Salvation of the Soul (purchased possession)

I've done it four times now. If you haven't gotten it by now a fifth time isn't going to help I don't think. Like I said I don't know why you are clinging to this doctrine so much but you obviously are going to believe what you want to believe despite what Scripture says. And you are entitled to do that if you so choose.

 

The person who is the soul and the person who is the spirit are not two different persons. It is one Person -- and a person CAN NOT be BOTH lost AND saved!

There is no text in all of scripture saying "soul lost BUT SPIRIT SAVED".

There is no text in all of scripture saying "spirit lost BUT SOUL SAVED".

There is no text in all of scripture saying that you can divide the soul and spirit as to different people - they are ONE person. No "body sharing".

The PERSON thinks. The PERSON will go to heaven or hell.

This is incredibly easy to read in scripture. "WHOSOEVER WILL" is not a reference to "just the spirit".

And that is Steaver's side - that has truth in it.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Matt 18 "Forgiveness revoked" for the PERSON
John 15 Cast out of the vine of Christ and burned in the fire --
Romans 11 REMOVED as a branch from Christ exactly as the lost Jews.

Romans 6 the "reward" for evil deeds is the second death.

2Cor 5:10 we must ALL stand before the judgment seat of Christ - to be judged according to deeds DONE IN THE BODY (i.e. deeds of the PERSON) whether they be good OR evil.

These texts are NOT about "less candy in heaven" as J. Jump points out.

These are all J Jump's texts - the part where he does have truth in his argument.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Again your argument makes no sense. If we were to use this Steaver logic then we would have to say that the simple gospel message of salvation by grace through faith isn't true either, because there are many people that struggle with the message before they are saved.

Just because one struggles with the Truth, doesn't mean it isn't true. That's just silly.

I don't even understand this statement. The Holy Spirit doesn't fight. It is we as fallen humans that wrestle with Truth sometimes.

Well that is certainly your opinion and you are entitled to it, but it's wrong. Never once have I said the blood of Christ takes a back seat. The blood of Christ is the very foundation! So please don't accuse me of believing "your" opinion.

Man you are just desperate to find "something" aren't you This "doctrine" is strong meat. That doesn't mean that every verse of Scripture that supports this doctrine is difficult . . . wow.

Utter nonsense. All you are doing is trying to shovel "your" opinion of this doctrine onto its believers.

Wow so now we are supposed to drop what we believe and believe what you believe because of some songs. Again . . . wow. By the way the blood of Christ IS the central focus. Without the shedding of blood there is NO remision of sins! Can't get any more important than that.

That's called an emotional high. The same thing can happen if you watch that home improvement show on ABC. One must be VERY careful about letting their emotions rule the moment!

Well the only thing that I can remember of that song is "what can wash away my sins . . . nothing but the blood of Jesus." So I would agree with that statement. And yes there are a number of hymns that are great songs, but theologically incorrect. That shouldn't come as any surprise. Whether one believes "this" doctrine or not that is true.

I can't believe you now want us to turn away from this because of songs.

Well I can't speak for everyone, but I don't think many would take issue with this . . . I just want people to let the text say what the text says instead of approaching the text with a slant. We are told that Scripture contains milk, meat and strong meat, so I'm not sure why you would try to argue that point? Some texts are easy to understand, while some texts are more complicated. I don't know why you would try to argue that point. You are the only person that I have ever come across that says the entire Bible is easy to understand. To me that's a pretty bold and arrogant statement to make. I don't know of any theologians that have even made that statement.

:laugh: Thanks for the good chuckle. I needed that. That's just a riot. :laugh:

 

Bob again just because you type this doesn't make it so. I know that's your "mo," but it's just not true. It is possible to be lost and saved at the same time. Scripture declares it to be so.

And while you are correct there is one person . . . that person is made up of three separate components. We are made in the image of God three in one. And yes those three things can be separated, and its not hard to see that, where one believes in the gospel of the kingdom or not.

 

Steaver, you are driving a Cadillac. JJump keeps sending you Volkswagen parts - for free. That's how he wants you to keep your Caddy running.

Seriously -- I'm expecting another translation of the Bible at any time now, written by J. Jump and his teacher. They will have all the verses they choose changed to reflect their doctrine, and/or they'll footnote with "that's not talking about the soul" or "that's not talking about the spirit" or "that's not talking about the body."

You can put it on your library shelf right next to the Book of Mormon, the New World Translation, and the Bible according to Kenneth Copeland.

In fact, JJump, perhaps you could give us a one-time list of all the scriptures that you have to "adjust" to fit your doctrine. Get the reference right, but then reword each verse so that it means what you say it means. Since you are convinced in your doctrine, you'll have no problem adjusting the words in each verse. That way, we'll can compare all of your version to the original. Maybe we'll all be enlightened!

:1_grouphug: <----Wow! Look at this! Here's what it REALLY means!

 

What’s wrong with J. Jumps interpretation? Well, short answer…it conflicts with yours, and what makes yours better than his? But hey…this is what Sola Scriptura is all about huh?


-

 

I suppose your are a King James only person huh. Even if not maybe you can tell me why almost every translation that is readily available for purchase "never" translates portions of Matthew and John correctly.

Go back to a Greek text. Anyone of your chosing, because it doesn't matter. Every reference in Matthew, where any of the Bible translators that you deem to be acceptable, have translated the phrase kingdom of heaven. You will see that in the Greek text (again all of them that I am aware of) the phrase is actually the kingdom of the heavens. The article "the" is always used and heaven is always plural. Yet somehow your acceptable translators missed that one. But I guess that's okay huh. That one really doesn't matter huh?

And by the way the first first manuscript, the aleph text also has the same phrase in John 3.

I don't think we want to get into a translation discussion do we? I mean if you believe one version to be inspired that is your business, but it doesn't make it so.

Yeah . . . here you go. Are you ready? Got your pen and paper handy. NONE. There's my list. Not a single one of them. Sorry to disappoint you.

By the way DQ I wouldn't quit my day job, because comedy really isn't in your future. :sleeping_2:

 

That's what I keep asking, but no one wants to step up to the plate. Everybody is a bench warmer these days I guess. One would think those splinters start to hurt after a while.

 

Some people like being told 'what to think' J. Jump, and when you challenge or encourage someone to step out of their comfort zone and think for themselves, they get defensive.


-

 

Boy you hit the nail on the head there my friend!

 

Well that explains a lot, and answers my question that I raised previously. But it seems odd that you have "no" person trail. You've "never" been to church? You have "never" had a Sunday School teacher? You have been self-taught the entire way through Scripture?

How do you know that to be true 100%?

There are actually a couple of people that I know of that discovered the difference between eternal salvation and the kingdom on their own study and it was only at that time did they start searching for others who had discovered the same thing. So again your theory holds very little water.

Well to be perfectly honest and it certainly isn't to be rude, I'm just not interested in what you have to say. I'm not interested in what Arlen Chitwood has to say, or Watchman Nee or Charles Stanely or _______________ you fill in the blank. I am only interested in what the Scripture has to say. That doesn't mean the Holy Spirit doesn't use men to teach us, because He does. Well at least some of us . But unless they are saying what Scripture says their words mean very little.

So what you "think" about the situation has no relevance whatsoever. You are most certainly entitled to your opinion, but it is just that - opinion.

Well from what I have been told (I don't put a lot of credence and study in the so-called church "fathers" - that's for another discussion), there is at least a couple of them that touched on the subject when dicussing aionios life.

It truly is amazing. I continued to be amazed the more I look into Scripture and see how things connect. And while most of Christendom would't admit as I am sure you will deny it as well, most of Christendom doesn't want to hear the Truth about much more than grace through faith apart from works. They want to have their own brand of religion that doesn't take them out of their comfort zone where as long as you are saved everything is okay and you can just coast the rest of the way home.

The Truth is there if we desire to learn it. But that doesn't mean the Truth is always easy to take in. Again Steaver if everything was as easy as you think it is there wouldn't be 500 zillion denominations. Obviously things aren't as simple as you would like to think.

Again I would love to visit with your brother and his pastor. How about passing along an email address or something?

 

Neither. That is Steaver speak, not Scripture. And you have way too much Steaver speak instead of just Scripture IMO.

 

I've had this tactic used on me so many times, I've come to expect it.

Because the opponent cannot answer the scriptural arguments of Jjump, Myself, James Newman, Joey Faust, Arlen Chitwood, etc., they cry that history is on their side.

"NNE HAS EVER TAUGHT THAT DOCTRINE!!!"

So you then show them the literally hundreds of well respected published, teachers that taught ME throughout history (RE Neighbour Robert Govett, GH Lang, SS Craig, JA Seiss, WH Griffith Thomas, WF Roadhouse, http://www.schoettlepublishing.com/booksonline.htm just to name a few)
they cry:

"YOU'RE FOLLOWING A MAN!! I FOLLOW THE BIBLE"

What a silly trap.

Lacy

 

As is the case with your claims about spirit saved while soul lost. What you "need" is a Bible text that says that - which is my point above - which makes my statement true.

Until you actually respond WITH the text that says that - you are stuck.

BTW - it is instructive that your response to my statement saying that you had not text for that view of yours - was to simply respond again with "no text".


I know that's your "mo," but it's just not true.

If youi had a text saying "Soul list WHILE at the same time spirit saved" you would have posted it just then.

Instead you give another "no text" assertion.

That is instructive.

Not three seperate persons where you could save one but not the others. It is just ONE person and the PERSON must be saved or lost.

There is no escaping this. You can not be BOTH. Sorry but - no purgatory!

In Christ,

Bob