1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Greek Tenses and OSAS

Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by ascund, Sep 12, 2005.

  1. 1jim

    1jim New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2005
    Messages:
    87
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi ascund,


    ascund:

    So which contractual clause of the New Testament do you use to support this statement of conditionality?


    Jim:

    The contract is that everyone who believes in Him has eternal life (John 3:16 and 6:47). That’s the contract. If a believer stops believing and literally no longer believes that Jesus is the Son of God or that he took the sins of the world on Himself or that He rose from the dead, then the contract is broken.

    Jesus says that one must endure to the end (Matthew 24:13) to be saved. That is, one must continue to believe. If one ceases to believe, he has broken the contract. That’s all the author of Hebrews is saying in chapters 3-6. He’s not saying that one has to be a perfect Christian. He’s saying that one must continue to believe.

    Common sense dictates that if the believer has eternal life, then the unbeliever does not have eternal life, regardless of whether or not he ever believed in the past.


    Jim
     
  2. 1jim

    1jim New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2005
    Messages:
    87
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi ascund,


    ascund:

    Second, the “if” clause in verse 14 is really a first class conditional. Here, there is no itsby bitsy wiggle room for contingency. This rhetorical construct states an assumption of truth for the sake of argument. The word for word translation resulted in an unfortunate English conditional allowing the NSNS heresy just enough room to claim this verse as a warning. Wrong! The underlying Greek speaks of the certainty of our position in Christ and the likelihood of walking by the Spirit. It assumes the fact of becoming made partakers in Christ continues in the present walk of sanctification.


    Jim:

    No. Hebrews 3:14 is a third-class condition, the protasis (“if” clause) featuring the indefinite “eanper" (if ever) and the subjunctive “katascwmen" (we should retain), and apodosis (“then” clause) featuring the perfect indicative (probably proleptic/futuristic) “gegonamen" (we have become). This kind of condition covers the entire spectrum of conditionals.


    Jim
     
  3. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    9,025
    Likes Received:
    8
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Quoting Ascund, "It makes Christianity a hopeless one-shot religion", referring the word "impossible" in Hb.6:4.
    Last night unable to sleep I just thought in my simple way about this very word for the understanding of which I have been confronted all my life. Thought I, but it actually tells us WHAT is the impossible, which namely is, that "those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good Word of God, and the powers of the world to come", THAT, "they should fall away (impossible) to renew them again to repentance (one of the "foundation-coctrine of Christ") etc.?
    Am I wrong?
     
  4. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    9,025
    Likes Received:
    8
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    I mean, it says, "For it is impossible (adunaton gar) once being enlightened (hapacs phohtisthentes) ... and falling away, again to renew to repentance (kai parapesontes palin anakainidzein eis metanoian)".
    Why "impossible", "Because" - participles! - "Because that would imply / mean such persons would unto themselves again crucify the Son of God" ... "impossible" supposition!.
    Is that not what the writer has in mind - and says?
     
  5. 1jim

    1jim New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2005
    Messages:
    87
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi Gerhard Ebersoehn,


    Gerhard Ebersoehn:

    I mean, it says, "For it is impossible (adunaton gar) once being enlightened (hapacs phohtisthentes) ... and falling away, again to renew to repentance (kai parapesontes palin anakainidzein eis metanoian)". Why "impossible", "Because" - participles! - "Because that would imply / mean such persons would unto themselves again crucify the Son of God" ... "impossible" supposition!. Is that not what the writer has in mind - and says?


    Jim:

    I don’t think so. All of the accusative participles modify “touV” (the ones), which is the accusative direct object of the infinitive “anakainizein” (to renew). The nominative adjective “adunaton” (impossible) is the predicate adjective to the subject of the implicit (not explicitly written) verb “estin” (it is), the infinitive “anakainizein” (to renew) being the subject. To renew to repentance the ones (who do these things described by the participles) is (implicit verb) impossible (predicate adjective). What is impossible is renewing them to repentance.

    Now, the adjective "adunaton" (impossible) could be either nominative or accusative in the neuter gender, as both are spelled the same. However, only the nominative case makes sense, because the only logical function for this adjective in this passage is as the predicate adjective to the infinitive subject "anakainizein" (to renew).

    6:4 adunaton gar touV apax fwtisqentaV geusamenouV te thV dwreaV thV epouraniou kai metocouV genhqentaV pneumatoV agiou 5 kai kalon geusamenouV qeou rhma dunameiV te mellontoV aiwnoV 6 kai parapesontaV palin anakainizein eiV metanoian anastaurountaV eautoiV ton uion tou qeou kai paradeigmatizontaV

    6:4 For impossible (it is) the ones once having been enlightened, both having tasted the heavenly gift and having been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5 and having tasted the beautiful word of God and the powers of the coming age, 6 and having fallen away, again to renew to repentance, (the ones) crucifying to themselves the Son of God and disgracing


    Jim
     
  6. steaver

    steaver Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    10,443
    Likes Received:
    182
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    That is interesting. I am taking this to the "Does God send His children to hell" thread since this is a thread for Greek.
     
  7. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Jim - nice work.

    And much appreciated at that!

    However there is a big problem with it. You make it appear that the Translators actually knew what they were doing and translated the text correctly such that it has the same meaning in English as it does in Greek.

    For some small group of Christians - that result is totally unnacceptable since they are among those that build their doctrine on the hope that the translators and linguists doing the well respected Bible translations "got their tenses wrong".

    So going to NASB, NKJV, Youngs etc - does nothing to disuade them. Neither does exegeting the text move them to reason.

    So while your work is much appreciated - I am afraid the conclusion will be quite unnacceptable. (To some)

    But I for one - will be adding it to my files.

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  8. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    9,025
    Likes Received:
    8
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Jim,
    I shall wait to hear what Lloyd has to say on this. You make a lot of irrelevant grammatical technicalities, and loose contact with the larger issue. The writer clearly is stating a rhetorical argument almost dramatically - "though we thus speak" - making suppositions of the impossible. First he supposes the impossibility those once enlightened - once for all - if those might fall, they could be "renewed" as were they at first not really renewed. No he says, "we are persuaded of better things of you!" (As John says, a man cannot be born twice, and if born of the Spirit it is for ever!) And then the writer CONTRASTS such as "once were enlightened" with those who "to themselves crucify the Son of God afresh and put Him to open shame" (those NEVER "enlightened") - No says he, it is impossible, a sacrileges idea "for those who were once enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and were made partakers of the Holy Spirit" - that is, it is impossible the OSAS "if they shall fall (away - and the best and every one of them do) that the whole wonder of being born of the Spirit could repeat itself! For that would mean, says this writer, that those redeemed by the omnipotent power and according to the omnipotent power of God actually could be persistent crucifiers of the Son of God. What he means is, this is the most impossible thing of all things impossible!
    Bring that 'content' and 'context' into account when you consider the 9finer0 points of grammar, is all I say!
     
  9. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    9,025
    Likes Received:
    8
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    The writer illustrates the irrepeatability of being born of the Spirit once in verses 7, where he says the rain falling on the earth brings forth either weeds or fruit-bearing plants. It is not fruit-bearing plants that must be planted over again after they had become weeds - which is supposing the ridiculous. The same - exactly the same - as supposing the once enlightened must all over be sown - die and rise - over and over again!
     
  10. 1jim

    1jim New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2005
    Messages:
    87
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi Gerhard Ebersoehn,


    Gerhard Ebersoehn:

    You make a lot of irrelevant grammatical technicalities


    Jim:

    Since when is what the language of the Bible actually says irrelevant? I guess it’s irrelevant to those who intend to interpret the Bible to mean whatever they want it to mean regardless of what it says.


    Gerhard Ebersoehn:

    The writer clearly is stating a rhetorical argument almost dramatically - "though we thus speak" - making suppositions of the impossible. First he supposes the impossibility those once enlightened - once for all - if those might fall, they could be "renewed" as were they at first not really renewed. No he says, "we are persuaded of better things of you!"


    Jim:

    The language says that renewing such a person to repentance is impossible in 3:14. That’s what it says. Everything that the writer warns is possible. That’s why he’s warning the readers. He says that he doesn’t think that the readers have succumbed to the things about which he is warning them, but he warns them of the possibility and encourages them not to go there.


    Jim
     
  11. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    9,025
    Likes Received:
    8
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Look how you contradict yourself, 1jim, "The language says that renewing such a person to repentance is impossible in 3:14. That’s what it says. Everything that the writer warns is possible."
    We differ because we suppose differently about the thing supposed. The thing supposed is to be renewed again. Hebrews says it's the impossible supposed; you say it the possible supposed. It's up to you to change your mind to agree with the writer's.
    I had a quick look at your insistence on the Accusatives of the Participles, and can't see that it makes any difference to the writer's supposition it is impossible to renew again the once enlightened at all as it is impossible to enlighten at all the ones by nature ("unto themselves") crucifying the Son.
     
  12. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    9,025
    Likes Received:
    8
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Quoting Jim, "He says that he doesn’t think that the readers have succumbed to the things about which he is warning them, but he warns them of the possibility and encourages them not to go there."
    In fact the writer encourages his readers to do the things about which he is warning them, namely, "leaving the first things of the doctrine of Christ (like repentance from dead works), let us accept responsibility to press on to the perfection." Exactly his warning is his reason for 'warning': 'Look, it's impossible an enlightened person .... can be enlightened again, seeing "if he shall fall (away), to renew (him) again", will be like laying the foundation of Christian doctrine again - which a total absurdity it could be done!
     
  13. ascund

    ascund New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2005
    Messages:
    767
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi Gerhard

    Remember CONTEXT

    Before moving on to Melchisedec, the author pauses once again to deliver a most remarkable warning. He knows that these Jewish Christians have been stagnating in the baby gospel truths. They have not advanced in Christianity, as is the expected normal progression. And a normal reaction to those who do not advance is to fall far backward! Since they were not advancing in Christ to meet their persecutions, there was a severe danger that they would collapse under their pressures and retreat to Judaism.

    But if they retreated in the face of persecution they would in fact be turning their backs on God and His superior New Covenant. The warning comes as a shock for the words are very stern. Verse 9 is the key to understanding this warning but we must first go through the steps of comprehending what the author means in the preceding verses.

    Before running the courses of the warning, it is necessary to point out that the warning is not dealing with mere “professors” of Jesus Christ. Recall that (chapter 5:11) it is said of these people that they are dull of hearing. It does not say that they are dead in trespasses and sins. Furthermore, that need to be teachers but they now need milk because they are babes. Babes means that they have been birthed into Jesus Christ! An unsaved person doesn’t need milk. They are dead and food doesn’t do them any good whatsoever! Therefore, this warning is written to Christians.

    I would like to talk about a common but wrong interpretation of this warning. Many in the Church of Christ use this verse as a “proof text” that a person can be lost. It is interesting to use this verse to show that teaching to be a false teaching. The word “impossible” is a terrible word for that wrong view. If a Christian can be lost, then it is “impossible” to restore them. That would mean that the only effective witnessing would be to those who are on death’s threshold. Witness to them, get them saved, and then hope that they die quickly before they fall away for there is no chance that once you fall that you can be saved again! How tragic this teaching is!

    The correct interpretation comes from realizing that this passage does not deal with eternal security. The author is writing to the saved Jewish Christians. They have been enlightened, they have tasted of the heavenly gift, they have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, and they have tasted the good Word of God and the powers of the world to come.

    This section shows that these five descriptors reflect the basic Christian experience. So far in this chapter we have been presented with the basic truths and the basic experiences of Christian living. They can be listed as follows:
    1. Repentance - - - - - - - - > Enlightenment
    2. Faith- - - - - - - - - - - > Heaven’s gift
    3. Baptisms - - - - - - - - - > Partake of the Spirit
    4. Laying on of hands - - - - > Word of God
    5. Resurrection of the dead - > Spiritual power
    6. Final Judgment

    The whole mood of this warning reveals that the author is speaking of eternal rewards that depend upon our faithfulness here on earth. In verse 6 he says, “if they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance” – not to salvation. Repentance is the theme of the seven letters to the seven churches as given in Revelation 2 and 3. God says, “repent”, to every church. That is God’s message to believers.

    The author is writing about the fruits of the Spirit and not about the basis or security of our eternal salvation! After a person lives through these basic truths and experiences and then turns his back on Christ, then there is no way to renew him to repentance a second time. That person will suffer great loss of his heavenly rewards!

    1 Corinthians 3:11-15 shows us that if a person’s works are worthless and are burned up in the Day of Judgment, then that person will “suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.” It is a picture of a person coming through a burning house. His hair is singed, he may have some burns, his clothes may have burn spots in them, but the man is still alive! He did not die in the flames.

    It is interesting to realize that the word “fall away” in Greek is from the word “parapito” and means simply “to stumble, to fall down”. It would be impossible to give it the meaning of apostatize. It is the same word used of our Lord when He went into the Garden of Gethsemane, fell on His face, and prayed. There are many examples of people in the Bible who have “fallen away”. The apostle Peter fell, but he was not lost. John Mark failed so miserably on the first missionary journey that when his Uncle Barnabas suggested that he go on the second journey, Paul turned him down. Paul never said that John Mark was lost. But later we see that Paul acknowledge that he had misjudged John Mark and writes “Take Mark and bring him with thee; for he is useful to me for ministering” (2 Timothy 4:11).

    So when a person professes Jesus Christ and then turns away, then hardness of heart settles in. They settle into a life style that makes repentance impossible. This is the same as if they rejected the wonderful works of Christ on the cross and brings scorn to the work of Christ. These people, in their desire to avoid earthly persecution, deny the very Christ that saved them. This indeed is a very severe warning! It is easy to see why many come to the conclusion that a person can be saved and then lost because of this passage.


    we must view this preparatory passage in the flow of the entire book and conclude that it is a terrible thing to crucify afresh the Savior. Such a drastic action will indeed be severely punished! However, that person will emerge from Judgment singed, burned, and with few reward (if any) but will still be saved (1 Corinthians 3:15).

    In fact, this person is likened unto the field that is well watered but only brings forth weeds. The owner burns the weed-infested field and says words of cursing and rebuke over the field. But notice that the owner doesn’t ever sell the field!

    This brings us to verse 9, which is the crux of this passage! In spite of the seriousness of the warning and the associated loss of rewards, the author is convinced of better things for his audience. In spite of the terrible warning just given, the author uses the word “BELOVED”. The author has done his duty. The shock of such a warning is now over and he rushes to follow up by reiterating his love for them. This is the first and last time in the book that the author calls them beloved. It is only right that the term is used just after the fiercest of the warnings! The author is ready to assume that his readers are all saved and showing forth real evidence of their salvation.

    His warning was given with the idea that the shock of the warning would better prepare them for deeper spiritual truths. It was as if he was thinking, “If I didn’t love you so much, I wouldn’t speak this way. I would rather scare you with words than have to endure sorrow over your backsliding.”

    One of the important things that accompany salvation is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. This is the main characteristic of the New Covenant! Although the Spirit can be grieved (Ephesians 4:30) God is constantly working to bring out the best in His children (Philippians 1:6). The potential for each Christian is truly amazing.

    The flow of this chapter now leads to the blessing side of this same warning.

    Lloyd
     
  14. ascund

    ascund New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2005
    Messages:
    767
    Likes Received:
    0
    Greetings

    Great comment!
    Stupendous logic! Many troubles with curiosities of a single word can be straightened out with an appeal to the larger known truths of God's Word.

    As an ex-mechanic, we often had a silly saying: If a little hammer can't get, use a bigger one!

    Contracts is a near area to what I do now! Nothing in government procurement of missiles is done without contracts. If there is any disagreement, contracts rule!


    THERE IS NO ESCAPE OR TERMINATION CLAUSE IN GOD'S NEW COVENANT.


    The onus is upon BobRyan and 1jim to manufacture the NT clause that would allow a believer to be cast into hell.

    Don't stay awake until they find it [​IMG]
    Lloyd [​IMG]
     
  15. ascund

    ascund New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2005
    Messages:
    767
    Likes Received:
    0
    In Fact


    Although I won't bet for money, I bet neither BobRyan nor 1jim know where God's New Testament clauses are given.

    I will make a public apology if they can turn to the contract.

    Lloyd
     
  16. steaver

    steaver Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    10,443
    Likes Received:
    182
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    That was Jim's quote Lloyd.

    God Bless!
     
  17. ascund

    ascund New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2005
    Messages:
    767
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wait a minute

    How come I keep getting you confused?

    That was a great quote! I thougt 1jim was the arminian here.

    Old age is not a fun thing to deal with. I am certain that I am falling off the edge into altzheimer's. At this stage I yet can recognize the coming symptoms. I saw relatives with this saddening condition. Now I follow.

    But praise the LORD, I'll be a mindless saint!
    Lloyd
     
  18. 1jim

    1jim New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2005
    Messages:
    87
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi ascund,


    ascund:

    The onus is upon BobRyan and 1jim to manufacture the NT clause that would allow a believer to be cast into hell.


    Jim:

    What?!

    Where did you ever get the idea that I thought that a believer would go to hell? That’s where unbelievers go, whether or not they ever believed before.

    The onus is on you to show where the Bible teaches that a believer cannot stop believing and thus become an unbeliever.

    The Bible is full of assurances to believers, to those who continue to believe. One must believe in order to have these assurances. If one chooses to no longer believe, then that from which he walks away is not forced on him; he forfeits the inheritance.

    Eternal security applies to believers, not to unbelievers. As long as one believes, he is eternally secure.

    The notion that one cannot lose one’s salvation as long as one continues to believe is Biblical. The notion that one cannot lose one’s salvation even if one stops believing is NOT Biblical. According to this latter view, an unbeliever is saved just as well as a believer is saved, which is NOT Biblical. According to this latter view, once a believer always a believer, EVEN IF ONE NO LONGER BELIEVES. This is nonsense. The truth is obvious: One is a believer if he believes, and one is an unbeliever if he does not believe. The fact that an unbeliever USED TO believe does not make him a believer. If he does not believe, then he is an unbeliever, regardless of whether or not he ever previously believed.

    The OSAS doctrine was INVENTED to calm the fears of believers who were worried about their salvation. Whereas it is Biblical that believers should not be worried about their salvation, because they are secure as long as they believe, it is NOT Biblical that unbelievers are just as secure as long as they USE TO believe. What nonsense.

    If one is an unbeliever, then he is not worried about his salvation; he isn’t worried about anything, because he doesn’t believe such things, even though he may have believed in the past.

    The OSAS doctrine takes the Biblical idea that the believer is eternally secure one step farther into the NON-Biblical idea that even someone who USED TO believe but NO LONGER believes is likewise eternally secure. Thus, the OSAS doctrine ends up teaching that UNBELIEVERS have eternal life, which is NOT Biblical.


    Jim
     
  19. ascund

    ascund New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2005
    Messages:
    767
    Likes Received:
    0
    Greetings 1jim

    So you don't know where God's clauses reside?

    I don't want to give up an apology. You'll have to wait 90 minutes until I can really thump you here.

    Meanwhile, God's promises are sure. The onus is an easy challenge for me.

    God’s promises for the believer’s security are numerous. Consider the following incomplete list:
    God promises us that we shall not perish (John 10:28-29).
    God has already glorified the believer (Rom 8:29-30).
    God will confirm every believer to the end (1 Cor 1:8).
    We stand in the power of God (1 Cor 2:5).
    God has established us in Christ (2 Cor 1:21-22).
    God has given the earnest of His Spirit (2 Cor 5:5-7).
    God has made us accepted (Eph 1:6).
    God has quickened us together with Christ (Eph 2:5-6).
    God began the good work in us and will continue to do it (Phil 1:6).
    God has made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance (Col 1:12-13).
    God has delivered us into the Kingdom of His dear Son (Col 1:12-13).
    God has delivered us from the power of darkness (Col 1:13).
    God has translated us into the kingdom of His dear Son (Col 1:13).
    The Lord is faithful, Who shall establish you (1 Thes 5:23-24 & 2 Thes 3:3).
    The Lord shall deliver me from every evil (2 Tim 4:18).
    The Lord will preserve me unto His heavenly kingdom (2 Tim 4:18).
    God reserves a place for us (1 Pet 1:4-5; Jude 1).
    God is able to keep us from falling (Jude 24).
    God will present us blameless before the presence of His glory (Jude 24).
    God has given us all things that pertain to life and godliness (2 Pet 1:3).
    God will not let our feet be move [from a position of justification], he does not slumber . . . He shall preserve you [the believer] from all evil: He shall preserve thy soul (Psalm 121:3,7).
    We shall not slide [from salvation] (Psalm 26:1).
    We can know that we are saved (1 John 5:13).
    God is faithful to deliver what He has promised (Heb 10:23).
    This list makes pretty easy common-sense reading.

    In 90 minutes, I'll add good Bible contractual stuff the likes of which it appears you've never been taught.

    Lloyd
     
  20. ascund

    ascund New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2005
    Messages:
    767
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hey 1jim

    Like taking candy from a baby. You CoCers are so focused on your self-righteous way to please God that your whole denomination has put an unspoken ban on God's contracts.

    If you are ever taught and learn God's contracts, then you can't remain a Christ denier. OK - I'm wrong here. I have a friend you I've shown this too and he dismissed it as irrelevant.

    You can lead a horse to water . . . . .
    Lloyd
     
Loading...