous car mechanic, that can work miracles.

 

[Cameron143]

Can you tell me which mechanic you goto? I would like that Maserati for my next car repair. Seems like a good deal.

I went to God's Garage.

And you will never be more than a VW Bug. You will probably get a racing stripe and number, though.

 

[Wansvic]

I do believe that Cornelius was saved.
However, he also did not know about being baptized.

Once we come to know this...
then it does become a requirement.

I would have to disagree that Cornelius and the others were saved before being water baptized. According to scripture sins are remitted upon obedience to water baptism in the name of Jesus. And the stain of sin has to be dealt with in order for salvation to occur.

Scripture also reveals that God no longer accepts ignorance as an excuse. (Acts 17:30, Rom. 1:18-23) And Jesus said, that it is those who hunger and thirst after righteousness that will be filled. (Ps. 119:105) As such, everyone is responsible to seek God's will.

Consider some points revealed in the entire Acts 10 account:
Although Cornelius was not Jewish he acknowledged his respect for "their" God by praying to Him, giving alms, etc. And because his heart was right toward God, God sent an angel to warn him. The angel of God directed him to send for Peter who would tell him what he must do to be saved.

Acts 10:31-33 reveals that Cornelius had been fasting and praying for guidance. And wanted to hear ALL things commanded of God. This is a clear example that God directs the paths of those who acknowledge Him. (Prov. 3:5-6) God filled them with the Holy Ghost as Peter was telling them about Jesus. And immediately afterward Peter gave the command that they be water baptized in the name of the Lord.

Notice as well that there is a reference to water baptism in Acts 10:43. It states, that it is through the name of Jesus that believer's receive remission of sin. (Acts 2:38, 22:16)

I'm reminded of what Jesus told Jews who believed in Him, "If you continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." John 8:31-32

 

[kinda]

I went to God's Garage.

And you will never be more than a VW Bug. You will probably get a racing stripe and number, though.

Well, I got the address now.

2100 E Davis St, Conroe, TX 77301

 

[Wansvic]

I disagree with pretty much everything you have said here except "God can use whatever He wishes to accomplish His purposes". In the case of Christ's baptism, He decided to use the Spirit.

Except that being baptized with water and being baptized with the Spirit are two distinct baptisms, not one. Both John the Baptist and Jesus make this very clear.

Jn.3:5 is not receiving the Holy Spirit, it is being made spiritually alive. It is the Spirit generating our spirit. He is not giving birth to Himself.

His command to immerse others in the fullness of God can be applied though accurate and complete teaching of the Godhead. To baptize means to be in complete identification with, it does not necessarily involve water.

No, we don't see water baptism in all cases of Acts. Many places it is assumed and not directly stated.

Cornelius was already reborn (spiritually alive) before Peter arrived which is why God visited Cornelius. What Cornelius needed was to be made part of Christ's body, that was something new and never seen before. The Spirit falling on them was the sign he was now a part of Christ and in His church (body). 1Cor.12:13

That obedience to water baptism is clear, is your opinion for if it were as clear as you say there would be no argument.

Cornelius was NOT already reborn. But because his heart was right toward God, God sent an angel to warn him. The angel of God directed him to send for Peter who would tell him what he must do to be saved. (Acts 11:14)

Acts 10:31-33 reveals that Cornelius had been fasting and praying for guidance. And wanted to hear all things commanded of God. This is a clear example that God directs the paths of those who acknowledge Him. (Prov. 3:5-6) As Peter was telling them about Jesus they were filled with the Holy Ghost and immediately afterward Peter gave the command that they be water baptized in the name of the Lord. Peter had already made a reference to water baptism in Acts 10:43. It is through the name of Jesus that believer's receive remission of sin. (Acts 2:38, 22:16)

Jesus told Jews who believed in Him, "If you continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." (John 8:31-32) The same holds true for all those who believe in Him.