The Problem of Salvation

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Which God are trusting in? The God of Mormonism who is a creatd being and progressing or the God of the Bible who Christ Jesus. Jesus was always God. Was never a spirit being who became a god. Was never created. Who created every thing there is and is and ever has been from eternity past the only One, True, Living, Creator, God. Isa 45:5

5 "I am the LORD, and there is no other;

Besides Me there is no God.

DLC

This isn't an either/or that you have set up. One thing is for sure, and that is that I don't worship the false God that you pretend exsists.

2 can play this 3rd grade game. My dad can beat up your dad. my God is older than your God, neener neener neener.

The bible never once says that Jesus was God from "eternity past". I cannot find that phrase in the bible. I do find that Jesus is the beginning of Gods creations though. The LDS never claimed that Jesus became a God/god or a "spirit being becomming god". Can you find me a scripture refernce for that.

I also cannot find a phrase that says "Who created every thing there is and is and ever has"

I don't even understand what you are saying here. I think you are saying that Jesus is God and he created everything that has ever exsisted. If that is the case can you find me a verse of scripture that unequivicolly claims this. I am not interested in your private interpretations of what you think the scriptures are saying.

And you still have never once answered this question. "Is God a God if false gods"? Yes or no?

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Will you repent and believe in Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior?

Did that a long time ago!

Mike

I did that to. So now I have to ask again. DLClark, what are you doing here? Shouldn't you be preaching to the athiests? WE are saved accourding to your beliefs. You have nothing to offer us in the way of your version of what you think the gospel is. As you see we have all ready met what you think the requirments are. And the stuff were you say "nu'uh" can be easily and plainly refuted with the bible.

Such as I need to beleive in the right Jesus to be saved. That isn't a requirement. Just that we need to beleive that Jesus is the savior and we have accpeted him as our saviour. Go ahead and try, as many have done before you and have failed.

[DLClark]

So you bring up a verse of scripture that contradicts another verse of scripture. Nice.

One verse says that we canno sin because we are born of God then you tell us that if we have no sin we are decieved?

I think it might not be a contrdcition but a mis-interpretation of scripture. I remain unconvinced that you know what you are talking about.

When Christ said in John 8:58 "Before Abraham was, I am," His listners knew exactly what He was saying. Christ, by making this claim was claiming to be eternal and there by easserting Himself to be God. Why did the Jew then take up stones to stone Him if He was not claiming to be God from eternity past? You may choose not to believe this point about His eternal deity but it will not change the fact of the Bible. It teaches that Jesus is God from all eternity past.

[DLClark]

This isn't an either/or that you have set up. One thing is for sure, and that is that I don't worship the false God that you pretend exsists.

2 can play this 3rd grade game. My dad can beat up your dad. my God is older than your God, neener neener neener.

The bible never once says that Jesus was God from "eternity past". I cannot find that phrase in the bible. I do find that Jesus is the beginning of Gods creations though. The LDS never claimed that Jesus became a God/god or a "spirit being becomming god". Can you find me a scripture refernce for that.

I also cannot find a phrase that says "Who created every thing there is and is and ever has"

I don't even understand what you are saying here. I think you are saying that Jesus is God and he created everything that has ever exsisted. If that is the case can you find me a verse of scripture that unequivicolly claims this. I am not interested in your private interpretations of what you think the scriptures are saying.

And you still have never once answered this question. "Is God a God if false gods"? Yes or no?

Here is your verse about Jesus creating everything.

John 1:1-3

1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2 The same was in the beginning with God.

3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.KJV

If you go down to verse 14 you will find the word Word refers to Jesus Christ. This passage says that Jesus made ever thing and that nothing has ever been made that Jesus did not make. I do not make statements out ofthin air. The Mormon god is not the God of the Bible. He is a created being and a demi-god.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

When Christ said in John 8:58 "Before Abraham was, I am," His listners knew exactly what He was saying. Christ, by making this claim was claiming to be eternal and there by easserting Himself to be God. Why did the Jew then take up stones to stone Him if He was not claiming to be God from eternity past? You may choose not to believe this point about His eternal deity but it will not change the fact of the Bible. It teaches that Jesus is God from all eternity past.

Um I think you are forgetting a key verse of scripture in this.

30 I and my Father are one.

31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.

32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?

33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;

36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and bsent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

Why did Christ quote this scripture? Why not just say "becuase I am God". Notice that the Jews did not offer a rebuttle of "It is obvious there is only one God and you are not him".

My question is why do you wish to stone the mormons when it is written that "Ye are gods". Notice Jesus uses this to establish that he is devine.

This is an admission of being devine. Gods is plural here. Did Jesus not know what he was talking about when he offered this verse of scripture?

Sorry but Jesus claims that I am does not mean the Jesus was "God eternity past". Good try though.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Here is your verse about Jesus creating everything.

John 1:1-3

1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2 The same was in the beginning with God.

3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.KJV

If you go down to verse 14 you will find the word Word refers to Jesus Christ. This passage says that Jesus made ever thing and that nothing has ever been made that Jesus did not make. I do not make statements out ofthin air. The Mormon god is not the God of the Bible. He is a created being and a demi-god.

Nice try but again a bit ambigous. It never states in unequivical terms that Jesus created every thing that ever exsisted. He did create the Heveans and the earth and every thing that are in them.

Tell me what does the "heveans and the earth" mean? Can you back that up by scripture? I don't think you can as the scripture never tells us what "Heveans and the earth" encompus. I can interpret this to mean that He created This hevean and this earth and all things that are in them, just as easily as you can interpret that to mean Every thing that ever exsisted. I just find your refrences lacking. Want to try again?

[DLClark]

Um I think you are forgetting a key verse of scripture in this.

30 I and my Father are one.

31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.

32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?

33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;

36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and bsent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

Why did Christ quote this scripture? Why not just say "becuase I am God". Notice that the Jews did not offer a rebuttle of "It is obvious there is only one God and you are not him".

My question is why do you wish to stone the mormons when it is written that "Ye are gods". Notice Jesus uses this to establish that he is devine.

This is an admission of being devine. Gods is plural here. Did Jesus not know what he was talking about when he offered this verse of scripture?

Sorry but Jesus claims that I am does not mean the Jesus was "God eternity past". Good try though.

What does the phrase "Son of God" mean. Well it does not mean that Jesus is God's son like human parents have sons. It had completely different meaning. A proper understanding of the phrase "Son of God" must come from how the Jews understood it at the time it was made. This phrase carried an oriental understanig and the Jews would have known it true meaning in such a way. When a person uses this phrase he saying "I am the son of my faither" he would be saying, "I am of the same substance or essence as my father is" that of a human being. When Jesus said that He was "The Son of God" He was saying that He was of same essence or substance as God the Father is. In other words, Jesus was claiming dieity with the Father. Jesus is the very same One, True, Creator, God as the Father is. This is how the Jews would have understood what Jesus was saying. The Mormon Jesus is not this Jesus of the Bible but was a man who became a god. The Mormon Jesus is a demi-god who can not save.

DLC

[DLClark]

Nice try but again a bit ambigous. It never states in unequivical terms that Jesus created every thing that ever exsisted. He did create the Heveans and the earth and every thing that are in them.

Tell me what does the "heveans and the earth" mean? Can you back that up by scripture? I don't think you can as the scripture never tells us what "Heveans and the earth" encompus. I can interpret this to mean that He created This hevean and this earth and all things that are in them, just as easily as you can interpret that to mean Every thing that ever exsisted. I just find your refrences lacking. Want to try again?

You may choose to look the other way but the Bible is very clear. It says that Jesus created everything that there ever was. Here is one of several verses that teaches this fact. John 1:3

3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.KJV

"All" mean total, the complete number of everything. This verse also says that without Jesus nothing ever came into existence. How simple can this verse be to understand. The Bible says that the reason you do believe this verse is that your mind is being decieved by Satan. Here read this.

2 Cor 4:3-6

3 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:

4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

5 For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake.

6 For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

KJV

DLC

[DLClark]

Um I think you are forgetting a key verse of scripture in this.

30 I and my Father are one.

31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.

32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?

33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;

36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and bsent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

Why did Christ quote this scripture? Why not just say "becuase I am God". Notice that the Jews did not offer a rebuttle of "It is obvious there is only one God and you are not him".

My question is why do you wish to stone the mormons when it is written that "Ye are gods". Notice Jesus uses this to establish that he is devine.

This is an admission of being devine. Gods is plural here. Did Jesus not know what he was talking about when he offered this verse of scripture?

Sorry but Jesus claims that I am does not mean the Jesus was "God eternity past". Good try though.

Here is the text from John, John 8:58-59

58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

59 Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.

KJV

The "I am" denotes absolute eternal existence, and not simply existence prior to Abraham. It is a claim to be Yahweh of the OT. That the Jews understood the significance of this claim is clear from their reaction, v. 59, to the supposed blassphemy. The reason you refuse to accept this truth about Christ is because of the blindness of your mind that Satan is responsible for. He blinds people to the truth about Christ so that they will not come to personal saving faith in the true Biblical Jesus Christ.2 Cor 4:3-6

3 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:

4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

5 For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake.

6 For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

KJV

DLC

[Flyonthewall]

What does the phrase "Son of God" mean. Well it does not mean that Jesus is God's son like human parents have sons. It had completely different meaning. A proper understanding of the phrase "Son of God" must come from how the Jews understood it at the time it was made. This phrase carried an oriental understanig and the Jews would have known it true meaning in such a way. When a person uses this phrase he saying "I am the son of my faither" he would be saying, "I am of the same substance or essence as my father is" that of a human being. When Jesus said that He was "The Son of God" He was saying that He was of same essence or substance as God the Father is. In other words, Jesus was claiming dieity with the Father. Jesus is the very same One, True, Creator, God as the Father is. This is how the Jews would have understood what Jesus was saying. The Mormon Jesus is not this Jesus of the Bible but was a man who became a god. The Mormon Jesus is a demi-god who can not save.

DLC

Given your explaination of Jesus' declaration of being the Son of God, how does His appeal to the scriptures fit in?

[mrmendoza]

What does the phrase "Son of God" mean. Well it does not mean that Jesus is God's son like human parents have sons. It had completely different meaning. A proper understanding of the phrase "Son of God" must come from how the Jews understood it at the time it was made. This phrase carried an oriental understanig and the Jews would have known it true meaning in such a way. When a person uses this phrase he saying "I am the son of my faither" he would be saying, "I am of the same substance or essence as my father is" that of a human being. When Jesus said that He was "The Son of God" He was saying that He was of same essence or substance as God the Father is. In other words, Jesus was claiming dieity with the Father. Jesus is the very same One, True, Creator, God as the Father is. This is how the Jews would have understood what Jesus was saying. The Mormon Jesus is not this Jesus of the Bible but was a man who became a god. The Mormon Jesus is a demi-god who can not save.

DLC

This is why we need true prophets today, to help us understand what the Bible means, so that we don't have to keep trying to keep up with every crackpot and psudoscholar like you telling us how to read Greek, & Hebrew. While it's true that it's good to know the context that the Jews of Jesus day may have seen things differently then we do today, you'll find that even their scholars today don't agree on much of what the Bible meant thousands of years ago! We need to know what it means to us today!

As for your example , you seem to be going way beyond the mark! "I am of the same substance or essence as my father is" can in no way be streached to "I am my father!" Nor can "I and my father are one." be reasonably understood to mean that, when you read John 17;

1 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:

2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.

3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.

5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. 6 I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word.

7 Now they have known that all things whatsoever thou hast given me are of thee.

8 For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I bcame out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me.

9 I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.

10 And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them.

11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the aworld, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

So let me ask you, who was Jesus praying to? Himself?

Again like so many other EVs, you keep howling that we don't believe in the Jesus of the Bible, as if you do! But you can't see past your own misinterpetations of what Jesus is! No matter what you or we think about what Jesus stands for, we are both talking about the same Jesus! We just have a different perspective about what He's done for us, and how he did it!

Mike

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

What does the phrase "Son of God" mean. Well it does not mean that Jesus is God's son like human parents have sons. It had completely different meaning. A proper understanding of the phrase "Son of God" must come from how the Jews understood it at the time it was made. This phrase carried an oriental understanig and the Jews would have known it true meaning in such a way. When a person uses this phrase he saying "I am the son of my faither" he would be saying, "I am of the same substance or essence as my father is" that of a human being. When Jesus said that He was "The Son of God" He was saying that He was of same essence or substance as God the Father is. In other words, Jesus was claiming dieity with the Father. Jesus is the very same One, True, Creator, God as the Father is. This is how the Jews would have understood what Jesus was saying. The Mormon Jesus is not this Jesus of the Bible but was a man who became a god. The Mormon Jesus is a demi-god who can not save.

DLC

Thanks for your non answer. THis is getting old. You can't even give a coherrant response to a simple question asked of you.

Here it is again

"My question is why do you wish to stone the mormons when it is written that "Ye are gods". Notice Jesus uses this to establish that he is devine.

This is an admission of being devine. Gods is plural here. Did Jesus not know what he was talking about when he offered this verse of scripture?"

Jesus also said that we will be one with him as he is one with teh Father. So now what? IT looks like you don't really believe what the bible teaches.

"The Mormon Jesus is not this Jesus of the Bible but was a man who became a god. The Mormon Jesus is a demi-god who can not save. "

Back to your 3rd grade tactics again? I see that you handle yourself in a truely "Christian" manner here.

Jesus was never claimed to be a "man who became a god". CFR that this is LDS thought. I don't think you have a clue about what you think we believe. This doesn't look very good for you.

Consider Sargons post for a more detailed reason that there are more than one God/god.

Another thread inspired me to post this little write up I did a while back about Jesus use of Psalm 82. Daniel Peterson has convincingly explained that Jesus' use of the passage only makes sense if the "gods" are truly divine.

I assume the reader believes that Jesus Christ understood the true meaning of the text, and that he did not abuse/misuse the text.

(NIV) John 10:30-39

30 I and the Father are one.

31 Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him,

32 but Jesus said to them, I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?

33 ?We are not stoning you for any of these,? replied the Jews, ?but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.

34 Jesus answered them, ?Is it not written in your Law, I have said you are gods?

35 If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came and the Scripture cannot be broken

36 what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, I am God's Son?

37 Do not believe me unless I do what my Father does.

38 But if I do it, even though you do not believe me, believe the miracles, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.

39 Again they tried to seize him, but he escaped their grasp.

The scene is pretty simple:

1. Jesus claims to be God.

2. The Jews accuse him of claiming to be God, and want to stone him for it.

3. Jesus defends his divinity by an appeal to Psalm 82.

4. The Jews continue to understand that Jesus is claiming to be God, and try to seize him.

5. Jesus escapes.

What is important is step 3. Jesus does not back down from his earlier claim of being one with the Father, of being the Son of God, of being himself a god. He defends this claim.

Psalm 82 only works for Jesus' argument if the "gods" mentioned in Psalm 82 are in fact divine. They must be in some way similar to what Jesus is. They can't be angels, because Jesus is not claiming to be an angel. They can't be mortal men, because Jesus isn't claiming to be a mortal man. They have to be what Jesus is claiming to be in order for his argument to make any sense.

Because Jesus is claiming to be divine/God, the gods in Psalm 82 must likewise we divine/gods. Otherwise, Jesus argument simply does not work. The gods of Psalm 82 are the same fundamental genus/race that Jesus is claiming to be- gods. Daniel Peterson writes:

But there is another and, for Christians, more fundamental problem. It does not seem that Jesus' citation of a metaphorical use of the term god, as applied to human beings, would go very far toward justifying his ascription to himself of literal divinity. So understood, Jesus would seem merely to be playing a word game, practicing a semantic sleight of hand, and, in fact, to be committing the logical fallacy of equivocation, wherein a word surreptitiously changes its meaning from one part of an argument to another. (The point of Jesus' argument is not that the Jews are unrighteous judges, but that it is not blasphemy for him to call himself divine.) It would be as if someone were declaring himself, madly enough, to be a vast ball of fusion-inflamed gases. We would scarcely be convinced if he were to offer, as evidence for the plausibility of his assertion, the fact that Rudolph Valentino, Lucille Ball, and John Wayne are generally called stars, and to demand that we, in fairness, grant the same title to him.

Therefore, Psalm 82 is a classic example of why the bible is not quite as monotheistic as most Christians suppose (just as scholars have long understood). It reveals a council of gods who are subordinate to a preeminent God. These gods are of the same genus/race as the preeminent god, but their role is to serve him and obey him on his council. These are the "sons of the Most High"(vs.6) God.

There is more than one God as psalms 82 outlined and Jesus used it to apple to the Jews for his own devinity.

[Vance]

It is becoming obvious that DLClark isn't here to have a discussion but to PREACH at us.

"What does the phrase "Son of God" mean. Well it does not mean that Jesus is God's son like human parents have sons."

That is one the dumbest statements I have heard. It is also an ABUSE of the language.

"and without him was not any thing made that was made". So clearly the things that pre-existed or uncreated are excluded here.

Also you need to have an understanding about what John meant by "all things". How could he have been talking about electrons, neutrons and protons if he DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THEM?

[Vance]

Let's look at the Greek of John 1:1 shall we?

En archE eimi ho logos kai ho logos eimi pros ho theos kai theos eimi ho logos

In beginning was the word and the word was toward the god and god was the word.

If DLClark understood the Greek, which he CLEARLY doesn't, he would know that this is very clear language describing the TWO SEPARATE beings, "the god" and "the word", and in the beginning BOTH of THEM were together.

AND the phrase "god was the word" means literally that "the word" was DIVINE!!!!!!!

Of course this verse doesn't specify exactly what "in beginning" is referring too. And of course DLClark ASSUMES that it is the beginning of everything.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Let's look at the Greek of John 1:1 shall we?

En archE eimi ho logos kai ho logos eimi pros ho theos kai theos eimi ho logos

In beginning was the word and the word was toward the god and god was the word.

If DLClark understood the Greek, which he CLEARLY doesn't, he would know that this is very clear language describing the TWO SEPARATE beings, "the god" and "the word", and in the beginning BOTH of THEM were together.

AND the phrase "god was the word" means literally that "the word" was DIVINE!!!!!!!

Of course this verse doesn't specify exactly what "in beginning" is referring too. And of course DLClark ASSUMES that it is the beginning of everything.

That is a bad assumption that other makes about genesis. "In the beginning" is ambigous. The beginning of what? Every thing? Or just this earth and this hevean? Scripture doesn't say.

[Tanyan]

[DLClark]

DLClark, Are you a Fundamentalist Independant Baptist KJV Only advocate ?. Your polemical wrting style portays you as one. I was once a Funammentalist Independant Baptist KJV Only many years ago so I pretty much recognize one when I meet/read one.

In His Debt/Grace, Tanyan, LDS JJJEDI KNIGHT.

I am not nor ever have been an Independent Fundamental Baptist. If I classify myself as anything I am a biblicist and nothing more.

What difference does it make what I am. It is more important what the Bible teaches than any label you place on a person. Show me from the Bible where I am wrong about Jesus.

[Zakuska]

Aaaa... A Bible Worshiper.

To each his own.

[Zakuska]

That is a bad assumption that other makes about genesis. "In the beginning" is ambigous. The beginning of what? Every thing? Or just this earth and this hevean? Scripture doesn't say.

Its a Hebrewic way of saying... "Once Upon a Time".

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Its a Hebrewic way of saying... "Once Upon a Time".

Sure is. I can agree with that.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Show me from the Bible where I am wrong about Jesus.

We have done that several times. Thanks for playing though. See my last post.

[DLClark]

Let's look at the Greek of John 1:1 shall we?

En archE eimi ho logos kai ho logos eimi pros ho theos kai theos eimi ho logos

In beginning was the word and the word was toward the god and god was the word.

If DLClark understood the Greek, which he CLEARLY doesn't, he would know that this is very clear language describing the TWO SEPARATE beings, "the god" and "the word", and in the beginning BOTH of THEM were together.

AND the phrase "god was the word" means literally that "the word" was DIVINE!!!!!!!

Of course this verse doesn't specify exactly what "in beginning" is referring too. And of course DLClark ASSUMES that it is the beginning of everything.

Your Greek is incorrect. It never says the Word was toward God. That is very bad Greek.

John 1:1

John 1:1-2

:1 En arche

[DLClark]

This is as I thought...the double negative is on the greek side, not the english.

And that is why I would like to see your take on why Jesus cautions His apostles to "watch and pray lest ye enter into temptation, for the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak". If the apostle are safely held in God's hand so that no one or no thing can pluck them out, why the warning? If they cannot lose their salvation, why worry about temptation?

This brings up the definition of "salvation", which there is more than one, but that is a topic of another thread.

I will go with you on this for a bit...what if they don't live "godly" lives? What if I am past that defining moment whereby I am saved and have eternal life, then I stop hearning and following? Are you saying God will not allow that to happen? or are you saying, as I have heard said before, that I was never truely saved to begin with? If it is the latter, then there really isn't a defining moment if in hind sight it can be said that "I was never really saved to begin with". If there is no defining moment, then salvation is a process or a path we must follow, and the further we get down the path, the less likely we are to stop hearing and following...but the possibility is still there.

I know this goes against your understanding, but please address the questions I have asked...don't just quote scripture because you will understand it one way and my understanding may not match yours.

Have you ever studied a foreign language before? You know they will often have thing in them that the English does not. With the Greek double negative it does not matter if the English has one or not. I am telling you what the Greek says. The NT was written in Greek and the btter we undersatand Greek the better we can understand the NT. The closest the English gets to expressing that Greek double negative is "shall never." Do you know what the word never means? It means, not ever, on no occasion, at not time. Sounds defenit to me. A believer can never ever lose his salvation. Also, can you show a conditional phrase in John 10:27-29? For your information all Greek conditional phrases begins with the word "if."

DLC

[DLClark]

It is becoming obvious that DLClark isn't here to have a discussion but to PREACH at us.

"What does the phrase "Son of God" mean. Well it does not mean that Jesus is God's son like human parents have sons."

That is one the dumbest statements I have heard. It is also an ABUSE of the language.

"and without him was not any thing made that was made". So clearly the things that pre-existed or uncreated are excluded here.

Also you need to have an understanding about what John meant by "all things". How could he have been talking about electrons, neutrons and protons if he DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THEM?

You have to look at the phrase "Son of" and understand it how the Jews would have taken it. By doing so you will know exaclty what Jesus mean by saying that He was the Son of God. It is a oriental saying that was common in the first century. We use saying from other parts of the world and so did the Jews. This phrase show Jesus' complete diety in that He and the Father are the very same, One True, Creator God. No people has ever sizen about thier religion. The most portentous fact about man is what thier concept of God found in their heart. A god begotten in the shadows of a follen heart will quite naturally be no true likeness of the true God. By bring theee Almighty down to man's level and making like unto us is erroneous and comes from within the imaginations of a fallen people. The idolatrous assumes that God is like man and makes him a exaulted man.

DLC

[Tanyan]

I am not nor ever have been an Independent Fundamental Baptist. If I classify myself as anything I am a biblicist and nothing more.

What difference does it make what I am. It is more important what the Bible teaches than any label you place on a person. Show me from the Bible where I am wrong about Jesus.