Did Jesus teach TULIP?

[donadams]

ARE YOU STILL TALKING ABOUT MARY????

He asked

 

[donadams]

If this is connection with perseverance it says nothing about losing one's salvation. It means exactly what it says. I don't see where there is any ambiguity. Those who do not believe the gospel (which is what is meant by hearing, as people often hear it and do not believe it and they would be the ones rejecting it) when they hear it preached (or read it) do not hear Jesus. ANd if they reject Christ, they are rejecting God. I am not sure why you need that explained to you.

If we suffer (for His sake) we will reign with Him. That is be victorious over sin and death as He is. If we deny Him, He will deny us. Why does that need to be explained to you? I think an eight year old could understand it---no offense intended.

In what way are you relating it to TULIP and whether Jesus taught it. YOu know---in the OP @Carbon gave scriptures supporting everypoint of the TULIP. Why don't you address them and keep them connected to the subject.

A person can reject the savior and not, repeat not lose salvation?

Your starting to sound like me glee Lol!

 

[Josheb]

Gen 3:15
Lk 1:28
Lk 1:49
Rev 12:1

We must accept grace and participate in christ

Heb 3:14 For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end;

Heb. 3:14 was written to people who had already experienced the salvific grace of God. The verse explicitly states, "We have come to share in Christ..." The translation should have been checked because the Douay-Rheims and KJV get it wrong. Check the Greek. This is the most frequently occurring error in your posts: The failure to correctly identify what is stated in the verse, especially when it comes to correctly identifying and discriminating between scripture identified audiences. Hebrews 3:14 has NOTHING to do with how a person become saved. It is solely, exclusively, about those already saved. I cannot recall a single post where you have EVER rendered scripture correctly. I point this out. I quote the verse for all to read, and then compare it to the posts showing what was claimed is not what is stated. As far as our interactions go, you've got a 100% fail rate! It proves you are either a very poor exegete, a very poor Catholic, a very immature Christian, or a troll (or maybe all four). The responses then confirm my appraisal because the next post out of your keyboard should be, "My bad, you're right. I misapplied Hebrews 3:14," and that is the end of the post (no other defense, no dismissal, no excuses, no obfuscation, no attempt to change the subject), but we here all know that is not what we'll read next. Too many fruitless attempts have been made to trust correct change will happen.

Yes, according to Hebrews 3:14 we must accept grace, but the "we" in Hebrews 3:14 is NOT the sinfully dead and enslaved sinner who does not believe. That "we" is the regenerate believer who is saved; the one who has come to Christ, the one who is able to have confident steadfastness. HUGE mistake made in Post 66.

HUGE!​

Notice also the verse is a predicate statement: If a person holds steadfast from beginning to end then he has (past tense) become to know Christ. This is 100% consistent with the Reformed position if you're saved, you'll act steadfastly, and if you don't then you never were saved in the first place. The beginning commitment continues to the end. The word is "hypostasis," and underlying confidence, assurance, substance, guarantee, or reality. The dead and enslaved finite sinner's will does not change reality.

 

[Josheb]

Stick to the OP topic. We all know by now that when you say the church founded by Christ, you mean the RCC.

I stand corrected.

 

[Arial]

I stand corrected.

?? My post you quoted was said to @donadams

 

[Arial]

A person can reject the savior and not, repeat not lose salvation?

Your starting to sound like me glee Lol!

A person who rejects the Savior is not saved and never was.

 

[Arial]

He asked

Why did he ask? Hmmm? Stop making excuses for yourself and stop looking for work arounds. And stop baiting people to go off topic. If you do not agree that Jesus taught TULIP then make your case, instead of promoting Catholicism. There is a board for that.

 

[Arch Stanton]

Don't you know how to grasp what a topic is and post accordingly?

Shouldn't that apply to everyone?

 

[CrowCross]

A person who rejects the Savior is not saved and never was.

It is possible for a true believer...albeit a weak or not educated christian to come under false teaching and believe their Jesus isn't who they thought He was....Or, perhaps believe persuaded into believing "there is no God".

For the most part I believe they were never saved but I do see a few objections to that rule. Still, if they were true believers they would still be saved despite the "rejection".

 

[donadams]

Heb. 3:14 was written to people who had already experienced the salvific grace of God. The verse explicitly states, "We have come to share in Christ..." The translation should have been checked because the Douay-Rheims and KJV get it wrong. Check the Greek. This is the most frequently occurring error in your posts: The failure to correctly identify what is stated in the verse, especially when it comes to correctly identifying and discriminating between scripture identified audiences. Hebrews 3:14 has NOTHING to do with how a person become saved. It is solely, exclusively, about those already saved. I cannot recall a single post where you have EVER rendered scripture correctly. I point this out. I quote the verse for all to read, and then compare it to the posts showing what was claimed is not what is stated. As far as our interactions go, you've got a 100% fail rate! It proves you are either a very poor exegete, a very poor Catholic, a very immature Christian, or a troll (or maybe all four). The responses then confirm my appraisal because the next post out of your keyboard should be, "My bad, you're right. I misapplied Hebrews 3:14," and that is the end of the post (no other defense, no dismissal, no excuses, no obfuscation, no attempt to change the subject), but we here all know that is not what we'll read next. Too many fruitless attempts have been made to trust correct change will happen.

Yes, according to Hebrews 3:14 we must accept grace, but the "we" in Hebrews 3:14 is NOT the sinfully dead and enslaved sinner who does not believe. That "we" is the regenerate believer who is saved; the one who has come to Christ, the one who is able to have confident steadfastness. HUGE mistake made in Post 66.

HUGE!​

Notice also the verse is a predicate statement: If a person holds steadfast from beginning to end then he has (past tense) become to know Christ. This is 100% consistent with the Reformed position if you're saved, you'll act steadfastly, and if you don't then you never were saved in the first place. The beginning commitment continues to the end. The word is "hypostasis," and underlying confidence, assurance, substance, guarantee, or reality. The dead and enslaved finite sinner's will does not change reality.

No one asked you to respond, why would the “saved” have to persevere, there would be no “if” and Matt 24:13 says we are not saved until death the end

My point was we must participate with Christ in His mission, power, and grace!

Thanks anyway

In the spirit of JTB I’ll tell you who I am not!
I’m not the christ
I’m not an apostle
I’m not a bishop
I’m not a priest
I’m not an evangelist
I’m not an apologist
I am one who obeys Jude 1:3
Contend for the faith
And
Philippians 1:27
Only let your conversation be as it becometh the gospel of Christ: that whether I come and see you, or else be absent, I may hear of your affairs, that ye stand fast in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel;

 

[donadams]

Why did he ask? Hmmm? Stop making excuses for yourself and stop looking for work arounds. And stop baiting people to go off topic. If you do not agree that Jesus taught TULIP then make your case, instead of promoting Catholicism. There is a board for that.

Fundamentalist blindness does not see that the vast majority of those who claim to be Christians that have ever existed, that exist now, or ever will, including all the apostles, bishops, fathers, doctors, martyrs, & saints are catholic!

 

[donadams]

?? My post you quoted was said to @donadams

Psalm55:16
As for me, I will call upon God; and the Lord shall save me.

Is that tulip?

 

[Josheb]

No one asked you to respond, why would the “saved” have to persevere...[?]

Because there are good works to be performed (Eph. 2:10) and it is incumbent upon the saved to mature (Eph. 4:11-16)... so the question displays ignorance.

, there would be no “if” and Matt 24:13 says we are not saved until death the end.

Yes, but the rest of scripture speaks of having been saved, being saved, and will be saved.... so once again your misguided practice of proof-texting displays ignorance and a willful, uniform, practice abusing God's word.

In the spirit of JTB I’ll tell you who I am not!
I’m not the christ
I’m not an apostle
I’m not a bishop
I’m not a priest
I’m not an evangelist
I’m not an apologist
I am one who obeys Jude 1:3

No, you're a troll.


So, once again, if you have something specific to post about TULIP without hijacking the op then please post it. Otherwise,

 

[Josheb]

I stand corrected.

(modeling appropriate response)

 

[Arial]

Psalm55:16
As for me, I will call upon God; and the Lord shall save me.

Is that tulip?

That would fall into the category "Does the OT teach TULIP?" But yes, that Psalm of David does teach the theology that is in the doctrines of TULIP. A serious difficulty you have is never applying context to a passage, and then using it to make your point. I perceive that you are not really asking a question but making a statement that the quoted passage does not teach TULIP.

Another thing you do not recognize, is what into arriving at the doctrines in TULIP. They did not arrive at it in the same way that you do, or those you listen to do. There is just as much OT in them as there is NT. In fact the NT is a continuation of the OT, revealing things that were in shadow in the historic period of the OT, not a break from it. The doctrines of the Reformers were arrived at systematically, using the entire Word of God, in the same way that the NT writers used their Scripture, which was the OT. All things must remain consistent within the whole.

In the context of the entire Psalm, what is David saying, and what does he mean by "save me?" David was obviously saved unto eternal life, but not by the covenant Law, though He obeyed it, but in the same way as Abraham was saved----through faith. And it was not by his choices, but by the election of God. In that Psalm, David is surrounded by enemies, and that is what he is asking to be saved from. He knows God, and He knows only God can deliver him. If you want to seek God, to know Him, read the Psalms of David. He is one who knew he had nothing unless it came from God. In the Psalms of David, we see precisely who God is and it is from who God is that all doctrine should flow. David trusted Him, and He trusted him because he had the witness of the Torah, where God revealed Himself, as a covenant (personal relationship between God and His covenant people) in demonstrating His claim with power and action in Egypt, the wilderness, and then through the Law and power as the one true and living God who created all things and is sovereign over all things. So yes, the OT teaches the doctrines that are in TULIP from the perspective of the NT (after the advent of the Savior). The OT is promise of the Savior. The NT is "The Savior has come."

 

[Arial]

Fundamentalist blindness does not see that the vast majority of those who claim to be Christians that have ever existed, that exist now, or ever will, including all the apostles, bishops, fathers, doctors, martyrs, & saints are catholic!

This is not the Catholic board. I won't tell you again.

 

[Arial]

(modeling appropriate response)

 

[Carbon]

What happened to “faith alone” and our free will to resist or accept the grace gift of God?

What happen to it?

I dunno, what happen to it?

 

[Arial]

It is possible for a true believer...albeit a weak or not educated christian to come under false teaching and believe their Jesus isn't who they thought He was....Or, perhaps believe persuaded into believing "there is no God".

For the most part I believe they were never saved but I do see a few objections to that rule. Still, if they were true believers they would still be saved despite the "rejection".

We grow. We begin knowing next to nothing of doctrine, Christ, or even God. Some may get stuck in a false teaching in their state as a baby, but that is not a rejection of Christ. This is where the doctrines that are in TULIP come into play, even if a person does not know them and even if they reject those teachings from a lack of understanding and misrepresentations. It is even possible for a person to never hear of the doctrine of the Trinity preached, never see it in their study, yet have an abiding trust in and love for Jesus, in much the same way a very young child brought up in a Christian home would. That depends on God, and what He has done in the very heart of a person.

A concerted effort of an entire denomination and those in it who whole heartedly reject the deity of Christ, making Him to be a creature, I think is a different story, a true rejection of Christ.

But often I think the things you suggested above are part of the growth and strengthening God is bringing about in the true believer. Which means, if that is the case, that God has truly saved them, given them to Christ, this will be a season only, and will achieve the purpose God has in it.

 

[donadams]

Because there are good works to be performed (Eph. 2:10) and it is incumbent upon the saved to mature (Eph. 4:11-16)... so the question displays ignorance.

Yes, but the rest of scripture speaks of having been saved, being saved, and will be saved.... so once again your misguided practice of proof-texting displays ignorance and a willful, uniform, practice abusing God's word.

No, you're a troll.


So, once again, if you have something specific to post about TULIP without hijacking the op then please post it. Otherwise,

Because there are good works to be performed (Eph. 2:10) and it is incumbent upon the saved to mature (Eph. 4:11-16)... so the question displays ignorance.

Yes, but the rest of scripture speaks of having been saved, being saved, and will be saved.... so once again your misguided practice of proof-texting displays ignorance and a willful, uniform, practice abusing God's word.

No, you're a troll.


So, once again, if you have something specific to post about TULIP without hijacking the op then please post it. Otherwise,

Then don’t bother to respond if think I’m a troll, btw every person on here is a troll in one way or another, the all have influence to peddle

We all have a world view

Who’s saved? You?
As usual you guys want it both ways
Now it’s three ways
You are saved!
You’re being saved!
You shall be saved!

He is right and he is right? They can’t both be right!
You know you are also right! F.O.R.

Psalm55:16
As for me, I will call upon God; and the Lord shall save me.

Is that tulip