Loss of salvation???

[GWH]

4 For as touching those who were once enlightened and tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Spirit,

5 and tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the age to come,

6 and then fell away, it is impossible to renew them again unto repentance


This is interesting no matter how people choose to interpret it. But we believe that Paul is the author of the Book of Hebrews and this would be something incredible for him to have added.

The NIV should make MM happier:

HB 6:4-6, “It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, because to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace.”

 

[lrs68]

The NIV should make MM happier:

HB 6:4-6, “It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, because to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace.”

Yes, a much clearer way to understand the point being made.

Thank You!

 

[Musicmaster]

4 For as touching those who were once enlightened and tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Spirit,

5 and tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the age to come,

6 and then fell away, it is impossible to renew them again unto repentance


This is interesting no matter how people choose to interpret it. But we believe that Paul is the author of the Book of Hebrews and this would be something incredible for him to have added.

Yes, you are right, no matter how anyone interprets it, it is interesting. What makes a difference, however, is that was not spoken to anyone under the Gospel of Grace. It was written to those who were under the Kingdom Gospel.

MM

 

[lrs68]

Yes, you are right, no matter how anyone interprets it, it is interesting. What makes a difference, however, is that was not spoken to anyone under the Gospel of Grace. It was written to those who were under the Kingdom Gospel.

MM

Are you saying the Gospel Jesus preached is different than the Gospel of Grace?

 

[Musicmaster]

Are you saying the Gospel Jesus preached is different than the Gospel of Grace?

You bet it is. What Jesus preached was true for those to whom He spoke that gospel. What Paul spoke to Gentiles was/is also true, and was/is meant for Gentiles all the way up to this very day and beyond until the rapture.

Now, the acid test for this is the very words of Paul. Some believe he was an outright liar, and that's on them. Paul clearly stated that his gospel was hidden in God from before the creation of the world, and was a mystery until revealed to him first.

What that means is that his gospel given to him directly be Jesus was not ever spoken before, because it would then NOT have been a mystery. Can we agree with that?

For them out there to call Paul a liar runs directly into calling Jesus a liar as well, given that Paul received it from Jesus Himself.

MM

 

[lrs68]

You bet it is. What Jesus preached was true for those to whom He spoke that gospel. What Paul spoke to Gentiles was/is also true, and was/is meant for Gentiles all the way up to this very day and beyond until the rapture.

Now, the acid test for this is the very words of Paul. Some believe he was an outright liar, and that's on them. Paul clearly stated that his gospel was hidden in God from before the creation of the world, and was a mystery until revealed to him first.

What that means is that his gospel given to him directly be Jesus was not ever spoken before, because it would then NOT have been a mystery. Can we agree with that?

For them out there to call Paul a liar runs directly into calling Jesus a liar as well, given that Paul received it from Jesus Himself.

MM

I am going to read, reread this a couple of times and chew the cud until I digest it because this is a very well thought out answer that I feel like I believe but want to make sure I am not jumping to conclusions based upon initial understanding.

It feels right but I just want it to become right in my spirit.

 

[Musicmaster]

I am going to read, reread this a couple of times and chew the cud until I digest it because this is a very well thought out answer that I feel like I believe but want to make sure I am not jumping to conclusions based upon initial understanding.

It feels right but I just want it to become right in my spirit.

I fully understand this, and appreciate your being careful in all that you read in forums. I always encourage others to read scripture for themselves and allow the Bible to speak for itself apart from the filters of churchianity and religion in general out there that is always misleading the masses with all manner of man-made doctrines and doctrines of demons.

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

I am going to read, reread this a couple of times and chew the cud until I digest it because this is a very well thought out answer that I feel like I believe but want to make sure I am not jumping to conclusions based upon initial understanding.

It feels right but I just want it to become right in my spirit.

Far too many people out there mistake their emotions for spirituality. In other words, they shun logic and reason in order to embrace their emotions as being spiritual unctions and direction from the Spirit. I'm always a believer in what I call "acid tests" for what we think is spiritual, in that if it doesn't align with scripture, then it's likely our own fleshly emotions or corruptions from the father of lies.

This is the basis for the rejection of the fact that there are two gospels at play in what they call the NT. As an Israeli, I fully reject the division considering that the Law was in full force up to the point of Christ's crucifixion, and was still observed and followed by the Church populated only by Jews at the very beginning. They did not continue the practice of sacrifices and peace offerings, but the rest they were still zealous.

If the "single gospel" gang thought this through with simply reading and accepting the differences between what Peter spoke as being the Kingdom Gospel of works toward salvation to the Jews and the Grace Gospel to the Gentiles for salvation that was utterly and completely without works, they instead rely upon their emotions so much so that some even go so far as to accuse Paul of allegedly having only summarized his gospel, as if the list were long and arduous.

The sheer rubbish that so many will pile around themselves in order to project the usual aroma from the garbage of socially engineered theologies has an appeal only to those with itching ears out there because of their love for the false teachers in their lives and all that they hear from them...after all, they all are such nice people...right, some who even raised some of these people who follow them?

The thought of calling their precious "pastor" out onto the carpets of accountability, given that most modern "pastors" are not at all accountable to anyone but the board that hired them to the position of the "hirelings" that they are...even if they FELT the "calling..."

MM