08 Nov 05
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesDo you believe for example? That someone murdered someone, went to jail, repented and accepted CHRIST. Then after a period of time, went back to their old ways. Murdered again, died unrepentful, is still able to go to heaven?
Does the verb 'believe' as used in John 3:16 have a perfect or progressive aspect?
This question pertains to the dispute about whether "once saved, always saved" is true or false. That is, whether a saved person can become unsaved and then need to be saved again in order to enter heaven.
08 Nov 05
4 edits
Originally posted by blindfaith101According to John 3:16, all of one's actions, besides belief, are irrelevant to whether one receives eternal life. So, under your scenario, the person would be saved, regardless of the aspect of the verb, because he accepted Christ and never rejected him.
Do you believe for example? That someone murdered someone, went to jail, repented and accepted CHRIST. Then after a period of time, went back to their old ways. Murdered again, died unrepentful, is still able to go to heaven?
If you meant to indicate that he did reject Christ's salvation by retracting his belief (his murderous actions and lack of repent don't entail this rejection), then his salvation depends on the verb's aspect, which I am trying to figure out.
08 Nov 05
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesI have a very close brother. He was a great man of GOD. Now after living in THE LORD for 20 years. He walked away from GOD, The Ministry, and his wife. Is he still saved. No. If he does not Repent and come back to CHRIST. Does he receive The Kingdom of Heaven? No.
According to John 3:16, all of one's actions, besides belief, are irrelevant to whether one receives eternal life. So, under your scenario, the person would be saved, regardless of the aspect of the verb, because he accepted Christ and never rejected him. If you meant to indicate that he did reject Christ (his murderous actions don't entail this rejection), then his salvation depends on the verb's aspect, which I am trying to figure out.
Or am I wrong?
08 Nov 05
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesExcuse me -- is there a name for the type of statement that occurs in this verse (rather than having Christ say the words, the narrator makes a statement about Christ's function)?
According to John 3:16, all of one's actions, besides belief, are irrelevant to whether one receives eternal life.
08 Nov 05
1 edit
Originally posted by Bosse de NageGood question. I don't know if there is such a term, except in this specific instance - speaking about the nature of Christ - in which it would be called a gospel. If you were speaking about my function in the Spirituality forum, I don't know what term you would use. It seems like there should be one.
Excuse me -- is there a name for the type of statement that occurs in this verse (rather than having Christ say the words, the narrator makes a statement about Christ's function)?
08 Nov 05
1 edit
Originally posted by blindfaith101Because it is not compatible with the notion of Christ that I understand. Christ died for the sins of the world, including your brother's. Your brother claimed his portion of Christ's suffering as his salvation. When your brother rejected his salvation, did Christ get a refund on his suffering? Would he accept one? How is the suffering that paid for your brother's sins now accounted for?
He loses, his Salvation. Why do you think he doesn't
08 Nov 05
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesThere is no use trying to bring you back to the Lordagain if you have once understood the Good News and tasted for yourself the good things of Heaven and shared in the Holy Spirit, and know how good the Word of God is,and felt the mighty powers of the world to come, and then have turned against God. You cannot bring yourself to repent again if you have nailed the Son of God to the cross again by rejecting him, holding him up to mocking and to public shame. When a farmer's land has had many showers upon it and good crops come up, that land has experienced God's blessing upon it. But if it keeps on having crops of thistles and thorns, the land is considered no good and is ready for condemnationand burnining off. HEBREWS 6:4-8
Because it is not compatible with the notion of Christ that I understand. Christ died for the sins of the world, including your brother's. Your brother claimed his portion of Christ's suffering as his salvation. When your brother rejected his salvation, did Christ get a refund on his suffering? Would he accept one? How is the suffering that paid for your brother's sins now accounted for?
The Living Bible
The Message Bible is also good for understanding.
CHRIST'S purpose was to die once, for all mankind. Not millions of billions of times. Once you have accepted Salvation, it is the greatest of gifts from GOD. We are to cherish Salvation. We are to watch over it, protect it, not all satan or the world to steal it, and etc. etc. etc. We Christians at times donot know or understand the gift that GOD has given us. With the power that CHRIST gives us through THE HOLY SPIRIT. There should be no hunger, sickness or disease. We should not be fighting each other, we should be working together. There are/were no Denominations in JESUS.
08 Nov 05
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesThis might help you:
Does the verb 'believe' as used in John 3:16 have a perfect or progressive aspect?
This question pertains to the dispute about whether "once saved, always saved" is true or false. That is, whether a saved person can become unsaved and then need to be saved again in order to enter heaven.
http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek/archives/96-12/0290.html
08 Nov 05
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesTo answer your question briefly - the verb 'believe' (pisteuo) has a persistent or continuous aspect rather than a perfect one.
Does the verb 'believe' as used in John 3:16 have a perfect or progressive aspect?
This question pertains to the dispute about whether "once saved, always saved" is true or false. That is, whether a saved person can become unsaved and then need to be saved again in order to enter heaven.
08 Nov 05
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesYou're thinking of Christ's death as "paying off" some debt we owe to the Father and, hence, of justification/salvation as being God "covering up" our sins*.
Because it is not compatible with the notion of Christ that I understand. Christ died for the sins of the world, including your brother's. Your brother claimed his portion of Christ's suffering as his salvation. When your brother rejected his salvation, did Christ get a refund on his suffering? Would he accept one? How is the suffering that paid for your brother's sins now accounted for?
The Catholic view of justification is that of ontological transformation†. The purpose of Christ's death was to make human nature capable of accepting God's justifying grace. But how far the process of justification goes (and, in the Catholic view, justification is a process and not an event) is up to the person. By rejecting grace, he reverses the process.
LH
---
* Luther's analogy for this was God throwing a pile of snow on top of manure.
† To modify Luther's analogy, transforming manure into snow
08 Nov 05
Originally posted by blindfaith101god told a prohet if you change from evil to good i will not remember the evil, but if you change from good to evil i will not remember the good. Just can not think of that prophets name at moment {Ezra comes to mind but unshure of this}.
Do you believe for example? That someone murdered someone, went to jail, repented and accepted CHRIST. Then after a period of time, went back to their old ways. Murdered again, died unrepentful, is still able to go to heaven?