Evidence for God from Science

As an aside, while I have a spare minute . . .

It seems to me the basis of the entire argument against "belief only" is the idea that repentance is necessary for salvation. We may say that a person must FIRST repent to be saved, or we may say that if a person is really saved, then they will repent (making it a necessary result). Regardless, it seems that people cannot accept the idea that a genuine Christian will not repent.

However, this is clearly false for at least two reasons. First, repentance cannot be a prerequisite for salvation, because that means salvation depends on me changing my behavior. I can believe all I want, but until I change my ways, I can't be saved. That is salvation by works.

Second, repentance cannot be a necessary result of salvation, because we know that some believers have committed the "sin unto death." In the OT, we know of people who sinned so consistently that God took them (i.e., Saul). Further, Jesus warned several of the churches He addressed in His Revelation to repent, or else He would destroy them. These people were saved, and yet Jesus said there was a possibility that they would not repent.

Again, then, we are forced back to the same, simple, Gospel message, which is that all who believe in Christ for eternal life have it.

God bless

HAT TRICK!

from the serious question thread:

ttoews wrote:

Jac3510 wrote:Jesus said "He who believes has everlasting life." John 3:16 says, "whosoever believes." If you want to be very technical about John 3:16, it is actually, "all the believing" so far as the Greek reads . . . if you have EVER been considered "a believing" person, then you HAVE right now everlasting life.

this is a good example of what I don't like concerning the treatment of scripture by your camp. You will point to John 3:16 and say something like, "see all that you have to do is have a moment of simple belief and you will be saved....it doesn't say that you must have a continuing faith or repentance...just simple momentary belief." Well, in actuality it doesn't say "simple" or "momentary" either and as for your understanding of the greek "all the believing" is not the same as "if you ever believed". If you have your tenses right then "believing" is an ongoing process, not a momentary event of the past. Further, at the end of Chapter 3 it states that whoever rejects the Son will not see life. Therefore, riddle me this, if this hypothetical fellow we are considering momentarily believes and then later rejects the Son, is the fellow saved (by way of your interpretation of v. 16) or is he not saved (by way of the plain wording of v. 36)?

I can provide just as thorough exegesis of John 3:16 as any other passage of Scripture. Bear in mind, ttoews, that if you are going to offer a passage of the Bible to prove me wrong, then either the verses harmonize or contradict what I am saying. Therefore, when you present it to me, it is my job to provide an exegesis. It so happens that every passage you have offered me harmonizes, and strongly advocates, what I have been saying. As I said before, many of the passages you gave me are, in fact, proof texts I often use.

Well, why don't we try John 3:16 here and its context, just to be fair?

• As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. (John 3:14-17, NASB)

This passage has been preached often enough that I should not have to lay out the context. At this point, Jesus makes the direct claim that all who look to Him will be born again. In verse fifteen, He uses the illustration from the OT about the bronze serpent. It should be immediately obvious to the reader what Jesus intends.

However, John 3:16 has been so often preached without 3:15 as a contrast, we will briefly look at the implications of this analogy. In the story of the bronze serpent, God told Moses to make the statue so that all who looked at it would receive healing. Nicky knew the only condition to those peoples' salvation was to look to at the snake. Thus, 3:15b becomes very powerful: all who believe in the Son of Man will have everlasting life. However, “believe” is clearly contrasted with “looking” as per the story. In other words, just as the Israelites looked to the snake in a moment of time to be saved, so we look to Christ at a moment in time and are saved. More literally, we look to Christ in a moment in time and have everlasting life.

Here, then, we have the famous John 3:16. “For” is the Greek word gar, and it is an explanatory word. That is, it basically says, “This is the reason.” Allow me to provide my own translation of the verse:

• For God loved the world in this manner: He gave His unique Son in order that all the believing in Him would not perish but instead they would have everlasting life.

So, in 3:15 Jesus says that all who believe in Him would have everlasting life, and why? Because God chose to demonstrated His love for the world in that manner. Several things are worth nothing. I use the phrase “in this manner” because houtos, while it does mean “so,” does not mean “so” as in “so much!” but rather as in “thus, so, in this manner.” This verse does not teach that God's love was so great that He was compelled to send His Son. It rather teaches that God loved the world, and this is how He decided to love it. Secondly, the word “world” here (kosmos) in Johannine thought represents the fallen world that is in rebellion to God. We could actually render the phrase, if we wanted to be a bit dynamic, as “God chose to love sinners by sending them His only Son . . .” God is not expressing His love for those He knew would believe in Him and thus be saints. He is not expressing His love for “good” people. He is expressing His love for those who have mocked and rejected Him!

We don't need to have a debate about what “unique” means . . . the Son is the only one, and thus it is the most precious thing God could possibly give to this world. The idea is powerful, though, as it says that God gave absolutely everything He had—the best of the best—to those who despised Him. He gave His best to His enemies for their benefit. Next, notice my translation uses the phrase “in order that,” which is exactly the meaning of hoste. The word is a word that expresses purpose, and the purpose of the gift (the Son) is that “all the believing in Him” would have eternal life.

We come now to the crucial phrase, “all the believing in Him.” Most important is the word “the believing.” This word is a participle in the Greek, present tense. It does connote ongoing action, however, we cannot take this to mean that the belief itself is ongoing. The reason is that participles have no absolute time because they are not in the indicative mood. Instead, their time is relative to the verb which they modify. Thus, if you have a present tense participle modifying a present tense verb, then the action is ongoing in the present tense. If the present tense participle is modifying an aorist (past) tense verb, then the action was ongoing in the past tense. In this case, “believing” is in line with “gave,” through the purpose word hoste. Thus, the ongoing action is in the past. Further, the word “all” in Greek literally means “all!”

Now, if I can try to bring out the emphasis hear . . . John could have used a present tense verb if he wanted to say that everyone who continues in a state of belief is saved. But, he didn't. Instead, he used this construction, a present tense participle plus the third person singular pronoun in the dative (en auton), thus the English, “the believing in Him.” John is creating a group of people here. The group is “the believing.” How do you get in that group? If at any time you “believe” in Him then you are in that group. Further, the word “all” reminds us that you can never be removed that group under any circumstances. If you have ever believed, then you are a part of “the believing,” for ALL the believing are saved.

Imagine three men. One does not believe, the second does but stops believing later, and the third continues in belief. Now, it is immediately clear that the first man never believed and is thus in no way a part of the “believing.” However, the second man believed at some point, and thus, “the believing” is made up of two people, the second and third. The second man falls away and is no longer, at present “believing.” However, notice that ALL the believing are saved. If the second man is not saved, then ALL do not have everlasting life, but only those who keep in the faith.

Before leaving off this phrase, it is important to note the little word “in.” The word is eis and is a directional preposition. It means “in, to, towards.” So, if we take our belief and put it in the direction of Jesus, beginning outside of Him and ending inside of Him, then we are saved. Thus, the analogy with the serpent is very clear. As the Israelites looked to the serpent to be saved, in the same way, our faith “looks to” Jesus and we are saved!

Now, those who do this will not perish. That is, they will not go to Hell, but they have “everlasting life,” more literally translated “life into the ages.” Notice that this life is “everlasting.” It is unending. It is “into the ages.” What ages? We are in one age now, but this life will continue into the future ones! If a person has this life but later loses it, then this “life” has the wrong name. If I am dead and then “born from above,” thus rendering me “alive into the ages,” but at some future point are no longer “alive into the ages,” then I must be, by definition, dead in the future age. Thus, I was never “alive into the ages” at all. Thus, we see by definition that everlasting life cannot be lost.

Finally, we see the contrasting between perishing and this everlasting life is set off by the word alla, which is the strong contrast in Greek (hence, “but instead”). John is saying, “You most certainly will not die, but instead, you most certainly will live!”

Thus, John 3:16 teaches a very profound lesson. Those who look to Christ in faith have, at the present time, everlasting life that cannot be lost, for they are placed in a group of people known as “the believing,” and all people in that group live forever, regardless of what they do or do not do in the future.

If there is any doubt about that, John clears it up in 3:17. Notice the explanatory “for” again. The reason 3:16 is true is that God did not send Jesus to condemn the word, but that the world would be saved. It is obvious that “condemn” is parallel with “perish” and “saved” is parallel with “everlasting life.” Thus, John gives us the definition of “salvation” in his book: salvation = everlasting life. The purpose of Jesus' coming was to provide this salvation to all who simply believe.

It should therefore be clear to the reader that salvation is by grace through faith alone. Nothing else is said to be a requirement in this passage. Indeed, nothing else could be, or else John would be a liar (as would Jesus!). If anything else were needed, then the person who “believed” but not met that second requirement would prove this false, because “ALL” the believing are saved!

So, for the rest of your post . . .

ttoews wrote:not in a way that convinces me that my continued use of it is misplaced.

If you have a problem with my exegesis anywhere, feel free to point it out.

ttoews wrote:this is the way I see it unfolding:
a) whatever I present will be dismissed on a technicality such as:
i)that passage is only referring to disciples not all believers
ii) there is a distinction between "sons" and "children"
iii) there is a distinction between "knowing" and "being saved"
b) on the other hand, what you present is not given that same level of scrutiny.
c) nevertheless, I will be more than happy to go through the scriptures with you.

I have never, nor ever will, “dismiss” a passage. If you notice, every Scripture you provide, I make it a point to not only explain why it doesn't mean what you assert that it does, but I explain what it actually means (as I see it). I expect that you believe Scripture should be closely examined. Jesus made an entire case on the tense of a word in one passage (Matt. 22:32). As for the “technicalities” you suggested, there is a difference in a believer and a disciple (see John 12:42). As for the distinction between “son” and “child” in Rom. 8, if you have a problem with the exegesis, then explain why. I think I've very thoroughly laid out my case there, although I could provide a lot more detail if you would like. And there most definitely is a difference in “knowing” God and being saved. The words do not even come close to meaning the same thing. If I know God, it means that I have an intimate knowledge of Him, as per the Greek. If I am saved, that means that God has declared me righteous.

As far as (b) goes, as I said above, it's not my job to scrutinize my own texts, although hopefully the scrutiny of 3:16 above will suffice. And I'm glad to hear about (c), hehe.

ttoews wrote:As an example of what I mean by (b) above allow me to point out an earlier exchange.
I asked (in the context of whether a degree/any repentance was necessary for salvation), "where is the biblical example of the fellow that believed and obtained eternal life, but also refused to repent?"

you replied:

Jac3510 wrote:Sure:

John 12:42 - "Yet at the same time many even among the leaders believed in him. But because of the Pharisees they would not confess their faith for fear they would be put out of the synagogue" (NASB)

1 Cor.5:5 - "I have decided to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus." (NASB)

1 Cor 11:27-31 - "Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. But a man must examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly. For this reason many among you are weak and sick, and a number sleep. But if we judged ourselves rightly, we would not be judged." (NASB)

2 Cor. 12:21 - "I am afraid that when I come again my God will humble me before you, and I will be grieved over many who have sinned earlier and have not repented of the impurity, sexual sin and debauchery in which they have indulged." (NIV)

Seems like a good start to me

where, in any of these verses is there any indication of the existence of a believer that has refused to repent at all? The 2 Cor passages speaks of a lack of repentance, but does not state that these believers never repented ever or that they never repented of their sins at the time of their acceptance of Christ.

Come on, ttoews . . . you can see my reasoning. John 12:42 flat SAYS that these people believed, and yet they refused to confess that belief. They went around and acted as if they DIDN'T BELIEVE! So much for confession being required to be saved, or are you going to tell me that these people weren't saved? Now, we would all agree that denying Christ is a sin, and every moment they didn't confess Christ, they were refusing to repent of that sin. 1 Cor 5:5 tells of a believer who refused to repent, and therefore, he was delivered to Satan. So, we flat have a believer that won't repent. We have 1 Cor. 11:27-31, which clearly speaks of these believers' refusal to repent. They were abusing the Lord's supper to such an extent that they were dying. ttoews, they were dying in their unrepentant state, and yet, we know that they were saved! And, as you noted, the 2 Cor. passage does speak of unrepentance. The fact is, Paul is afraid that some of them will not repent. So, was Paul mistaken in his theology? If even one genuine believer is capable of not ever repenting, then your entire system is destroyed. Paul was clearly afraid that some—indeed many—would not repent. That doesn't make sense given what you are saying. He knows for 100% sure that many of these are saved, because he witnessed them receive the Holy Spirit. If it is true that all believers will at some point repent, then Paul had nothing to worry about. The fact that he is worried should tell you something.

Now, I'll ask you to do the same thing with me that I do with you. When you present me a passage of Scripture, I offer a thorough exegesis. You should do the same, rather than simply accusing me of not being careful in what I cite to support my position.

ttoews wrote:it most certainly seems that some apostates have done just that....but what can't happen is for God to be surprised by such a rejection

I never have said that God is surprised . . . did I leave you with that impression? Now, if people have rejected their faith, then my question to you is this: how long does a person have to believe before they are “really saved”?

ttoews wrote:again not demonstrated to my satisfaction. Look at the passage. Verse 7 declares God will not be mocked and in verse 8 Paul goes on to speak of the eternal destinies of destruction and eternal life. Paul connects "God being mocked" with the eternal destinies (your demonstration notwithstanding).

You'll have to provide an exegesis that shows why my view is wrong rather than just asserting your own. Your position is weak, in my view, because Paul is talking about “doing good” to each other in that section, and he talks about not giving up in doing good. We give up because we seek our own pleasure, and in doing so, we reap destruction . . . that destruction is not Hell. It is death or the loss of rewards. Or are you going to argue that these Galatians, who were clearly saved, could lose their salvation by not doing good to each other?

ttoews wrote:tis somewhat ironic that you make such an emotional appeal to avoid the emotional and stick to the exegetical....but I am happy to get into the scriptures

No, it isn't, and that is fallacious reasoning. You have been making appeal to emotion to prove your case is right, or at least, that I am wrong. I am appealing to emotion to convince you to avoid that argument, because it is genuinely dangerous. I am not trying to prove my case . . . I am trying to get you to act in a certain manner.

Have fun with those passages

God bless

Jac3510 wrote:HAT TRICK!

yes the volume is impressive

If you have a problem with my exegesis anywhere, feel free to point it out.

.....As far as (b) goes, as I said above, it's not my job to scrutinize my own texts, ....

I was wondering how to deal with the sheer volume and I think I will follow your suggestion and go through the passages one by one in greater detail (pointing out your many mistakes along the way )...in the mean time, a few quick points

Come on, ttoews . . . you can see my reasoning. John 12:42 flat SAYS that these people believed, and yet they refused to confess that belief. ....

Jac, you do not understand the level of precision that I seek.
I had said something such as repentance would necessarily flow from saving faith.
You had responded with something such as, no repentance is not necessary for salvation and need not accompany it
I had asked for a biblical example of something who was saved and yet had not repented.....meaning not had repented at all, ever.
You provided 4 passages of instances of where believers were not doing what they were supposed to do, but those are instances only and do not satisfy the request for an example of someone who never ever repented. For example, a person that doesn't publicly confess his faith may still have spent a week in expressing his remorse and in repentance. So come on, yourself...be precise, b/c that is what you demand from me.

You'll have to provide an exegesis that shows why my view is wrong rather than just asserting your own. Your position is weak, in my view,...

trust me, I feel the same way wrt you and yours.

ttoews wrote:tis somewhat ironic that you make such an emotional appeal to avoid the emotional and stick to the exegetical....but I am happy to get into the scriptures

No, it isn't, and that is fallacious reasoning. You have been making appeal to emotion to prove your case is right, or at least, that I am wrong. I am appealing to emotion to convince you to avoid that argument, because it is genuinely dangerous. I am not trying to prove my case . . . I am trying to get you to act in a certain manner.

for the record when did I appeal to emotion? For example, saying something is absurd is suggesting it is lacking in logic. So now, if you think I made an appeal to emotion I suspect you may have misunderstood me and I would be pleased to provide my reasoning that you mistook for emotion.
and you have my apologies if there was an emotional appeal in my stuff....

Have fun with those passages

I expect we both will...be advised that given the volume you throw back at me, I will try and deal with each passage (in the order I select) in enough detail so that I won't have to keep returning to it after your lengthy response(s)...so it might be a week before the first installment appears.

God bless

you too Jac ol' boy

I will give some more select quotes from Jack Van Impe.
The entire letter can be found on his website.

Jack Van Impe Ministries International Newsletter
June 11, 2006
(Prophecy portal on the web at http://www.jvim.com)

Victory

The second effect of the "born-again" experience is victory. First John 5:4, 5 states, For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the VICTORY that overcometh the world, even our faith. Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?

If ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the SPIRIT do mortify [put to death] the deeds of the body, ye shall live. For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God (Romans 8:13, 14).

John 2:15-17 answers the question. Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the f1esh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.

I am not preaching perfection. Christians can slip and fall, but that is vastly different from becoming enslaved to fleshly lusts.

The problem is not one's possession of an old nature, but the old nature's possession of a person. The latter means that one has not been "born again," for "regeneration" endows one with a divine nature (see 2 Peter 1:4),

2 Corinthians 5:17 declares, If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. Enslavement to sin points to an empty profession -- just lip service -- and leads one into helplessness for the ages of eternity, for the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever (1John 2:17).

Remember, if there is no desire for victory, no quest for victory, no evidence of victory, there will be no victory celebration in heaven.

John 4:7, 8 states, Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is BORN OF GOD, and knoweth God. He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love

This statement is so important that one's eternal existence in heaven or hell depends on it. Hear it again. He that loveth not knoweth not God
[1 John 4:8]

John 3:14 declares, We know [not hope, guess, or think -- but know] that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death.

1 John 3:10, In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

Love is the evidence of one's "born-again" experience. So, if we love one another, God dwelleth in us (1 John 4:12).

James 1:26, If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man's religion is vain.

when it is eternally too late, they will discover that the unrighteous, including "railers," do not inherit the kingdom of God (see 1 Corinthians 6:9)

We have concluded in this chapter that holiness, victory, and love prove one's salvation experience to be genuine. Where do you stand? Examine yourself to see whether or not you are in the faith (see 2 Corinthians 13:5). If the evidence is against you, settle the issue with God immediately. Eternity -- forever and forever and forever -- is a long time to be lost!



If you have time I suggest you read the entire letter at his website.
I am sure I lose something by just picking out pieces from the entire letter.
I will get into my own thoughts in a future post. However, I think Jack Van Impe has dealt well with the topic.

Michael

Sorry this took so long to post....I'll start with a passage we both claim supports our own view, namely Matt 7:15-23.
As posted before, it reads:
15"Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.
21"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' 23Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers

Here are some of the claims that you have made wrt that passage...my comments on your claims follow in bold:

A. regarding those Jesus call evildoers:

1) These people were definitely committed!
the passage doesn't state this at all. The passage states that these people a) address Jesus as "Lord,Lord" and b) claim to have prophesied etc. in Jesus name. Please note that the passage never states whether the address of Jesus as "lord" is sincere, or whether they actually did what they claimed to do in Jesus' name. Jesus says that He never knew them and as such, even if they were committed, why would you presume that they were committed to the Lord...it seems that they were either lying or mistaken.

2 But they go to Hell. Why? Because they never trusted Christ.
It doesn't say that they never trusted Christ and although I believe that such was the case, you are making a claim that is not contained in the text. As to the stated "why", Christ sends them away saying that He never "knew" them and classifying them as "evildoers"....presumably that is the "why"

3 They trusted their works . . .which was shown by their commitment
Again Christ doesn't say that they trusted their works instead of Him...where do you see the word "trusted"?

B. regarding the trees and their fruit

1)Yes, the fruit and tree are both bad and both go into the fire. But what is Jesus talking about? He tells us Himself: "Watch out for false prophets . . . by their fruit you will recognize them." This test shouldn't be applied to the general person, because Jesus didn't apply it to them. He is talking about teachers/prophets. why do you think this test does not have general application? The phrase "every good tree" is very general. Further, look at Luke 6:43-45:

"No good tree bears bad fruit, nor does a bad tree bear good fruit.

Each tree is recognized by its own fruit. People do not pick figs from thornbushes, or grapes from briers.

The good man brings good things out of the good stored up in his heart, and the evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in his heart. For out of the overflow of his heart his mouth speaks."


or at Matt 12:33

"Make a tree good and its fruit will be good, or make a tree bad and its fruit will be bad, for a tree is recognized by its fruit"

The fruit test is a test for general application.

2) Their fruits are not their deeds, but their teachings. this is simply not stated in the passage

3) It says that every tree that does not bear good fruit is cast into the fire. Why? Because, keep in mind, these are false teachers....Clearly, these trees are producing bad fruit, and that fruit is false teaching. These false teachers have clearly not believed in the true gospel of Jesus Christ. .... Yet again, keep this in context of TEACHERS. again, bad fruit is mentioned, but it is your presumption that the bad fruit is false teaching and only false teaching.
Further, given passages like Matt 3:8-10 and Luke 3:8-9 I do not believe it is appropriate to limit the definition of "bad fruit" to "bad teaching."
Matt 3:8-10:
"Produce fruit in keeping with repentance.

And do not think you can say to yourselves, 'We have Abraham as our father.' I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham.

The ax is already at the root of the trees, and every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire."


4) It is true that only those who do the will of the Father enter the kingdom, but what is that will? Jesus tells us himself in John 6:29, "Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent." Yes the work of God is to believe in Christ (I understand that belief to be a profound belief and you understand it to be a simple belief...so mentioning belief doesn't establish anything), but it is odd that in considering God's will you refer to the "work of God" and try to limit God's will to a single thing mentioned in a single passage.


C. regarding the entire passage...

1) But, let's take this a step further . . . where is this going to take place in history? At the GWT Judgment, right? These people about to be cast into the Lake of Fire. They are making their defense. They have done all kinds of things, not the least of which is to confess Jesus as Lord! But, they NEVER BELIEVEDit doesn't say they confessed Jesus as Lord! It says they addressed Jesus as Lord. I don't know what "confessed" entails in your mind. What is key, however, is that Jesus "never knew them".

2) It clearly teaches that commitment of life does NOT result in salvation.No, it doesn't expressly state that at all...even if we assume that these fellows were committed, it doesn't say they were committed to either Jesus or to good works.....and, in any event, my position is that salvation and commitment are both results of faith and not that salvation is a result of commitment

3) The false teachers have done things FOR JESUS,...that is only a claim of theirs...but how could anything have been done by them for Jesus if He never knew them?

4)The people at that judgment believed they were saved because they did such great works for the Lord. They had lived their lives for Him. it doesn't say that they did any great works for the Lord or that the lived their lives for Him. I can't help thinking about some television evangelists when I read this passage. Yes they call Jesus Lord, but their love seems to be for fame and fortune and not for the Lord....or perhaps these people accepted a unilateral contract, called Jesus "Lord", participated in a few charismatic healing seminars and thereafter pursued their love of worldly things

5)However, they were evil-doers because they did it to try to earn their righteousness, and they never obeyed the simple plan to only believe. no mention is made of trying to "earn righteousness" or that such is what made them evil-doers and no mention is made of a "simple plan"...trying to earn salvation is, of course, impossible...but it doesn't state that these evildoers were trying to do that

Jac, over and over again you read things into this passage that just aren't there. I suggest that the parts of the passage that are key to our discussion are:

A.Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
If we can define good fruit, then we know what will be possessed by those who are spared from the fire
In that regard, given how "fruit" is used repeatedly in the NT, it is clear that normally it is used to refer to righteous/unrighteous deeds and thoughts....and that should be the understanding of "fruit" in Matt 7.
B.Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven
If we can define the "will of the Father" we can know what is done by those who will enter the kingdom of heaven
Again, do you seriously think that the will of God is limited to "simple belief" and does not include acts of righteousness for his children? Is it necessary to refer to passages that show God's will includes things other than simple belief?
C.Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you...'
If we can define "knew" then we can gain an idea of what the damned lacked.
In this regard, look at a passage such as John 10 where at 14-15 it reads:

14 "I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me-- 15 just as the Father knows me and I know the Father--and I lay down my life for the sheep. 16 I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd.

We are likened to sheep. The sheep know the shepherd and follow him. The passage describes how sheep depend on the shepherd for their safety and listen to his voice. Likewise, those whom Jesus knows, know Him, actually follow Him, listen to Him and depend on Him...and they do not merely depend on a unilateral contract.


I am content to invite anyone considering this matter to:
a) read the 4 gospels, Acts and the epistles
b) then return to Matt 7 and ask
i) should the understanding of "bad fruit" be limited to "bad teaching"
ii) should the understanding of the "will of God" be limited to "simply believing"
iii) should "being known by Jesus" be limited to the mere acceptance of an offer

I'll actually keep this short this time. We only have two issues that come up from your response, and then I want to reiterate my primary argument which always seems to go unaddressed:

1. Concerning those calling Jesus "Lord" but still find themselves condemned, you repeatedly claim that I am reading things into the passage. Where do I find them trying to "earn" their righteousness? Where do I find them "commiting" their lives to Jesus? The answer is found in the thing Jesus is discussing. Remember, again, this is talking about the events at the Great White Throne Judgment. At this time, every knee shall bow, and every tongue shall confess that Jesus is Lord, from the believers to Satan himself. There is no question that Jesus is right. There is no argument. There is no attempt to get around Jesus. It is clear that He is God, that He is Judge, and that salvation comes only through Him. That is plain to all.

In that context, these people say, "Lord!" It is true that all will call Him Lord, but keep in mind that these people did great things in His name while on earth. These people clearly believed that they were saved. They are surprised at their condemnation. In short, this is their defense! "Lord," they say, "we did great things for you! Why are we condemned?" Jesus answers that they are condemned because He never knew them. Thus, we see that "doing great things for the Lord" doesn't save. It doesn't even come close. Even our greatest righteousness is as filthy rags. Who are those who Christ has known? Those who have believed in Him for everlasting life (John 3:16).

Now, say what you will, but you cannot get around the central idea of this passage which is this: there will be those people on the Day of Judgment who, although they lived their lives doing great things for Jesus (for whatever their motives), they will be condemned. Thus, as a logical corralary, we see that doing things for Jesus does not save. It further proves that you can do things for Jesus and be condemned. Again, these people thought they were saved based on their works, based on all they did for Him (in His name). However, they are condemned. Why? "Because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son" (John 3:18, NIV)

Commitment, repentance, and good works don't lead to salvation. Belief does, only only belief does. To say otherwise is to teach a false gospel.

2. Concerning the tree/fruit issue: I stand by my exegesis. You appeal to Jesus' use of a similar point as stated elsewhere to prove what He means in this passage. That's a fine method, as comparing the thoughts of a person can shed light on what they mean at any given time. Would you like me to provide an analysis of each of the other fruit/tree passages you've offered? Maybe you should do it . . . you've seen me exegete enough Scripture. It shouldn't be hard to see how those should be read.

So, rather than providing a series of expositions again, I'll simply encourage you, and those reading this, to a) examine the context of those passages and see what Jesus was teaching there, b) to examine the context of the passage in question, as I have done here, and see if what I am saying doesn't line up. I think you will see that it does, unless, of course, you believe that the picture of a tree is only allowed to represent one idea in the universal realm of thought.

3. Now, my basic point is this: to be saved, we simply trust Christ. Show me somewhere in Scripture that another condition is laid. John 3:16 is enough for me. I posted about twenty references for R7 a bit back . . . any of those will do just as well. You, however, argue that a certain type of faith is necessary . . . that is, a faith of such a quality that it necessarily produces good works. You argue that a person has to keep on believing, because God can't be mocked. Implicit in this thought is that if a person mocks God, he doesn't deserved to be saved. Thus, your entire soteriology is a merit based one.

Jesus offers salvation freely. There is NO cost. He offers it AS A GIFT. Jesus said, "He who believes has everlasting life." Do you believe that? Do you believe Jesus gives everlasting life to all who simply believe? Have you believed in Jesus for everlasting life, or have you believed that other works are necessary, such as repentance or perseverance? Jesus said that unless we receive the kingdom of God as a child, we will by no means enter it. What does that mean? It means we must receive it freely, totally dependant on Christ for it, recognizing that there is NOTHING we can do to earn it or keep it. That's the only way we are saved.

God bless

Jac3510 wrote:I'll actually keep this short this time.

thanks....I'll do likewise before I move on to the next passage

The answer is found in the thing Jesus is discussing. Remember, again, this is talking about the events at the Great White Throne Judgment. At this time, every knee shall bow, and every tongue shall confess that Jesus is Lord, from the believers to Satan himself. There is no question that Jesus is right. There is no argument. There is no attempt to get around Jesus. It is clear that He is God, that He is Judge, and that salvation comes only through Him. That is plain to all.

In that context, these people say, "Lord!" It is true that all will call Him Lord, but keep in mind that these people did great things in His name while on earth. These people clearly believed that they were saved. They are surprised at their condemnation.

again you are reading into the text... it doesn't say that they were surprised...perhaps they were and I fully suspect some will be surprised.... but I have already explained how these doers of evil could be your salvation by mockery types, but they might also be the type described in Acts 19:
13 Some Jews who went around driving out evil spirits tried to invoke the name of the Lord Jesus over those who were demon-possessed. They would say, "In the name of Jesus, whom Paul preaches, I command you to come out." 14 Seven sons of Sceva, a Jewish chief priest, were doing this. 15 One day the evil spirit answered them, "Jesus I know, and I know about Paul, but who are you?"

Now, say what you will, but you cannot get around the central idea of this passage which is this: there will be those people on the Day of Judgment who, although they lived their lives doing great things for Jesus

I checked yet again...nothing similar to "lived their lives doing great things for Jesus" is anywhere to be found...closest is that this doers of evil claim do have done a few things.

.... doing things for Jesus does not save.

agreed

It further proves that you can do things for Jesus and be condemned.

again this is not in issue....

Commitment, repentance, and good works don't lead to salvation. Belief does, only only belief does. To say otherwise is to teach a false gospel.

agreed ...but the issue is whether it is a false gospel to teach that salvation can come from a faith that does not produce good fruit

3. Now, my basic point is this: to be saved, we simply trust Christ. Show me somewhere in Scripture that another condition is laid.

in good time

You, however, argue that a certain type of faith is necessary . . . that is, a faith of such a quality that it necessarily produces good works. You argue that a person has to keep on believing, because God can't be mocked. Implicit in this thought is that if a person mocks God, he doesn't deserved to be saved.

no, implicit in this is that if a person mocks God, he has rejected the gift, repudiated the unilateral contract

Jesus offers salvation freely. There is NO cost. He offers it AS A GIFT. Jesus said, "He who believes has everlasting life." Do you believe that? Do you believe Jesus gives everlasting life to all who simply believe?

you were doing wonderfully until you added the word "simply" to what is stated in John 3:16

Have you believed in Jesus for everlasting life, or have you believed that other works are necessary, such as repentance or perseverance? Jesus said that unless we receive the kingdom of God as a child, we will by no means enter it. What does that mean? It means we must receive it freely, totally dependant on Christ for it, recognizing that there is NOTHING we can do to earn it or keep it. That's the only way we are saved.

now, again I can agree with this...though I would tend to think God will be rather forgiving wrt the "recognition" thing...not all will have the same capacity for understanding etc.....but I don't believe that God will be all that forgiving wrt mockery.

have a great July 4th

ttoews wrote:again you are reading into the text... it doesn't say that they were surprised...perhaps they were and I fully suspect some will be surprised.... but I have already explained how these doers of evil could be your salvation by mockery types, but they might also be the type described in Acts 19:
13 Some Jews who went around driving out evil spirits tried to invoke the name of the Lord Jesus over those who were demon-possessed. They would say, "In the name of Jesus, whom Paul preaches, I command you to come out." 14 Seven sons of Sceva, a Jewish chief priest, were doing this. 15 One day the evil spirit answered them, "Jesus I know, and I know about Paul, but who are you?"

"Salvation by mockery" . . . hmm . . . I wasn't aware I had used such a phrase? Now, let's look at my point again, since you admit to it and then don't deal with it:

1. These people thought they were saved

Proof: They were not expecting damnation. You yourself note that "some" will be surprised . . . you expect it! They thought they were saved based on what? Based on all the good works they had done "in Jesus' name"

2. These people were not saved.

Proof: Jesus said they weren't.

3. Point: Doing good works in Jesus' name has absolutely no bearing on one's salvation.

I don't think you will disagree with that. Perhaps the sons of Sceva will say "Lord, Lord" at the GWT judgment. It doesn't change my point, which is that confessing Jesus as "Lord" doesn't save. Doing good things doesn't save. The people in this passage did "good things" for Jesus. They did "great" things. You certainly don't believe that if our good outweighs our bad then we will go to heaven, so it is silly for you to argue that these people only did "a few things."

Now, again, look at the main assertion of the text: "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord' will enter into the Kingdom of Heaven." That's my point. Who enters into the Kingdom? Only those who have believed, as per John 3:16.

ttoews wrote:agreed ...but the issue is whether it is a false gospel to teach that salvation can come from a faith that does not produce good fruit

And I'm waiting on Scripture that says it does. You used the "Lord, Lord" passage as one that proved your position . . . now, I've strongly demonstrated in this passage that Jesus is talking about false teachers and their false doctrine. I notice you didn't take up my offer to exegete the other "tree/fruit" passages . . .

ttoews wrote:in good time

The only authority here is Scripture. If you the Bible teaches that there is another condition than belief, I would be most interested to see it!

ttoews wrote:no, implicit in this is that if a person mocks God, he has rejected the gift, repudiated the unilateral contract

Before or after, ttoews? Does my later rejection of God's gift mean I lose my salvation? Do you actually believe that you can lose your salvation?!?!?!? If so, I can totally understand your position in a way I couldn't before. If that is your position, then we have found our problem and this need not continue.

ttoews wrote:you were doing wonderfully until you added the word "simply" to what is stated in John 3:16

What is the difference in "all who believe" and "all who simply believe" and "all who only believe"? None, other than to highlight and strengthen that "believe" is the only condition. Suppose, though, that there is another condition. Let's say, for argument, that condition is repentance, since that is such a popular argument. In that case, it is feasible that there are those who have believed and have not repented, and therefore, they are not saved. In that case, John 3:16 is contradicted, because ALL the believing are saved (Gk: pas ho pisteuwn). The only way for you to get around this is to redefine "belief" as including repentence, in which case, "simply" doesn't contradict your theology at all.

The lexical definition of pisteuo to "believe" or "trust." It has absolutely no conotations of repentance or confession as John 12:42-43 makes clear. Strongs is a fine enough place to start. The BAGD is better, and the TNDT is about as authoritative as lexicons get.

ttoews wrote:now, again I can agree with this...though I would tend to think God will be rather forgiving wrt the "recognition" thing...not all will have the same capacity for understanding etc.....but I don't believe that God will be all that forgiving wrt mockery.

So, you either believe you can lose your salvation if you "mock" God, or you believe that if you "mock" God, it proves you were never saved. In either case, God forgives all sin except the sin of mockery.

I'm sure you'll object that that break down . . .

Have a happy fourth, too!

God bless

How do you all define believe or Believe?

What all actually do you have to believe in and what does that mean?

Do you have believe in your heart or simple saying the words is enough?


Michael
Thomas

bluesman wrote:How do you all define believe or Believe?

What all actually do you have to believe in and what does that mean?

Do you have believe in your heart or simple saying the words is enough?


Michael
Thomas

To me believing is trusting that what God's word says is true and claiming it by faith. I believe that God gave me eternal life when I turned to him in faith and trusted completely in my heart that Jesus died on the cross to save me and be the propitiation for my sins.

Some would say I couldn't have believed unless God enabled me to, and some would say that when I believed God in His mercy and love heard my prayer of faith and extended His grace and washed me in the blood of Christ.

All I know is that I believe with all my heart that Jesus died on the cross for me and that He is the only way to the Father. Maybe I'll never know how I got there but I know I'm there now.

Bluesman, FFC offered a beautiful answer. For the record, the lexical definition of "believe" is "to trust," "to be persuaded," or "to believe." It is to acknowledge that something is true and/or to rely on it. There is a range of Greek words here we are dealing with. Pisteuw is the Greek word John uses throughout his gospel, and it simply means "to believe" or "to trust." It has no connotations of commitment or repentance.

Again, I'd suggest picking up any basic NT-Greek word dictionary. The NIDNT is pretty solid, and it works off Strong's numbers, so if you don't read Greek, you can still use it (the definition transliterates, so you don't even have to be able to read Greek script).

Bottom line: the lexical definition of "believe" - the word used by John - simply means to acknowledge that something is true or to trust. If I "believe" in Christ for life, it means I take Him at His word that He will give it to me. You ask if just saying words are enough . . . you misunderstand. You don't even have to say that you believe. You may say you believe because you believe, but you believe first. The moment you believe you are saved. A practical ramification is that we don't have to "pray to receive Jesus Christ." The moment you believe in Him you receive Him. Our first prayer as a Christian should not be, "Lord, I'm a sinner. Please come into my heart, forgive my sins, and save me!" No, no, no . . . our first prayer as a Christian should be, "Lord, thank You for saving me! Help me now to live my life in service to You, and break me of my sinful ways."

God bless

I completely agree with you, Jac, but even if we, at the time we "truly" believe, blurt out "God forgive me", or "come into my heart, Lord Jesus" I don't think God will be mad or insulted. I have a feeling that in His great love He may even be touched by such an attitude...but I agree, and scripture certainly plainly states that believing is all that is required for salvation.

All I know is that I believe with all my heart that Jesus died on the cross for me and that He is the only way to the Father.

It also says something about Jesus. I can believe he died on the cross and that he thought he was doing it for me. However, I have to believe he had the power to die for my sins. That there is eternal life or life-after death.
That there is a God! and Jesus was the Son of God.

Then from there that everything else Jesus taught then I better listen to, try to follow, try to learn, understand and obey.

It a if step 1 was true and not just faked words then step 2 should follow.

Now in the step 1. Believe! What is there for doubts?
You or someone else may claim to believe 100% with all their hearts, but has it been tested?

The test can be real of one of your making, along as you believe its real.
Being faced with you own death. Like being told you had cancer.
It could be just your mind playing trick on you too thinking your going to die. This fear of Death.

Mostly as a making in my own mind I have had this great fear of Death.
I have gone through it twice and both times my trust in Life after Death was not where I hope they would be. I pray to God to remove the doubts and I think he answered that its still a work of slow progress.

Even contact with the Holy Ghost is not 100% immediate removal of doubt.
I think the first contact can be denied as being just my emotional state at the time.

Anyways in good times I can trust in the Lord , but will I during the tribulations of life?

Michael
Thomas

ttoews,

Here is an audio exposition (15 minutes) of Matt. 7:21-23. The second link here is a full sermon on that passage:

http://www.faithalone.org/Audio/51205b.ram
http://www.faithalone.org/Audio/lordship.ram

And here is another exposition, thi sone of Matt. 7:15-20.

http://www.faithalone.org/Audio/51205a.ram

And here is the index I am getting these from. Really . . . good stuff here:

http://www.faithalone.org/Audio/index.html

God bless

BTW, FFC: I agree that there is nothing wrong with saying asking God to forgive you or ask Jesus to "come into your heart" . . . so long as you have truly believed in Jesus Christ for everlasting life apart from works, because that's the main issue.

Jac wrote:BTW, FFC: I agree that there is nothing wrong with saying asking God to forgive you or ask Jesus to "come into your heart" . . . so long as you have truly believed in Jesus Christ for everlasting life apart from works, because that's the main issue.

I know and I agree. Sometimes that line is very thin and only God knows which side an individual is on. I commend you for keeping the message clear.