Orangeslice13, a blessing to those around him…..Again

#7,277
#7,277
@GVF
I absolutely approve of your answer.
We may not agree on every topic or any but you and I can have a friendly conversation because you’re coming from a place of honesty.

GVF said:
Sorry to butt in, but Acts 3 does not give more detailed instruction on salvation, that I see. The only real reference is verse 19 where it says repent and turn to God... What that means can be found in Acts 2 and many other places in the NT. Acts 3 does speak of faith in Jesus and faith through him that healed the cripple. However, it didn't say if the cripple was or was not already a believer, and in the context of how it is written it can also be interpreted that Peter meant by his faith, God healed him because they did not asked the cripple if he was saved before they healed him. They just walked up to him and healed him, whether he was saved or not as an open act of God's power. And there is no indication of whether or not the cripple specifically asked to be saved either before or after.

There are many passages where people asked what they must do to be saved, and the response included baptism as part of the answer. There are passages that same question is merely answered to believe or have faith. I personally do not believe one answer nulls or replaces the other. I believe that the different passages collectively provide the answer. Others may interpret differently. Some still may change their interpretation over time pertinent to the time they spend in study of the Word.

As to your question to the other poster, I will answer yes. And as to why, I believe the NT covers the subject well, and though there are some passages that say to believe or to have faith without saying baptism, there are just as many others that specifically include baptism when the questions are asked about what one must do to be saved. I will say I do not believe the CoC (which I am), are the only ones to believe this. My grandparents were Baptist, and I asked my grandfather why he was baptized, and his answer was same as the one I would give for myself. I believe that if you are going to be a believer, you accept the scripture as the living word, and what is in it. So, if you collectively study the passages that deal with salvation, it's a relatively easy answer to come to. At least for me. I also believe that another person's path to understanding is exactly theirs, and where they are may be different than me, and I had my path to understanding and salvation, and do not have to power or authority to judge another's path, except for God does expect me to share that and make disciples though him.

The most successful people I have known when studying with others never directly answered those questions when someone asked what they needed to do. They would present scripture to the other person and asked them to read it and say what they thought Jesus was telling them to do. I respect that, as it does not put any one person in the position of being a judge so to speak.

Again, sorry to butt in, and not looking to re-ignite the conversation, but That's my .02 cent on answering the question, and why I believe my answer.
Click to expand...

you need not be sorry.
My children went to a COC school. The majority are like you. Honest about their beliefs. Very few are like that other guy. And every denomination has them. My statements on the COC should have been more focused on him and not on the denomination as a whole.
GVF said:
In context, He was specifically referring to oaths and swearing. Verses 33-37. But, one could see much value in that applying to other areas of life.
Click to expand...

It’s my belief that the others you mentioned would give a simple yes or no if pressed.
But to oversimplify we will all be judged by ourselves so others opinions don’t really matter that much.

I believe I’d enjoy conversing with you on this topic and other biblical topics but I have no desire to do so in that thread.
 
#7,278
#7,278
Orangeslice13 said:
@GVF
I absolutely approve of your answer.
We may not agree on every topic or any but you and I can have a friendly conversation because you’re coming from a place of honesty.



you need not be sorry.
My children went to a COC school. The majority are like you. Honest about their beliefs. Very few are like that other guy. And every denomination has them. My statements on the COC should have been more focused on him and not on the denomination as a whole.


It’s my belief that the others you mentioned would give a simple yes or no if pressed.
But to oversimplify we will all be judged by ourselves so others opinions don’t really matter that much.

I believe I’d enjoy conversing with you on this topic and other biblical topics but I have no desire to do so in that thread.
Click to expand...

Where did your kids go to school. I went to FHU/ACU/FHU. Regular city HS where I lived. Parents asked us to try Christian college first year and then whatever. Ended up staying and graduating. Liked it pretty well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeslice13
#7,279
#7,279
Orangeslice13 said:
In case y’all missed it, I do not think the book of Hebrews is inspired and I do not consider it scripture. As a matter of fact approximately 30% of the guys who determined what books would be in the Bible agree with me. I’ve described it as “crap”. Not because of any real doctrine issues. There’s only one I take exception with. It’s just loaded with errors that don’t exist in the rest of the “New Testament” writings. Nothing to get in a twist about but there is one guy who just can’t let it go.

I think he may be secretly in love with me.
Click to expand...

Sounds interesting. So, what is your objection to Hebrews. Never really heard this take I can think of.
 
#7,280
#7,280
GVF said:
Where did your kids go to school. I went to FHU/ACU/FHU. Regular city HS where I lived. Parents asked us to try Christian college first year and then whatever. Ended up staying and graduating. Liked it pretty well.
Click to expand...
We are Boyd Buchanan Bucs.
I can’t say enough good things about the people there or the school. They are with out a doubt the best in the city of chattanooga at what they do.
 
#7,281
#7,281
GVF said:
Sounds interesting. So, what is your objection to Hebrews. Never really heard this take I can think of.
Click to expand...

It’s not anything doctrine related.
It’s just loaded with little mistakes that don’t exist anywhere else in scripture.

that’s actually not true.
There’s one doctrine error I take exception with and another I’m meh on.

Give me a few and I’ll give a little run down on both.
 
#7,282
#7,282
Orangeslice13 said:
@GVF
I absolutely approve of your answer.
We may not agree on every topic or any but you and I can have a friendly conversation because you’re coming from a place of honesty.



you need not be sorry.
My children went to a COC school. The majority are like you. Honest about their beliefs. Very few are like that other guy. And every denomination has them. My statements on the COC should have been more focused on him and not on the denomination as a whole.


It’s my belief that the others you mentioned would give a simple yes or no if pressed.
But to oversimplify we will all be judged by ourselves so others opinions don’t really matter that much.

I believe I’d enjoy conversing with you on this topic and other biblical topics but I have no desire to do so in that thread.
Click to expand...

I enjoy discussing, but some get offended too easily when discussing with others. The point is to discuss and study and learn. Not set out to prove anyone wrong. There was a time when the CoC had a severe reputation for that. there was a time it may have been warranted, reformation and all. But, it carried along into the fifties and beyond.
A small handful of do's and don'ts in my arsenal to get started:
I do not believe the CoC is the only church that believe predominately what we do.
I don't believe we are 100% factual as we are also human in establishing our beliefs.
I do believe the above is wholly different than setting the bible aside and writing your own governing book of beliefs.
I do believe one must accept the Bible is the Word of God in order to continue their path meaningfully. Not parts.
I believe scripture is very solid on salvation, communion, and making disciples. On these things I don't think there is scriptural room for much misinterpretaion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: joevol33 and vol445
#7,284
#7,284
I'm checking out for evening. I might jump on later from phone. Responses might be slow tonight.
 
#7,285
#7,285
GVF said:
I'm checking out for evening. I might jump on later from phone. Responses might be slow tonight.
Click to expand...
Take your time.
I’d prefer a long friendship to a short exchange.
I appreciate your stance above.
I’m will to answer any questions you have honestly and support with scripture for why I believe what I believe.
I’ll get to that Hebrews answer later tonight
I believe we can be honest with each other and respect one another’s beliefs.
I’m glad to have another buddy who may not agree with me to speak with.
Iron sharpens iron.
 
  • Like
Reactions: joevol33
#7,289
#7,289
GVF said:
I'm checking out for evening. I might jump on later from phone. Responses might be slow tonight.
Click to expand...

So....
The one doctrine issue I have with Hebrews is in Ch 6.

For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6 and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, [d]since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame. 7 For ground that drinks the rain which often [e]falls on it and brings forth vegetation useful to those for whose sake it is also tilled, receives a blessing from God; 8 but if it yields thorns and thistles, it is worthless and close [f]to being cursed, and [g]it ends up being burned.

this is a clear statement that If you lose your salvation you can’t get it back. I’ve heard every way possible to twist this into “if you could, then you can’t” which I would agree with but that’s not what is said here.

Now background on me. It’s my contention that there is a statement and 2 witnesses to make things “legal”. I have searched and have not been able to locate the 2 witnesses for either point of view. This verse remains an enigma. A dear friend recently told me he could support the “if/then” concept from other scripture but has yet to do so. I remain excited to here this argument as it’s one I’ve never heard attempted before and I’ve been at this for a while.

the issue I’m meh on involves the “angel of the Lord” but as I’m not exactly 100% on that it’s probably not worthy of discussion.
 
#7,290
#7,290
Orangeslice13 said:
Take your time.
I’d prefer a long friendship to a short exchange.
I appreciate your stance above.
I’m will to answer any questions you have honestly and support with scripture for why I believe what I believe.
I’ll get to that Hebrews answer later tonight
I believe we can be honest with each other and respect one another’s beliefs.
I’m glad to have another buddy who may not agree with me to speak with.
Iron sharpens iron.
Click to expand...

It’s A Trap!
 
#7,292
#7,292
Orangeslice13 said:
So....
The one doctrine issue I have with Hebrews is in Ch 6.

For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6 and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, [d]since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame. 7 For ground that drinks the rain which often [e]falls on it and brings forth vegetation useful to those for whose sake it is also tilled, receives a blessing from God; 8 but if it yields thorns and thistles, it is worthless and close [f]to being cursed, and [g]it ends up being burned.

this is a clear statement that If you lose your salvation you can’t get it back. I’ve heard every way possible to twist this into “if you could, then you can’t” which I would agree with but that’s not what is said here.

Now background on me. It’s my contention that there is a statement and 2 witnesses to make things “legal”. I have searched and have not been able to locate the 2 witnesses for either point of view. This verse remains an enigma. A dear friend recently told me he could support the “if/then” concept from other scripture but has yet to do so. I remain excited to here this argument as it’s one I’ve never heard attempted before and I’ve been at this for a while.

the issue I’m meh on involves the “angel of the Lord” but as I’m not exactly 100% on that it’s probably not worthy of discussion.
Click to expand...

My answer according to my understanding of salvation as a whole is that everything is forgiven (or can be through repentance) by the Grace of God. Except for blasphemy, which according to scripture is not. If what is being spoken of in these verses is indeed pointing to blasphemy, then there is no contradiction as far as I'm concerned. there is sin, and forgiveness of sin. And there is blasphemy (denouncing God). One would have to have a clear view of what these verses are addressing to determine the accuracy of this passage. I say this for 2 reasons:

One, you seem to understand it is talking about losing salvation, and blasphemy is the only single way to do that, and is completely different than hitting a ho on Friday, getting drunk on Saturday, and realizing Sunday morning you have sinned and need to repent. I think people may have differing interpretations of what "fallen away" means in these verses.

Two, in verse 8 it refers to ground that has gone permanently bad verses the fertile soil in verse 7. Not a bad crop season, but ground that has failed to produce ever again, so to speak. That would indicate to me that this is referring to blasphemy, which would make this passage doctrinally sound.

I'll add lib a 3rd point here using Peter. Peter was an Apostle that discipled for Jesus, until his own death. Yet, at the betrayal, he denied Christ 3 times, and was received back into Christ. He sinned, and fulfilled prophecy, but he did not denounce God's existence after having been in God. Therefore he retained his salvation.

Finally, a 4th ad lib, one who has fallen away to the extent I think these verses are addressing is in the position of serving two masters, which cannot be done, and their heart is not able to reconcile. They are lukewarm and will be spewed from the mouth of God. Being lukewarm is different than being like David, where we are sinners, but desire to be perfect in God.

I'm not sure where you are coming from with the statement and two witnesses, but I'll take a stab at it in you possibly meaning that one would have to fall away and there are two bearing witness to what the fallen may have said or done. That's OK of sorts if one is addressing them fellowshipping still. But, God would not need those witnesses in his judgement of us. So, that in my opinion has it's limitations here.

So, in a nut shell, I don't think there is doctrinal or contradicting issues here. My take is that this passage is addressing blasphemy in an obscure way, in which case I have no issue with it.
 
#7,293
#7,293
GVF said:
My answer according to my understanding of salvation as a whole is that everything is forgiven (or can be through repentance) by the Grace of God. Except for blasphemy, which according to scripture is not. If what is being spoken of in these verses is indeed pointing to blasphemy, then there is no contradiction as far as I'm concerned. there is sin, and forgiveness of sin. And there is blasphemy (denouncing God). One would have to have a clear view of what these verses are addressing to determine the accuracy of this passage. I say this for 2 reasons:

One, you seem to understand it is talking about losing salvation, and blasphemy is the only single way to do that, and is completely different than hitting a ho on Friday, getting drunk on Saturday, and realizing Sunday morning you have sinned and need to repent. I think people may have differing interpretations of what "fallen away" means in these verses.

Two, in verse 8 it refers to ground that has gone permanently bad verses the fertile soil in verse 7. Not a bad crop season, but ground that has failed to produce ever again, so to speak. That would indicate to me that this is referring to blasphemy, which would make this passage doctrinally sound.

I'll add lib a 3rd point here using Peter. Peter was an Apostle that discipled for Jesus, until his own death. Yet, at the betrayal, he denied Christ 3 times, and was received back into Christ. He sinned, and fulfilled prophecy, but he did not denounce God's existence after having been in God. Therefore he retained his salvation.

Finally, a 4th ad lib, one who has fallen away to the extent I think these verses are addressing is in the position of serving two masters, which cannot be done, and their heart is not able to reconcile. They are lukewarm and will be spewed from the mouth of God. Being lukewarm is different than being like David, where we are sinners, but desire to be perfect in God.

I'm not sure where you are coming from with the statement and two witnesses, but I'll take a stab at it in you possibly meaning that one would have to fall away and there are two bearing witness to what the fallen may have said or done. That's OK of sorts if one is addressing them fellowshipping still. But, God would not need those witnesses in his judgement of us. So, that in my opinion has it's limitations here.

So, in a nut shell, I don't think there is doctrinal or contradicting issues here. My take is that this passage is addressing blasphemy in an obscure way, in which case I have no issue with it.
Click to expand...

interesting take on the verse. I will ponder that for a while. My immediate reaction would be that I think the loss of salvation isn’t possible.
Messiah says
(John 10)
My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: [28] And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. [29] My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able topluck them out of my Father's hand.

I include myself in “nobody” meaning that I cannot remove myself. As to those who blaspheme the Spirit of G-d I’d argue that they were never saved to begin with.
as scripture also says.
(1 John 2)
They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they all are not of us.

But that’s just an initial reaction. I’ll clearly give it a lot more thought.

I’m sorry for not being clear. I’m a messianic believer. I practice keeping Torah as a sign and because of my love for G-d. I do not believe the acts of keeping Torah are anything beyond a result of my salvation. You and I differ on baptism. I was baptized as an act of keeping Torah because I love G-d and was instructed to do so. Very much like the Roman soldier of acts 10. My salvation came first. But again it’s ok we disagree there.

I tell you all that to tell you this. The statement a 2 witnesses is a legal requirement of Torah. It’s a way of verifying truth.for example, The first witnesses of the risen messiah were 2 women who received the statement from an angel. Likewise I support all my beliefs in scripture with an original Vs and 2 other verses that say the same thing. I don’t always site more than one verse. Like above where I gave one verse for each thought. However I’ve done the study and can support the things I post with 2 more.

I hope that clears things up
 
#7,294
#7,294
Just a few verses on blasphemy, one of which makes a distinction between the blasphemy of men and the Son of man as forgivable, and the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost as not. (Matt 12:31-32). Which is why I think the passage in Hebrews you laid out is referring to the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, in which case it is doctrinally correct.

Heb 10:29
Lev 24:10-16
Num 21:5-6
Matt 12:31-32
Mak3:29-30
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeslice13
#7,296
#7,296
GVF said:
Just a few verses on blasphemy, one of which makes a distinction between the blasphemy of men and the Son of man as forgivable, and the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost as not. (Matt 12:31-32). Which is why I think the passage in Hebrews you laid out is referring to the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, in which case it is doctrinally correct.

Heb 10:29
Lev 24:10-16
Num 21:5-6
Matt 12:31-32
Mak3:29-30
Click to expand...

It’s interesting and I plan on spending time on it but I still don’t see support for the loss of salvation that overcomes the verses saying you can’t. If anything I think the verses you quoted speaks to the prevention of salvation and not so much it’s loss.
 
#7,297
#7,297
Orangeslice13 said:
interesting take on the verse. I will ponder that for a while. My immediate reaction would be that I think the loss of salvation isn’t possible.
Messiah says
(John 10)
My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: [28] And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. [29] My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able topluck them out of my Father's hand.

I include myself in “nobody” meaning that I cannot remove myself. As to those who blaspheme the Spirit of G-d I’d argue that they were never saved to begin with.
as scripture also says.
(1 John 2)
They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they all are not of us.

But that’s just an initial reaction. I’ll clearly give it a lot more thought.

I’m sorry for not being clear. I’m a messianic believer. I practice keeping Torah as a sign and because of my love for G-d. I do not believe the acts of keeping Torah are anything beyond a result of my salvation. You and I differ on baptism. I was baptized as an act of keeping Torah because I love G-d and was instructed to do so. Very much like the Roman soldier of acts 10. My salvation came first. But again it’s ok we disagree there.

I tell you all that to tell you this. The statement a 2 witnesses is a legal requirement of Torah. It’s a way of verifying truth.for example, The first witnesses of the risen messiah were 2 women who received the statement from an angel. Likewise I support all my beliefs in scripture with an original Vs and 2 other verses that say the same thing. I don’t always site more than one verse. Like above where I gave one verse for each thought. However I’ve done the study and can support the things I post with 2 more.

I hope that clears things up
Click to expand...

See my secondary post with blasphemy verses as to why I interpret Hebrews 6 as I do.

However, I do believe a person saved can be in God, and for unforeseen life experiences allow Satan into their hearts to the point that they turn and curse God and the Spirit, losing salvation. See the fallen angel that was cast to hell. I think verses on blasphemy pertain to the saved and unsaved alike. however, a person that curses God, yet has not know him in salvation yet, can be saved (see Paul). Because losing salvation pertains to one who has tasted God, yet in turn rejected him. See Paul.

As far as when salvation occurs, many do believe that they first received salvation, then were baptized later as an act of obedience because Jesus was baptized, etc. I'm on the fence on this sort of. If you were baptized for remission of sin and to receive the gift of God as I was also, should it be a stumbling block to me, or a point of contention between us, if you believe you were saved before immersion, and I believe I was saved at immersion when we both completed the full act. (believing, repenting, immersion). Personally, I believe Salvation is a gift bestowed by God upon the realization you need to and respond to it in completion. How can one come to believe and not see the need to be baptized and say they are saved. The whole premise of belief, repentance, and baptism is a complete act of obedience. It cannot be accomplished in part. And every example I find in the NT, says that when people heard and believed, they immediately went down to the water. We this this multiple times. Therefore, I see salvation as a one step process where all realization comes together at one point and you are then baptized. (Mark 16:16, Matt 28:19, John 3:22, Rom 6:3-4). Now concerning receiving the holy Ghost, I find that it was received by believers when they were baptized as well as immediately prior upon believing as they were to be baptized. Again, why I contend that salvation is a process whereas everything falls into a bucket at one time and is not spread out over a sequence of buckets. (Jn 3:15, Acts 2:38, 1Cor 12:13, Mk 1:8, Acts 8:15-17, Titus 3: 5-6, Acts 10:44-47). But, in all instances I see where baptism occurred upon believing and they went into the water, all at that point of convergence.
 
#7,298
#7,298
Orangeslice13 said:
It’s interesting and I plan on spending time on it but I still don’t see support for the loss of salvation that overcomes the verses saying you can’t. If anything I think the verses you quoted speaks to the prevention of salvation and not so much it’s loss.
Click to expand...

I believe you will find it speaks to both, as only one sin is unforgiveable, and I think it speaks more to the saved that blaspheme and lose their salvation, because one would have to believe in order to denounce. Blasphemy is more an act of a saved person that has tasted God, turning their back on God. An unsaved person has yet to taste God, and therefore cannot lose what they have not had. In that state, they are already not saved anyway. If you look at the verses I provided, and there are others also, I think you would atleast understand my point.
 
#7,299
#7,299
Orangeslice13 said:
interesting take on the verse. I will ponder that for a while. My immediate reaction would be that I think the loss of salvation isn’t possible.
Messiah says
(John 10)
My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: [28] And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. [29] My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able topluck them out of my Father's hand.

I include myself in “nobody” meaning that I cannot remove myself. As to those who blaspheme the Spirit of G-d I’d argue that they were never saved to begin with.
as scripture also says.
(1 John 2)
They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they all are not of us.

But that’s just an initial reaction. I’ll clearly give it a lot more thought.

I’m sorry for not being clear. I’m a messianic believer. I practice keeping Torah as a sign and because of my love for G-d. I do not believe the acts of keeping Torah are anything beyond a result of my salvation. You and I differ on baptism. I was baptized as an act of keeping Torah because I love G-d and was instructed to do so. Very much like the Roman soldier of acts 10. My salvation came first. But again it’s ok we disagree there.

I tell you all that to tell you this. The statement a 2 witnesses is a legal requirement of Torah. It’s a way of verifying truth.for example, The first witnesses of the risen messiah were 2 women who received the statement from an angel. Likewise I support all my beliefs in scripture with an original Vs and 2 other verses that say the same thing. I don’t always site more than one verse. Like above where I gave one verse for each thought. However I’ve done the study and can support the things I post with 2 more.

I hope that clears things up
Click to expand...


Also, your use of john 10 says "His Sheep." Sheep are followers. They go where you lead them. Now, a sheep can wander off (sin), but can be brought back to the herd (group of believers) through grace. But, a sheep that no longer is a sheep (blasphemer), has left the flock and has denounced the flock and the shepherd. And will be devoured by the wolves.
 
#7,300
#7,300
vol445 said:
Wish someone else could see this gvf gave an honest concise reply that wasn’t hard to follow whether you agree or not.
Thanks for that
Click to expand...

We sometimes tend to forget when discussing God, is that no two paths are the same (points of study in our life), yet we are chasing the same goal...understanding and salvation. The more time we spend in the word, the more he reveals to us. I may not see the same verses the same way a year from now if I have spent the time in the word enough that God grants me more wisdom. Same for you, or Slice, or anyone else. Now, I may be more blatant if someone says you can be saved without baptism, but I will still strive to appreciate that is where they are in their understanding at that time.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top