Eternal Security...(Revised May 2015)

[crochet1949]

The fruit of the Holy spirit coming to indwell a person Will make a difference in the person

You keep asserting this. I'm asking you to show it from Scripture.

Let me give you an unrelated example. Suppose I said to you that some people have the supernatural power, given by the Holy Spirit, to just know who is "really" saved and who isn't. Or suppose I said to you that the Bible is clear that Jesus will return on an evenly numbered year(e.g., 2018, not 2017). Or suppose I said that people with the gift of healing also have the gift of tongues. Or suppose I said that true Christians will work at least one miracle in their lives.

I hope you would disagree with all those statements. I suspect you would tell me as much, offer some Scripture that goes against what I said, and more importantly, you would ask me where the Bible actually says any of those things. Now, suppose I couldn't show you a single verse that said any of them. Would you believe me? OF COURSE NOT.

Now, you are just asserting, without providing ANY biblical evidence, that all true Christians will at some point bear the fruit of the Spirit. You've cited a verse that tells me what the fruit of the Spirit IS. I don't doubt that. I'm asking you for a verse that says that ALL Christians at some point will, in fact, bear that fruit. Because, right now, you are in the position of making a very serious theological claim and offering absolutely no biblical evidence. And worse yet, while you aren't seeing it I grant, the claim you are making contradicts the gospel itself. Let me be very, very blunt here. If a person believes what you are saying, then they do cannot logically believe the gospel.

Thankfully, people believe contradictory ideas all the time, because most of us don't take the time to ensure that all of our beliefs are consistent with one another. But my point is that what you are saying actually contradicts the gospel. And you should take that very, very seriously.

So, AGAIN, I'm asking you--what verse in Scripture do you have that says that ALL Christians will bear the fruit of the Spirit.

And while I wait for you to provide the verse that is nowhere found in Scripture (because it is not only unbiblical, but anti-biblical), I'll direct you to Luke 8:14 as an example that says that some Christians never bear any fruit.

Let's look at Galatians 2:20 for a moment --" I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me."
"Christ lives in me." -- the believer has Christ living in him -- the attributes of Christ are -- love, joy (Jesus others you), peace (that He gives us) -- and our bodies are the temple of the Holy Spirit.

[Jac3510]

Yes, Christ lives in us. Where, again, does that say that all Christians therefore produce the fruit of the Spirit? Yes, our bodies are the temple of the Holy Spirit? Where does that say that all Christians therefore produce the fruit of the Spirit?

Let me try it this way. What you are doing is drawing a false inference and not stating plainly a premise you are working on. I'll show you. Your logic goes something like this:

1. Christ lives us me
2. ?
3. Therefore, I will produce the fruit of the Spirit

1. I am the temple of the Holy Spirit?
2. ?
3. Therefore, I will produce the fruit of the Spirit

1. The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, etc.
2. ?
3. Therefore, I will produce [or better, the Spirit will produce through me] love, joy, peace, etc.

Do you see how you are making an unstated assumption? Now in all three cases, the ONLY way to draw the conclusion--the only premise that works--is something like, "Christ always produces the fruit of the Spirit in those in whom He indwells," "The Holy Spirit always produces His fruit in those whom He indwells," and "If the Holy Spirit lives in me, He will produce His fruit in me," respectively.

That--the missing logical premise--is what I'm asking you for Scripture to say. You aren't providing that. You just keep giving me statements about what the fruit of the Spirit is or that we are indwelt by Christ or the Spirit or whatever. But that's not what I'm objecting to. My point is that your missing premise is not in the Bible and, in fact, is directly contradicted by the Bible. And moreover, your missing premise, if taken seriously, contradicts the biblical statements about the gospel and therefore directly results in a false gospel.

So, again, I'm going to ask you: what Scripture do you have to support your missing premises?

[crochet1949]

What constitutes salvation? How does a person Know they are 'saved'?

[Jac3510]

Believing (which is to say, trusting) in Jesus Christ. See John 1:12; 3:16; 5:24; 6:47; 11:24-27; 20:31; Acts 16:31; Rom 3:22; 4:1-5; Eph 2:8-9; 1 Tim 3:16; 1 John 5:13, and so on. I'm not sure what the scare quotes around "saved" are about.

[Philip]

jgbg: I am not saying that we are saved by works and you know it. The works that the bible says that Christians will do are done by our faith

But you undoubtedly are asserting that you are MAINTAINING and COMPLETING your salvation through your own ability to persevere - which clearly would involve works. And if YOU leave the Holy Spirit, this would indicate your inability or lack of desire to persevere. So what you postulate is a Jesus-PLUS scenario: "Jesus saves, but I must maintain my own ETERNAL life." First place, why does one have to maintain ETERNAL life? So what you are saying is, ultimately, that your salvation is in your own sinful hands and is dependent upon YOU to complete it. That's not "entering into ETERNAL life," but into an insecure flirtation with, very likely, TEMPORARY life. And so you're asserting that your security for eternity is ultimately up to you and not Christ???!!! No one could have confidence in such contingent "eternal" life. Wow, eternal life that may well just be temporary - wouldn't one call that and oxymoron? How insecure you must be, wondering if you're not, one day, gonna screw it all up.

Have you ever stopped to think that EVERY person God saves, He can see the rest of their lives, actions and decisions - which would obviously included any potential falling away. So God saves one to what HE calls eternal life, only to realize He made a mistake, because He chose to save someone without the self-discipline to persevere???!!! As IF He couldn't see those that would eventually fail at this. Any person who believes this is an individual who has no certainty of salvation, and no trust that God will see Him through to the end of His days. And thus Philippians 1:6 was simply deluded, wishful thinking?

[crochet1949]

Jac --don't know what you mean by 'scare quotes' around 'saved'. I was meaning 'whatever word you want to use' such as 'saved , born-again, a child of God, etc.

You listed Lots of Scriptures --
John 1:12 "Yet to all who received Him, to those who believed in His name, He gave the right to become children of God---"
3:16 "For God so loved the world that He gave.....that whosoever believeth in Him will not perish but have everlasting life."
5:24 "I tell you the truth, whoever hers my word and believes Him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life."


Lots of good Scripture -- I would have included 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 vs 2 By this gospel you are saved...
. vs3 ..that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures and that He appeared to Peter..."

Romans 10:9 - 10 "That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved."
Romans 6: 4 "We were therefore buried with Him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life."
'a new life'.

[B. W.]

No the person leaves the Holy Spirit. The bible never says you can not leave the Holy Spirit.

If you stop believing you are leaving the Holy Spirit not the Holy Spirit leaving you.

God will never leave a Christian it is us who leaves God.

what are you laughing about now?

jpbg33 and others reading who think a true born again Christian can lose his or her salvation let's look at the proof text most often used to support this claim which are from Hebrews chapter Six and Ten.

Hebrews Chapter Six

For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6 if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame.Heb 6:4-6 NKJV

This is simply stating that it is impossible for those who are Born Again to fall away because for them to return to salvation would involve putting Jesus' work of the cross and Jesus into a state of open shame. Read it several times. If one always needs to perform works of repentance to be renewed to a state salvation then they crucify Christ again putting Him to an open shame, contempt...

How so? By showing all people this: God is really weak, he let's his own walk away from him if they sin. God is sure a hard one to please, so why try... who needs a God like that anyways.

If the verses from chapter Six meant one can lose God's gift of salvation then the writer contradicts his own premise in chapter seven:

Therefore He is also able to 'save to the uttermost (Greek reads σωζειν eis to παντελες)' those who come to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them, Heb 7:25 NKJV

Jesus our High Priest is able to save his own to the uttermost because he does what? Now read Isaiah 55:11 again...

Therefore, Hebrews chapter six verses do not teach one can lose his or her salvation for to do so mocks the
Lord's ability to save to the uttermost and hold to contempt his own words of intercession are not enough to keep one saved, Isaiah 55:11. It is impossible for a believer to fall away due to the nature of the one interceding.

Hebrews chapter Ten

Heb 10:26,27 NKJV, For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, 27 but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries.

Context of chapter ten indicates the animal sacrificial system, forsaking the assembly, trampling the Son of God underfoot, counting the blood of the covenant by which sanctifies one as a common thing, insulting the Spirit of grace and persecution. Verses 32 and 33 helps explain what is going on during that time...

Heb 10:32,33 NKJV, But recall the former days in which, after you were illuminated, you endured a great struggle with sufferings: 33 partly while you were made a spectacle both by reproaches and tribulations, and partly while you became companions of those who were so treated...

The church to whom the book of Hebrews was written went through terrible suffering and persecution. To avoid such suffering you had folks inside the assembly forsake the assembly by betrayal and selling out members of the church to be rounded up and tortured or killed for profit. They themselves would then revert back to the animal sacrifices. Such folks that did this were like Judas Iscariot the son of perdition and not a child of God. That is to whom the writer is referring to directly by context of chapter ten as well as historical accounts.

People often came to the church for the benefits of the food provided, the welfare offered, and made a pretense of believing in Jesus' name just as those in John 2:23-26 did. When the cr-p hit the fan when severe persecution arose, these folks sold out the Christians in similar fashion as Judas did to Jesus and the 11 other disciples. These folks were never saved - these were false brethren.

Their forsaking acts of betrayal trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he or she was sanctified a common unclean worthless thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace by their betrayal of actual believing Christians to the persecuting authorities and then going back to animal sacrifice system to atone for sins. Historical accounts show they did this for profit, to make money.

We do not practice that system of animal sacrifice, if one did, then they never trusted in Jesus's work on the cross and Resurrection unto new life. Since animal sacrifices are not practiced then Heb 10:26 cannot apply to born again Christians in the church as I know of none going back to that system. Notice the context of chapter Ten such as in Heb 10:1-18 as it proves this very thing leading to verse 26 and beyond.

Now read Hebrews 13:5, 6 NKJV, Let your conduct be without covetousness; be content with such things as you have. For He Himself has said, "I WILL NEVER LEAVE YOU NOR FORSAKE YOU." 6 So we may boldly say: "THE LORD IS MY HELPER; I WILL NOT FEAR. WHAT CAN MAN DO TO ME?"

Who will never leave us or forsake us? Which lines up with Heb 7:25 for proper interpretation from the writer of Hebrews himself. Lining up also with what Jesus himself said in John 10:25,26,27,28,29,30.

There are sheep who are not His, not born again at all, who for profit spy out the church, identifying believers to be rounded up to be tortured, killed, imprisoned, etc...

There are false brethren in the church and being false were never saved to begin with.

So jpbg33 and those who think one can lose salvation: Have you for profit spied out the church, identifying believers to be rounded up to be tortured, killed, imprisoned, etc... and / or reverted back to the animal sacrifice system?

If so then Hebrews 10:26 applies to you. If not, you are saved to the uttermost by words of intercession by Jesus Christ the true eternal High Priest just like the rest of us. You too like us, are being sanctified and struggle with sin and learn to overcome sin as well as learning to know the Lord personally each and everyday. We too do acts of repentance by the 1 John 1:9 way and are on the same team empowered by the Holy Spirit to help others along their way better know the Lord deeper.

Here is what the September 30 devotional calendar from In Touch Ministries says:

Jesus forgives you. he never holds a grudge or puts up a barrier to forgiving all your sins. He completely erases all your past sinful acts - He alone has the full capacity to forgive and forget... Jesus never condemns you for your failures. To the contrary, when you fall, He picks you up, dust you off, and helps you to move forward in your life. He teaches you important lessons from your mistakes so you can experience strength and wholeness.

Quoted from Dr Charles Stanley devotional Calendar from the 9/30 date

Blessings
-
-
-

[jpbg33]

accually what I am doing is call interpreting scripture with scripture not the dictionary.

just because I use a verse and then use another verse doesn't mean you proved me wrong on the verse I used first. It just means I am using another verse to show you were you are wrong in what you have said about the verse. You haven't proven me wrong on the other verse. You just used something wrong to prove me wrong and I use another verse to show that the point that you are making about the verse is wrong.

so when I use a verse and say what it mean. Then you make a comment how I am miss inturpriting it and then you say what you think it means. I am pulling verses out and showing you where you are wrong. You have yet to presented a good argument. People here are over looking that becauses they agree with you, but that does not make your argument good.
We have moved on from other points but in a good debate you can pull out points you made earlier and use them again if they support your argument.

The point you make about Greek is wrong.

To say that in Greek, if it says while you currently believe you get something eternal. Then you can not loose it if you stop believing. that isn't right.

the only true mean of that verse is if you believe when you die then you have eternal life.

that verse is obviously talking about what happended to a believer when they die.

you your self said it is saying that in English. Then you said but it was originally written in Greek, Then you say in Greek you have to over look the present believe part and go to the eternal part. then you go on to the meaning of the word life.

Well people that were way smaerter then you or me wrote it in Ehglish to mean if you die believing then you have everlasting life.

they would not have put that if you currently believing when you die you have ever lasting life if that wasn't what it meant.

the word believed is in the bible so they obviously knew about it and if you were right about just believing at some point in your life then they would have used the word "believed not believeth".

you are not only just skipping over currently believing but you are also skipping over parish those words are both before eternal life.


so it is

first if you currently believe

second is when you die

third is you well never die.

you are also skipping over the word should, which is a very important word. Using shall is not right. if you put shall it opens the verse up to be interpreted many different ways.

the reason they used should instead of shall is because if you believe then you shouldn't ever stop and it keeps the meaning of the verse as, "if you believe when you die you have everlasting life". With shall you could twist the meaning of the verse up like you are doing.

[Jac3510]

Please stop talking about Greek. I know Greek. I've taken multiple hours of the stuff at the master's level. I read my NT in Greek and prepare my sermons and lessons from the Greek text (usually Byzantine text, but I always cross reference the critical editions (by preference, SBLGNT). I've gone far beyond basic, introductory grammars. You are wrong. You don't know what you are talking about. Stop it.

[B. W.]

jpbg33 and others,

Let me state that I understand your position regarding losing one’s salvation. I once held that view. I also am associated with churches and ministries and people that still hold to that view. I consider such folks to be sincere brothers and sisters in Christ, not enemies or heretics. I do not make it an issue. I also understand the displeasure such have against Once Saved Always Saved or OSAS because it is viewed as a license to sin and justification to sin so that grace abounds.

That is why I do not use the term OSAS as it puts up a stumbling block and creates useless strife based on misconceptions. In my opinion, OSAS should be rephrased due to the abuse of the what is now known as the uber hyper grace teaching that views grace as a free license to sin without any consequence of God’s correction. Those responding to you here will agree that they also disfavor this misrepresentation of God’s grace by those in the so called uber hyper grace movement and do agree with Romans 6:1,2 in the fullest sense of its meaning.

The phrase eternal security, in my opinion, is a better term to use than OSAS as OSAS has been hijacked for controversy and strife purposes. I simply, when ministering places do not make this an issue with fellow Christians. It serves no purpose other than prevent the gospel from being spread which is not good at all.

With this in mind, let me share how I came to understand the Eternal Security in brief.

Many years ago, I came across an individual who always had the ability to self-condemn himself. He became born again through the street witnessing revival amongst teenagers God used me and others during the early/mid 1980’s that last close to 3 years. At that time, I taught one could lose salvation.

This teenage male kid would see a young lady and with that youthful passion of sin in his mind. He would use that to say he lost his salvation. We shared that it did not. Every bad thought or action was viewed as losing his salvation and he worked so hard to maintain his salvation. No matter how hard and long we tried to explain to him that such things are not the cause of losing salvation, and what sanctification is about, he would not listen because of the contradiction posed by Losing Your Salvation doctrine known as LYS.

Finally, his mental struggle led him to be so condemned that he decided to tell the Holy Spirit to take a hike and wanted nothing to with this torment of never beings able to measure up. In his mind, he blasphemed the Holy Spirit, which in reality he did not. This led to more mental torment and a suicide attempt. My friend and I intervened in that attempt and he is alive today because of it. Thankfully over the years, as I last heard from him, he left that line of thinking and is in eternal security camp.

That event led me to investigate the LYS. I could not escape Jesus’ words in John chapter Ten that no one is able to snatch a Christian out of the Lord’s hands. I discovered this: that the no one mention in the text included the one trying to jump! I could not escape the reality of the text. It pressed hard on my mind. Coming to rescue another from their suicide attempt due to thoughts of losing salvation was a game changer God used to wake me up to the realty of the Good Shepherd.

I was studying biblical Greek ad Hebrew at the time and was involved in lessons translating chapters from the bible from Greek into English. I have done John chapters 1,2,3,10 and many other chapters and whole letters of the Apostles as well too. In none of these do they say a true believer in Christ will lose his or her salvation.

They did mention false brethren, false leaders, who lead people to follow the law of circumcision to prove salvation, or mixing the animal sacrifice in with the work of the cross to keep oneself saved, or follow cunning devised tales of a false Jesus who will work you to death as ones not to follow.

I also discovered by translating Hebrews chapter 6,7 and 10,11, and parts of 13 what I wrote in my last post. These do not teach that a true Christian can lose his or her salvation. Chapter Ten dealt with those creeping into the church under the disguise of being a believer sanctified by the blood of Jesus in order to make a profit by betraying the fellowship into the hands of persecutors to be jail, tortured and or killed. Those that do are not saved and thus place a curse upon themselves to be d-mned due to their personally seared conscience.

Or they did so for money from the persecutors to convert members of the fellowship of the need to go back to the animal sacrifice system for one’s atonement thus mocking Jesus’ blood shed as able to atone. It is these agitators, false brethren, Hebrews 10:26,27 is dealing with. note the word enemy or adversary used in verse 27.

A true born again Christian would not revert back to animal sacrificial system due to understanding the blood of Jesus, however, one not saved who associated with the fellowship in name only might go back to that system for atonement out of ignorance or fear, and at a later time become saved. But the agitators placed a curse upon their own selves. That is the context of chapter ten.

I understand that this may be at first difficult to digest but please take the time to seek the Lord in prayer and study these things out for yourself. There are far more verses that substantiate the Eternal Security (ES) of the Christian than those used to counter ES.

Let me address Free Will

Free will is a slippery term. With that let me pose a question to you. If God never spoke, called out, to, Adam and Eve after the fall, could either a man or woman be able to really seek to return back to God by their own means alone?

If God never called out to them, all humanity would be lost to this day, despite the gift of free will (free moral agency) granted them. We would use our free will to deny God and justify our sins. God, however called out to humanity and thus created a choice when before there was none so we can return him in order to reset our free will to freely follow him and note that Jesus in John 1:1,2,3,14 is also called the word.

His call, His word, the gospel message, violates human free will by creating a choice to choose whom you will serve. In this God proves his Justice supreme and grace par excellent.

For anyone to become born again, God must violate our human free will by creating a choice. This means that God is in no way subservient to Human Free Will. He respects it because he presents to it a choice but He is not subservient to human free will. In this I am deeply thankful to the Lord for doing so with me – to wake me up by all the choices he continually confronted me with so I would finally yield to him. Amen.

Now knowing that He will never let me go, causes me to walk freely by the Spirit and less by the flesh all by the 1 John 1:9 way. Titus 2:11-15 shouts that grace teaches us how to not to always yield to sin all by the the 1 John 1:9 way. By His grace alone, He can use me to help others and move in the gifts of the Holy Spirit as He so wills to help others through their journey in life. In this I found eternal life true and a new way to live profound with purpose for life restored no matter how rough the go.

I desire to pass that on to the proceeding generations…

Blessings all…
-
-
-

[B. W.]

Please stop talking about Greek. I know Greek. I've taken multiple hours of the stuff at the master's level. I read my NT in Greek and prepare my sermons and lessons from the Greek text (usually Byzantine text, but I always cross reference the critical editions (by preference, SBLGNT). I've gone far beyond basic, introductory grammars. You are wrong. You don't know what you are talking about. Stop it.

Jac, I think jpbg33 was referring more to my post and addressing me….

So, jpbg33, wow, there are two of us here responding to you who have translated whole chapters and letters from the Greek text NT. We are not dumb in this matter so you are forgiven.

Well, all I can do is suggest that you invest in and learn to use some good bible software and do some very basic word studies, NT Greek dictionaries studies, grammar, and history studies before making such claims. Using such bible software makes things easier.

I studied NT Greek when no such software made it so easy as I had to learn the long arduous hard way. Folks can now do so with relative ease nowadays with good software programs. Give it a try.

Best wishes to you…

As I stated a few from the LYS camp just desire to create strife and what does the bible say about that jpbg33?
-
-
-

[jpbg33]

Jac3510 if you wont to stop talking about Greek then stop debating with it.

so you are saying that you can interpret Greek better then the not just one but big groups of Greek scalars that translated it into English. That is a very big clam.

We have to talk about your Greek knowledge because you are basing your augment on it. If you do not wont to prove to the world how you know Greek better the all Greek scalars then do not use it in the debate.

So lets get back to debating what the bible says not what you think it means in Greek, or else prove to the world you know Greek better then the translators. If you are better then them I'm waiting to here who you know that. I am basing my argument on there knowledge of Greek and not only on there knowledge but the rest of the Bible.

The debate with out Greek is.

If you currently believe when you die you have everlasting life. That is the English meaning of the verse.

B.W. First snatching you out of God hand. It is not talking about you snatching your self out you can not snatch your self out of anything. The whole idea of the word snatch means that some else is pulling you out. It has nothing to do with you.

To snatch your self out you would have to leave your body and then grab ahold of your self and pull your self out. you are reading you into it. How do I know that? Because other verses contradict that.


On other thing about your post. God did not infringe on free well by giving us a choice. That is not infringing that is give us more another option. The free well is still there because we still have to make the choice. So God did not infringing on any thing. To infringe on free well God would have had to make the choice for us, but he didn't we have to make the choice our selves "Free Well".


One other thing if you translate the Bible at your church. that is not as accurate as how the King James bible was translated. Why because you are going at it with one point of view. So your translation will resemble that view and if your view is wrong then your translation is wrong.

and is your church smarter then the Greek scalars of the King James Bible as well.

[Jac3510]

I'll respond in some detail later. For now, I'l quote from an intermediate text titled Greek Grammar: Beyond the Basics (you can see it, as well as the page I'm citing, here).

• No one has ever seen the present tense by itself, for example. What we see is a verb that has as many as seven different morphological tags to it (one of which may be present tense), one lexical tag (the stem)--and all this in a given context (both literary and historical). Although we may be, at the time, trying to analyze the meaning of the present tense, all of these other linguistic features are crowding the picture. Indeed, one central thesis of this grammar is that other linguistic features affect (and therefore contribute to) the meaning of the particular grammatical category under investigation.
  
  Grammarians' hypothesis about the unaffected meaning of a particular morpho-syntactical element (such as genitive case, present tense, etc.) are supposed to be based on a decent sampling of the data and with a proper linguistic grid to run it through. Older works tended to obscure the unaffected meaning because the data on which they based their definitions were insufficient. For example, the idea that the present prohibition means, in essence, "stop doing" is in reality a specific usage that cannot be applied universally. An abstract notion of the present prohibition first needs to be found, one that is both distinctive to the present prohibition and able to explain most of the data.

That's from pp. xiii-xiv, italics original. The simple fact is that you are wrong about what the present tense "means." The present tense doesn't mean anything at all. No one who knows Greek would ever say something to igorant as to imply that it "means" something in and of itself. You just don't know what you are talking about. Propositions, not particles, have meaning. And while tense (and even that is a word grammarians don't like to use--the proper terminology, for reasons I won't explain here right now, is either aspect or aktionsart, dependingon the context) contributes to the meaning, it is but one of many tags that need to be considered. And moreover, the tense itself is not meaningful in and of itself. The syntactical classification of the particular tense is a major part of the discussion. As you mentioned the present tense, you have to decide if the verb in question is an instantaneous, progressive, "narrow band," "broad band," iterative, customary, gnomic, or futuristic present (and that's just Wallace's categories!) before you make any claims on the meaning of the passage in question.

And all that, again, is just for starters. As I said, you are very much out of your depth here. You do not know what you are talking about. You want to make an argument based on the tense of some verse, feel free. But don't make a fool out of yourself and start citing Greek. Cite the English translation of your choice, recognize that the translation reflects their linguistic and theological interpretation of the Greek text, rely on their authority, and move on. But don't pretend like "the Greek" means anything that you think it does.

[jpbg33]

I'm not making a fool out of my self. It is you I never said I new Greek at all. I know English and the English translation of the verse uses a present tense form of belief. So the English way to write that verse according to 100's of Greek scalars is to use the present tense form of the word belief. You do not think they are right because you wont to believe osas.

So in English the tense do mater and Greek scalars know that they mattered in English. So they used believeth because they felt that believeth was the only way to not lose the real meaning of the verse in English. Because they knew in English tenses do matter. So they couldn't use the word believed because they felt that wouldn't be right in English. I am not saying that I know Greek better them or you, but what I am saying is that I trust there translation more then I trust yours.

one other thing believeth is in the bible many times so they did have other text to compare with.

[crochet1949]

Jac3510 if you wont to stop talking about Greek then stop debating with it.

so you are saying that you can interpret Greek better then the not just one but big groups of Greek scalars that translated it into English. That is a very big clam.

We have to talk about your Greek knowledge because you are basing your augment on it. If you do not wont to prove to the world how you know Greek better the all Greek scalars then do not use it in the debate.

So lets get back to debating what the bible says not what you think it means in Greek, or else prove to the world you know Greek better then the translators. If you are better then them I'm waiting to here who you know that. I am basing my argument on there knowledge of Greek and not only on there knowledge but the rest of the Bible.

The debate with out Greek is.

If you currently believe when you die you have everlasting life. That is the English meaning of the verse.

B.W. First snatching you out of God hand. It is not talking about you snatching your self out you can not snatch your self out of anything. The whole idea of the word snatch means that some else is pulling you out. It has nothing to do with you.

To snatch your self out you would have to leave your body and then grab ahold of your self and pull your self out. you are reading you into it. How do I know that? Because other verses contradict that.


On other thing about your post. God did not infringe on free well by giving us a choice. That is not infringing that is give us more another option. The free well is still there because we still have to make the choice. So God did not infringing on any thing. To infringe on free well God would have had to make the choice for us, but he didn't we have to make the choice our selves "Free Well".


One other thing if you translate the Bible at your church. that is not as accurate as how the King James bible was translated. Why because you are going at it with one point of view. So your translation will resemble that view and if your view is wrong then your translation is wrong.

and is your church smarter then the Greek scalars of the King James Bible as well.

I read the comment about the KJV of Bible -- you Do realize that the version 1611 was the revised version of it. Do you know the history of how the KJ version was put together. This is one area I do have Some knowledge about -- you are sounding silly. It was a committee of many who put the version together. It's called the King James Version simply because the King had to authorize the printing of any book or it was not legal to print it.