You may know (absolutely) ye have eternal life

I do not profess to be a mind reader, to know one's intents. I can only go by the words one posts. And those were your words, as I noted.

Incidentally, I have read every post on both threads referred to in my own post, although I normally post replies as I come to a post, not read the whole thread, then backtrack.

FTR, if I, in fact am "exhibiting an unusual love of unwarranted animosity that this board could do without," as you claim, why is it I have not been contacted, in any way, by any Moderator and/or Administrator or other "BB Brass" concerning this?

I do have one theological question, however. Would you agree with this statement? None of it? All of it? Part of it?

This happens to be a portion of the Doctrinal statement adopted by my own church, FTR.

Ed

 

HP: Ed, I am sorry but I do not at this time feel compelled to answer your question. It has nothing to do with the thread that I can see, and your past comments clearly appear to me that you are on a witchhunt to no good end.

HP: One would have to be new to this board and or extremely naïve to not understand the ‘why’s’ you ask about.

 

HP: There are times Steaver when one does not fell compelled in the least to answer another’s questions for reasons best kept to themselves. Your questions happen to be of that nature, and now is such a time.

 

Since the thread has to do with one may "know absolutely" that one has eternal life, for one thing, I was suggesting that the portion of the doctrinal statement from my church is effectively saying the same things along the same lines, from its appearance.

BTW, one poster recently "banned" was about as strong an advocate of "free grace" as am I, whom I do not think you would be much in agreement with, either. And I fully am an advocate of "free grace," as you would likely know. I suspect that position is fully consistent with "OSAS" although that is a term I seldom use on any regular basis. I don't even particularly like the words "free grace" (The phrase is redundant, by definition.), but do use it for 'thumbnail' identification purposes.

I will also say that I have seen more than a handful of posters, whom I would mostly agree with a couple more almost to a 100% agreement on doctrine "banned," over my 2 yr. 8 mos. on the BB. And I have likewise seen some with whom I have had multiple disagreements from Day One still be around for that same entire time, as well.

So I suggest your 'sly implication' of nefariousness, on the part of the BB brass, at least as to the "whys" of any 'action' that has been or not been taken regarding me, is unwarranted, at best.

I have no "in" with any of the 'BB powers that be,' in any manner whatsoever. I do not personally know any of them, and to my knowledge, in fact, have only personally known 3 BB Members during my time here, - one of whom joined the Board, and has made a grand total of 5 posts in 2 1/2 years, and happens to be one of my closest personal friends for over 40 years, and joined because I was on the board; A second was my college pastor also about 40 years ago, and I did not know he was a member until sometime after I joined, and I have not seen him face to face for something over 35 years, and the third one is the lone individual I met that is a BB member, that I met after joining the BB.

Ed

 

I have wondered too if Bob Ryan is ok. I hope you'll check in Bob and let us know. Even though I disagree with your SDA doctrines, I do like to read your posts on creation.

 

HP, your view cleary contradicts 1John 5:13. You have refused to answer Steaver's question.
Here is a quote by you that seems to apply this situation quite well.

Does this apply to you as well as to others?

 

Aren't the conditions clearly in the verse: hearing and believing. I am not a Greek scholar (nor any type of scholar for that matter :laugh: )but the words hearing and believing are present participles that make Young's Literal Translation appear to be very accurate:

Young's Literal Translation
'Verily, verily, I say to you -- He who is hearing my word, and is believing Him who sent me, hath life age-during, and to judgment he doth not come, but hath passed out of the death to the life.

I know some hold to Unconditional Election (the "T" in the TULIP) but clearly the condition of believing is very clearly taught in scripture. I think believing is what saves us; an ongoing belief, not a one time act (I know it is God who saves, so don't go there). That is where I probably differ from HP who I think overemphasizes practical holiness, obedience, and freedom from sin to maintain salvation.

Peter describes the Elect as those "Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time." I Peter 1:5

 

HP: Salvation is of the Lord. Nothing we do has any merit to initiate or maintain our salvation. Conditions are not meritorious in any way. They are always thought of in the sense of ‘not without which’, not ‘that for the sake of.’ When a person receives a pardon, it is not without the consideration of certain conditions. A person does not maintain the pardon by obedience, but neither will a pardon for one offense keep one from re-incurring the full penalty of the law if in fact one resorts again to breaking the law. A pardon only speaks to crimes that are past. Salvation only speaks to sins that are past. There is no blanket pardon for future infractions of the law, and salvtions hope does not grant to one imunity from the guilt and possible punishment of future sins. Ro 3:25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of SINS THAT ARE PAST, through the forbearance of God;

Our works do not keep us saved, but neither will we maintain our hope of salvation apart from obedience. Remember the prison illustration? I believe it sets forth clearly the distinction between ‘conditions for’ and the ‘grounds of’ a pardon and or salvation.

Heb 3:6 But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, IF we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end.

How big a word is that little word 'if.'

 

Conditions? No. Common sense? Yes. [/quote]
You don't find the same type of tenses in the epistles. Why would that be?

In the Book of Acts, it is straightforward command:
Acts 16:31 and they said, `Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved--thou and thy house;'

In Romans:
Romans 10:13 for every one--whoever shall call upon the name of the Lord, he shall be saved.'
--It is a one time act.

Romans 5:1 Having been declared righteous, then, by faith, we have peace toward God through our Lord Jesus Christ,
--It is a one time act, and here it shows that it cannot be continuous for it is a past action. It has been completed.

Why the difference from the gospels?
One cannot ignore the context.

John 5:1-2 After this there was a feast of the Jews; and Jesus went up to Jerusalem.
2 Now there is at Jerusalem by the sheep market a pool, which is called in the Hebrew tongue Bethesda, having five porches.
--Jesus was at Jerusalem, on the Sabbath Day. He had just worked a miracle. Now in the Temple he has an audience, the Jews, and has been speaking to them of why He has the authority to do miracles; His claim to deity; and now His claim to give eternal life.

In the context of these claims (his words), and his miracle (his works) he says these words:
"He who is hearing my word and is believing Him..."
The context were the Jews, and/or others that were listening to him. Right there and then, those people that were hearing him and believing what Him could have eternal life. It is in the continuous because his audience is standing right before him as he is speaking those words. This is a gospel giving an historical account, not an epistle giving a doctrinal dissertation. The words therefore must be taken in its context.
The truth remains the same.
When one hears his word and believes on Him that sent him has everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation, but is passed from death unto life.
--As taught by the epistles it is a one time act.

To call hearing and believing as conditions for salvation is ridiculous.
Neither one are considered "works" which is meant by conditions.
It is obvious that a person must hear the gospel. How can hearing be classified as a condition. This is nothing but a red herring. It is a command given to believers to go and preach the gospel to all that are in the world. They need to hear.
They need to believe.
Belief is not a work, and is never considered a work. Why do some posters keep insisting that "faith" is a work when God says it isn't. Take your argument up with God.

 

To the measure I absolutely believe Christ is God and Saviour Omnipotent to the same measure I absolutely believe His having saved me.

 

"To call hearing and believing as conditions for salvation is ridiculous ..." because salvation without hearing and believing as its way and means, is ridiculous.

 

DHK:
"They need to believe.
Belief is not a work, and is never considered a work. Why do some posters keep insisting that "faith" is a work when God says it isn't."

GE:
Of course to believe is a work; it is a command, and faith is the obedience to God's Command to believe, and therefore, is the work of the believer. The truth and fact of it not in the least detracts from faith being the gift of God's Grace and favour. So no man can boast, but in the grace of God through Jesus Christ.

 

Steaver, I want to say, Amen!

 

Now you have me confused! I cannot see that you two actually disagree???

Regeneration is the only condition of eternal salvation - a condition which God ONLY, can, and does fulfill --- in us and for us and on our behalf but without our help.
Perseverance also is the only condition of eternal salvation - a condition which God ONLY, can, and does fulfill --- in us and for us and on our behalf and ALSO, without our help. Christ, is "the everything in everyone fulfilling Fullness of God". 'The ONLY condition' -- that's why there can be TWO, 'ONLY' conditions!