Saved in 3 tenses?

[Roselove]

3 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Sister Rose, 

Concerning Matthew 7:21-23 –

“Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.  Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name?  And in thy name have cast out devils?  And in thy name done many wonderful works?  And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.”

In order to correctly understand our Lord’s teaching in Matthew 7:21-23, I believe that we must understand two important elements of this teaching.

1.  First, we must understand the judgement that our Lord pronounces against the given group of this context.  It is not significantly important whether our Lord professed His judgment, or confessed His judgment.  Rather, it is much more important to understand the actual judgment that He expressed.  Even so, this judgment includes three parts: 

(1)  The Confrontation – “I never knew you”
(2)  The Condemnation – “Depart from me”
(3)  The Classification – “Ye that work iniquity”

The key to understanding our Lord’s judgment is bound up in the word “never.”  Herein the Greek word that is translated “never” means just that – “never, not ever at all whatsoever.”  As such, our Lord indicated that He never at all whatsoever knew these individuals as His own people.  It is not that these individuals possessed eternal salvation at one time, and then somehow lost their salvation.  Rather, it is that they NEVER possessed eternal salvation at any time whatsoever at all.  It is not that these individuals were the children of God at one time, and then somehow ceased to be the children of God.  Rather, it is that they NEVER were the children at any time whatsoever at all.  For this very reason the Lord condemned them to depart from Him, such that they could not enter into the kingdom of heaven, but were cast out into the eternal judgment of hell.  Indeed, for this very reason the Lord classified them as those who worked sinful iniquity.  They may have classified their works as good works, but the Lord classified their works as iniquity and classified them themselves as the workers of iniquity.  In no manner whatsoever did the Lord classify them or their works as acceptable in His sight.  Indeed, according to Proverbs 21:4, our Lord views even the plowing of the unsaved wicked as sinful iniquity in His sight.

2.  Second, we must understand the argument that the given group of this context presented unto the Lord.  Now, let us take note that this context is specifically about who will or will not enter into the kingdom of heaven.  Furthermore, let us take note that this context is about those who follow a Biblically based religion; for only such would say, “Lord, Lord,” unto the Lord Jesus Christ.  Finally, let us take note that this context is about judgment day and about the determination by which individuals shall enter into the kingdom of heaven.  Contextually then, the religious individuals of this context present the power of their good works as the foundational evidence by which they should be permitted entrance into the kingdom of heaven.  Yet does God’s Holy Word teach us that good works are the true foundation by which individuals may enter into the kingdom of heaven?  No, it does NOT.  Rather, God’s Holy Word teaches us that the true foundation by which we sinners shall enter into the kingdom of heaven is in being born again and eternally saved by God’s grace through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.  These individuals were not trusting in Christ, but in their own good, religious, powerful works.  Thus they were NEVER known by the Lord as His own people.  Yet the Lord did not at all deny their performance of these good, religious works; nor did the Lord deny that they employed His very name in the performance of their works.  Indeed, they had performed these works and had claimed the name of the Lord while performing them.  Yet their works in the Lord’s name did not matter.  They were NEVER known by the Lord as His own people because they had NEVER placed their trust wholly and only in Him as Savior.  So then, from where did they acquire the power to perform their supernatural works?  Since they did not receive that power from the Lord, they could only have received it from the Lord’s great adversary, the devil.

Sister Rose, I pray that this answer was of help in answering your questions.  If not, please ask any further question that you might concerning the matter.

Thank you, I see what you're saying, most of it makes sense to me. The last part, I don't understand though, how could they cast out devils if they were getting their power from the devil? That was one of the things that they supposedly did, but I know that Jesus said that is impossible. That only, can be from God.

Edited October 30, 2017 by Roselove

[Jordan Kurecki]

On 10/30/2017 at 12:03 AM, Roselove said:

Thank you, I see what you're saying, most of it makes sense to me. The last part, I don't understand though, how could they cast out devils if they were getting their power from the devil? That was one of the things that they supposedly did, but I know that Jesus said that is impossible. That only, can be from God.

1. THEY said they cast out devils, not God, so that doesn't mean they actually did. 

2. Is it really out of the realm of possibility that demonic spirits could give the appearance of being cast out to deceive the one who "cast" them out? To me it would be entirely within the character of demonic spirits to deceive someone in that way... I mean after all.. look at the passage... because these people "cast out devils" they have a false sense of spiritual security. 

[Pastor Scott Markle]

On 10/30/2017 at 1:03 AM, Roselove said:

Thank you, I see what you're saying, most of it makes sense to me. The last part, I don't understand though, how could they cast out devils if they were getting their power from the devil? That was one of the things that they supposedly did, but I know that Jesus said that is impossible. That only, can be from God.

Sister Rose,

Actually, I myself am not aware of any passage wherein our Lord Jesus Christ taught that it is impossible for the power of the devil to cast out an evil spirit.  On the other hand, I am aware of a passage wherein our Lord Jesus Christ implied that it would be unwise for the devil to permanently cast out an evil spirit in the manner that our Lord Jesus Christ was doing so.  This passage would be Luke 11:17-18 (and the parallel passage of Matthew 12:25-26) -- "But he, knowing their thoughts, said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and a house divided against a house falleth.  If Satan also be divided against himself, how shall his kingdom stand?  Because ye say that I cast out devils through Beelzebub."  However, through this passage our Lord Jesus Christ also seemed to imply that it is possible for the power of the devil to cast out evil spirits. 

Furthermore, within the immediate context of Luke 11:17-18, the Lord also revealed that if an evil spirit is cast out of an individual who is not then received as one of the Lord's own, then that evil spirit might return unto that individual with a number of more evil spirits, so that the latter state of that individual would be worse than the former state.  This our Lord Jesus Christ indicated in Luke 11:24-26 -- "When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest; and finding none, he saith, I will return unto my house whence I came out.  And when he cometh, he findeth it swept and garnished.  Then goeth he, and taketh to him seven other spirits more wicked than himself; and they enter in, and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first."  Even so, such a case wherein an evil spirit is cast out would not be unprofitable for the devil, but would become more profitable for the devil since he would acquire even greater control over the individual.  Indeed, I can also imagine a case wherein the devil would cause an evil spirit to be cast out by one of his own, in order to deceive the "exorcist" or the audience that such was from God, and thereby in order to obtain a greater control of deception over those individuals.

However, two points should be clearly understood in the case of Matthew 7:21-23.  (1) Those who claimed to have performed the casting out of devils were NEVER the Lord's own people.  (2) Their casting out of devils, along with their prophesying and their wonderful works, was classified by our Lord as the working of iniquity.  Therefore, we may conclude that by whatever power they performed the casting of out devils, the Lord did NOT approve of it.  For me, that leads me to the conclusion that the Lord also did NOT empower it.

Edited October 31, 2017 by Pastor Scott Markle

[Roselove]

1 hour ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Sister Rose,

Actually, I myself am not aware of any passage wherein our Lord Jesus Christ taught that it is impossible for the power of the devil to cast out an evil spirit.  On the other hand, I am aware of a passage wherein our Lord Jesus Christ implied that it would be unwise for the devil to permanently cast out an evil spirit in the manner that our Lord Jesus Christ was doing so.  This passage would be Luke 11:17-18 (and the parallel passage of Matthew 12:25-26) -- "But he, knowing their thoughts, said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and a house divided against a house falleth.  If Satan also be divided against himself, how shall his kingdom stand?  Because ye say that I cast out devils through Beelzebub."  However, through this passage our Lord Jesus Christ also seemed to imply that it is possible for the power of the devil to cast out evil spirits. 

Furthermore, within the immediate context of Luke 11:17-18, the Lord also revealed that if an evil spirit is cast out of an individual who is not then received as one of the Lord's own, then that evil spirit might return unto that individual with a number of more evil spirits, so that the latter state of that individual would be worse than the former state.  This our Lord Jesus Christ indicated in Luke 11:24-26 -- "When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest; and finding none, he saith, I will return unto my house whence I came out.  And when he cometh, he findeth it swept and garnished.  Then goeth he, and taketh to him seven other spirits more wicked than himself; and they enter in, and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first."  Even so, such a case wherein an evil spirit is cast out would not be unprofitable for the devil, but would become more profitable for the devil since he would acquire even greater control over the individual.  Indeed, I can also imagine a case wherein the devil would cause an evil spirit to be cast out by one of his own, in order to deceive the "exorcist" or the audience that such was from God, and thereby in order to obtain a greater control of deception over those individuals.

However, two points should be clearly understood in the case of Matthew 7:21-23.  (1) Those who claimed to have performed the casting out of devils were NEVER the Lord's own people.  (2) Their casting out of devils, along with their prophesying and their wonderful works, was classified by our Lord as the working of iniquity.  Therefore, we may conclude that by whatever power they performed the casting of out devils, the Lord did NOT approve of it.  For me, that leads me to the conclusion that the Lord also did NOT empower it.

Okay, explained this way, I think I understand now. So perhaps, a person that's not trying to glorify God, but promote themselves (like those tv faith healers?) or even another "god", might say they are casting them out, but the demon might have just left in order to fool everyone. So, the devil wouldn't be dividing against himself in that situation. I guess I was just a little confused because some people might really believe that someone who professes to have the power of Christ working through them (but really they don't), might get saved because of that? But I suppose that could be a situation where everything ends up working together to glorify God? And again, to simply just fool the person believing they are right with God and able to cast them out, but aren't?

[Pastor Scott Markle]

30 minutes ago, Roselove said:

Okay, explained this way, I think I understand now. So perhaps, a person that's not trying to glorify God, but promote themselves (like those tv faith healers?) or even another "god", might say they are casting them out, but the demon might have just left in order to fool everyone. So, the devil wouldn't be dividing against himself in that situation. I guess I was just a little confused because some people might really believe that someone who professes to have the power of Christ working through them (but really they don't), might get saved because of that? But I suppose that could be a situation where everything ends up working together to glorify God? And again, to simply just fool the person believing they are right with God and able to cast them out, but aren't?

Indeed. We must ever remember that the devil's absolutely greatest weapon against humanity, to keep the lost from salvation and to keep the saved from faithfulness, is DECEPTION.  Certainly, the devil would not want the casting out of an evil spirit in order that the delivered individual might trust in Christ, as in the cases wherein our Lord Jesus Christ cast out evil spirits.  However, the devil would have no problem whatsoever empowering such events if he could use them as a tool of deception, especially if he could use them as a tool to deceive multiple individuals or even multitudes of individuals.

[*Light*]

Very true indeed. There are a lot of charlatans out there that claim to drive out demons, and the demons could very well fool others into believing that the demon/s were cast out. And the one casting out demons would preach false doctrines and deceive many. I have seen this time and time again. The devil is the Father of all lies and we should never underestimate his deception.

Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. (Matthew 7:22,23)

Benny Hinn is the epitome of a charlatan who claims to heal people and drive out demons. He's going to be in for a rude awakening when he faces Almighty God at the Great White Throne judgement. 

Edited October 31, 2017 by (Omega)
Benny Hinn

[Roselove]

1 hour ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Indeed. We must ever remember that the devil's absolutely greatest weapon against humanity, to keep the lost from salvation and to keep the saved from faithfulness, is DECEPTION.  Certainly, the devil would not want the casting out of an evil spirit in order that the delivered individual might trust in Christ, as in the cases wherein our Lord Jesus Christ cast out evil spirits.  However, the devil would have no problem whatsoever empowering such events if he could use them as a tool of deception, especially if he could use them as a tool to deceive multiple individuals or even multitudes of individuals.

Thank you for clearing this question up for me, I think I see now what was going on in the context of this passage. Sometimes it's hard for me to take things into context, sometimes there's a lot going on in the book or chapter and I get a bit confused. Do you have an advice when it comes to issues like that? I've learned throughout my Christian growth that, that is one of the biggest problems that I face while studying.

[Pastor Scott Markle]

1 hour ago, Roselove said:

Thank you for clearing this question up for me, I think I see now what was going on in the context of this passage. Sometimes it's hard for me to take things into context, sometimes there's a lot going on in the book or chapter and I get a bit confused. Do you have an advice when it comes to issues like that? I've learned throughout my Christian growth that, that is one of the biggest problems that I face while studying.

As my 22 year old son, who is in Bible college training for the pastorate, said recently in a conversation with me -- Sometimes we miss the beauty (truth and wisdom) of the forest (broader context) for the individual trees (details), yet at other times we miss the beauty (truth and wisdom) of the individual trees (details) for the whole forest (broader context).  Furthermore, most individuals tend to lean more in one or the other direction.  As you have taken note, you yourself tend to lean more in one of those directions than the other; therefore, you must ever be  diligent to consider the other direction whenever you engage in Bible study.  As far as advice for Bible study -- I believe strongly in precision of understanding, both precision in the details (grammar) and precision in the flow of thought (context).  Be careful not to neglect any part that is precisely communicated, but also be careful not to add any idea that is not precisely revealed.  To rightly divide God's Word of truth means to cut a line of understanding that is precisely according to the pattern of revealed truth.  Such precise understanding indicates that we should seek not to err unto the right hand OR unto the left.  In addition, I would challenge you to find a very trusted Bible student, who is very precise and careful in Bible study, with whom you may discuss your thoughts concerning particular passages of study; for such an individual can help you to see things that you may not have noticed on your own.

By the way, I yet intend to continue my response toward the article on John 6:37-40.  Having begun, I very much desire to finish.

Edited October 31, 2017 by Pastor Scott Markle

[Roselove]

1 hour ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

As my 22 year old son, who is in Bible college training for the pastorate, said recently in a conversation with me -- Sometimes we miss the beauty (truth and wisdom) of the forest (broader context) for the individual trees (details), yet at other times we miss the beauty (truth and wisdom) of the individual trees (details) for the whole forest (broader context).  Furthermore, most individuals tend to lean more in one or the other direction.  As you have taken note, you yourself tend to lean more in one of those directions than the other; therefore, you must ever be  diligent to consider the other direction whenever you engage in Bible study.  As far as advice for Bible study -- I believe strongly in precision of understanding, both precision in the details (grammar) and precision in the flow of thought (context).  Be careful not to neglect any part that is precisely communicated, but also be careful not to add any idea that is not precisely revealed.  To rightly divide God's Word of truth means to cut a line of understanding that is precisely according to the pattern of revealed truth.  Such precise understanding indicates that we should seek not to err unto the right hand OR unto the left.  In addition, I would challenge you to find a very trusted Bible student, who is very precise and careful in Bible study, with whom you may discuss your thoughts concerning particular passages of study; for such an individual can help you to see things that you may not have noticed on your own.

By the way, I yet intend to continue my response toward the article on John 6:37-40.  Having begun, I very much desire to finish.

Thank you, I will definitely try hard to look at things in light of the whole context, I think also reading and hearing so many perspectives since I got saved 8 years ago, has definitely added confusion to my understanding. It's hard now to not get swayed by every wind of doctrine I hear that concerns me. I've talked to my preacher some, he does teach well, but the times I've sat and talked with him one on one, he would say very incorrect things at times. It has discouraged me from going back to him for personal advice. My Sunday school teacher is very knowledgeable, but he and his wife aren't doing well at all physically, right now. They're both older and his wife has been in the hospital lately, so I really haven't felt comfortable having deep discussion with him about these things right now. I know he's going through a lot. So I really only have this site to talk to knowledgeable people, right now. And I must say, I'm extremely thankful for all of the help and insight that I've gotten on here! 

I look forward to hearing the rest of your thoughts!

[Pastor Scott Markle]

10 minutes ago, Roselove said:

So I really only have this site to talk to knowledgeable people, right now. And I must say, I'm extremely thankful for all of the help and insight that I've gotten on here! 

I look forward to hearing the rest of your thoughts!

Well, I shall ever seek to provide whatever help that I can, as time permits.

[Pastor Scott Markle]

In his second main point, the author of the article presented the following:
               (https://edgarsreflections.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/what-did-jesus-mean-by-“i-will-lose-nothing”-in-john-639/amp/)

Quote

WHAT IS MEANT BY “LOSE NOTHING”?

Again, let me repeat that John 6:39 refers to the Jewish disciples only of the Lord Jesus when he was here on earth. Therefore, the “losing” here has something to do with them alone. It does not refer to salvation. It refers to the protection of Christ which he mentioned in his prayer in John 17:12: “While I was with them (the given ones), I protected them and kept them safe by that name you gave me. NONE HAS BEEN LOST except the one doomed to destruction so that Scripture would be fulfilled.” Notice that the phrase “none has been lost” is not about salvation because of the fact that this protection was given WHILE the Lord Jesus was still with them. In short, while the Lord was still with them, he protected them so that no one was lost. And John himself explained that to us in John 18:8,9: “I told you that I am he,” Jesus answered. “‘If you are looking for me, then let these men go.'” This happened so that the words he had spoken would be fulfilled: “I HAVE NOT LOST one of those you GAVE me.” John 6:39 got fulfilled here in John 18:8,9. Those that the Father GAVE to the Son has NOT LOST by the Son because he protected them. Therefore, the “losing” in John 6:39, if taken within the context John’s Gospel, has nothing to do with salvation and therefore could hardly support the doctrine of OSAS or ES. It is rather about the protection of Jesus that he gave to the disciples WHILE HE WAS WITH THEM (17:12), the ones the Father has given him.

This particular point would appear to be the author's strongest point, since it seems so easy to connect the idea of Jesus' losing nothing in John 6:39 with the idea of Jesus' losing none of them in John 17:12.  However, the true strength of this point rises or falls upon the validity of the author's other supporting points.  For this very reason, the author begin this point as follows, "Again, let me repeat that John 6:39 refers to the Jewish disciples only of the Lord Jesus when he was here on earth. Therefore, the “losing” here has something to do with them alone. It does not refer to salvation."  I myself have three points of conflict with this presentation of the author's second point:

In the first place --

As I have previously demonstrated in my previous postings of review concerning the author's article (here and here), I believe that the author is in error on a number of his supporting points.  Furthermore, as I proceed to the third and final point of the author's article I intend to demonstrate additional error in his supporting points.  Even so, since the strength of the author's present point rises or falls upon the foundation of his supporting points, I believe that as the points of the author's supporting foundation falls, so this point falls with it.

In the second place --

The Greek verb from which the English verb "should lose" in John 6:39 and the English verb "is lost" in John 17:12 are translated is worthy of our notice.  This Greek verb is "ἀπόλλυμι" ("apollumi").  This Greek verb is found twelve times in the gospel of John; and on a number of those occasions, it is translated with the English verb "perish." (See John 3:15-16; 10:28)  In particular its usage in John 10:28 is of significance for the present consideration.  As we have noted in a previously in this series of reviews, the context of John 10:27-30 also speaks concerning those whom God the Father had given unto God the Son, and applies that truth unto all of the Lord Jesus Christ's sheep.  Even so, in John 10:28 our Lord Jesus Christ spoke concerning all of His sheep, whom the God the Father had given unto Him, saying, "And I give unto them eternal life, and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand."  Now, herein the phrase, "shall never perish," is translated from the same Greek verb as is found in John 6:39 and John 17:12 concerning those who are not lost.  Thus we might consider our Lord's teaching in John 10:28 as follows: "And I give unto them eternal life, and they shall never BE LOST, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand."  Indeed, we might even consider the reason that our Lord reveals by which none of His sheep will ever be lost -- because they cannot be plucked out of His own hand.  Yea, none of His sheep will ever be lost specifically because He Himself will never lose any of them.  Then in John 10:29 our Lord Jesus Christ added the truth, "My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand."  So then, none of God the Son's sheep, whom God the Father has given unto Him, can ever be lost, specifically because God the Son AND God the Father will never lost them.  It seems to me that the truth concerning never being lost (or, never perishing) is certainly applied within the gospel of John unto more than just the eleven apostles (yea, unto ALL of God the Son's sheep) and is certainly applied unto more than just physical protection (yea, even unto the eternal security of a believer's eternal life).

In the third place --

The author of the article seems to assert that our Lord Jesus Christ's statement in John 17:12, "and none of them is lost," had application only unto physical protection.  However, this assertion does not follow the whole flow of thought within our Lord's prayer in John 17:11-17.  Certainly, the declaration of John 18:8-9 indicates that physical protection was included within that responsibility.  Yet the flow of thought in John 17:11-17 does not appear to indicate that physical protection was the exclusive meaning of that responsibility.  In John 17:11 our Lord Jesus Christ prayed for God the Father to keep through His own name those whom He had given unto God the Son.  Then at the end of John 17:11 our Lord Jesus Christ revealed the purpose for this keeping work of the Father, "that they may be one, as we are."  When we consider our Lord Jesus Christ's further prayer for oneness among believers in John 17:20-23, it seems quite clear that this oneness is a spiritual matter, not a physical matter.  Now, having prayed in John 17:11 for God the Father to keep the eleven apostles, our Lord Jesus Christ indicated in John 17:12 that already kept them in the Father's name while He was with them in the world.  Thus we may understand that the keeping work within the context of these verses is the same work.  The keeping work for which our Lord Jesus Christ prayed that the Father would administer unto the eleven was the same keeping work that our Lord Jesus Christ Himself had already administered unto them.  Yet the Lord Jesus Christ would be departing from the eleven in order to ascend unto God the Father.  As such, He would no longer be present with them in order to administer this keeping work directly.  Thus He prayed that God the Father would carry forward that keeping work once after His departure.  So then, how did our Lord Jesus Christ describe this keeping work that He had already administered unto the elven, and that He was praying for God the Father to continue administering unto them?  First, in John 17:12 our Lord Jesus Christ indicated the nature of this keeping work, stating, "While I was in the world, I kept them IN THY NAME."  Second, in John 17:15 our Lord Jesus Christ indicated the protection of this keeping work, praying, "I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them FROM THE EVIL."  Finally, in John 17:17 our Lord Jesus Christ revealed the means for this keeping work, praying, "Sanctify them THROUGH THY TRUTH: thy word is truth."  Even so, from the whole contextual flow of thought in our Lord's prayer, we may understand that the keeping work which He Himself had administered and for which He prayed of the Father was not strictly a physical matter, but was far more so a spiritual matter.  In fact, the very statement of exception that our Lord Jesus Christ made concerning Judas Iscariot, "the son of perdition," would also emphasize that this keeping work was a spiritual matter.  In John 17:12 our Lord Jesus Christ declared, "Those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, except the son of perdition."  Herein the clause of exception indicates that "the son of perdition" had indeed already been lost.  Yet Judas Iscariot had not come to any physical harm by this point in time.  Judas was not physically lost.  On the other hand, by this time it was quite certain that Judas was spiritually lost, and that for eternity.  So then, even the context of John 17:11-17 does not seem to allow for us to view this keeping work as encompassing only physical protection.  Certainly, as I have acknowledged, the declaration of John 18:8-9 indicates that physical protection was included within our Lord Jesus Christ's responsibility of the keeping work.  However, that physical protection was not the primary aspect of that keeping work.  Rather, spiritual protection was the primary aspect of that keeping work.

However, the author of the article presented one more main point in his argument.  Therefore, there is yet more for us to consider.

Sister Rose, are you following this information thus far; or do you have any questions about this information?

Edited December 1, 2017 by Pastor Scott Markle

[Roselove]

On 11/24/2017 at 12:19 PM, Pastor Scott Markle said:

In his second main point, the author of the article presented the following:
               (https://edgarsreflections.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/what-did-jesus-mean-by-“i-will-lose-nothing”-in-john-639/amp/)

This particular point would appear to be the author's strongest point, since it seems so easy to connect the idea of Jesus' losing nothing in John 6:39 with the idea of Jesus' losing none of them in John 17:12.  However, the true strength of this point rises or falls upon the validity of the author's other supporting points.  For this very reason, the author begin this point as follows, "Again, let me repeat that John 6:39 refers to the Jewish disciples only of the Lord Jesus when he was here on earth. Therefore, the “losing” here has something to do with them alone. It does not refer to salvation."  I myself have three points of conflict with this presentation of the author's second point:

In the first place --

As I have previously demonstrated in my previous postings of review concerning the author's article (here and here), I have demonstrated my belief that the author is in error on a number of his supporting points.  Furthermore, as I proceed to the third and final point of the author's article I intend to demonstrate additional error in his supporting points.  Even so, since the strength of the author's present point rises or falls upon the foundation of his supporting points, I believe that as the points of the author's supporting foundation falls, so this point falls with it.

In the second place --

The Greek verb from which the English verb "should lose" in John 6:39 and the English verb "is lost" in John 17:12 are translated is worthy of our notice.  This Greek verb is "ἀπόλλυμι" ("apollumi").  This Greek verb is found twelve times in the gospel of John; and on a number of those occasions, it is translated with the English verb "perish." (See John 3:15-16; 10:28)  In particular its usage in John 10:28 is of significance for the present consideration.  As we have noted in a previously in this series of reviews, the context of John 27-30 also speaks concerning those whom God the Father had given unto God the Son, and applies that truth unto all of the Lord Jesus Christ's sheep.  Even so, in John 27:28 our Lord Jesus Christ spoke concerning all of His sheep, whom the God the Father had given unto Him, saying, "And I give unto them eternal life, and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand."  Now, herein the phrase, "shall never perish," is translated from the same Greek verb as is found in John 6:39 and John 17:12 concerning those who are not lost.  Thus we might consider our Lord's teaching in John 10:28 as follows: "And I give unto them eternal life, and they shall never BE LOST, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand."  Indeed, we might even consider the reason that our Lord reveals by which none of His sheep will ever be lost -- because they cannot be plucked out of His own hand.  Yea, none of His sheep will ever be lost specifically because He Himself will never lose any of them.  Then in John 10:29 our Lord Jesus Christ added the truth, "My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand."  So then, none of God the Son's sheep, whom God the Father has given unto Him, can ever be lost, specifically because God the Son AND God the Father will never lost them.  It seems to me that the truth concerning never being lost (or, never perishing) is certainly applied within the gospel of John unto more than just the eleven apostles (yea, unto ALL of God the Son's sheep) and is certainly applied unto more than just physical protection (yea, even unto the eternal security of a believer's eternal life).

In the third place --

The author of the article seems to assert that our Lord Jesus Christ's statement in John 17:12, "and none of them is lost," had application only unto physical protection.  However, this assertion does not follow the whole flow of thought within our Lord's prayer in John 17:11-17.  Certainly, the declaration of John 18:8-9 indicates that physical protection was included within that responsibility.  Yet the flow of thought in John 17:11-17 does not appear to indicate that physical protection was the exclusive meaning of that responsibility.  In John 17:11 our Lord Jesus Christ prayed for God the Father to keep through His own name those whom He had given unto God the Son.  Then at the end of John 17:11 our Lord Jesus Christ revealed the purpose for this keeping work of the Father, "that they may be one, as we are."  When we consider our Lord Jesus Christ's further prayer for oneness among believers in John 17:20-23, it seems quite clear that this oneness is a spiritual matter, not a physical matter.  Now, having prayed in John 17:11 for God the Father to keep the eleven apostles, our Lord Jesus Christ indicated in John 17:12 that already kept them in the Father's name while He was with them in the world.  Thus we may understand that the keeping work within the context of these verses is the same work.  The keeping work for which our Lord Jesus Christ prayed that the Father would administer unto the eleven was the same keeping work that our Lord Jesus Christ Himself had already administered unto them.  Yet the Lord Jesus Christ would be departing from the eleven in order to ascend unto God the Father.  As such, He would no longer be present with them in order to administer this keeping work directly.  Thus He prayed that God the Father would carry forward that keeping work once after His departure.  So then, how did our Lord Jesus Christ describe this keeping work that He had already administered unto the elven, and that He was praying for God the Father to continue administering unto them?  First, in John 17:12 our Lord Jesus Christ indicated the nature of this keeping work, stating, "While I was in the world, I kept them IN THY NAME."  Second, in John 17:15 our Lord Jesus Christ indicated the protection of this keeping work, praying, "I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them FROM THE EVIL."  Finally, in John 17:17 our Lord Jesus Christ revealed the means for this keeping work, praying, "Sanctify them THROUGH THY TRUTH: thy word is truth."  Even so, from the whole contextual flow of thought in our Lord's prayer, we may understand that the keeping work which He Himself had administered and for which He prayed of the Father was not strictly a physical matter, but was far more so a spiritual matter.  In fact, the very statement of exception that our Lord Jesus Christ made concerning Judas Iscariot, "the son of perdition," would also emphasize that this keeping work was a spiritual matter.  In John 17:12 our Lord Jesus Christ declared, "Those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, except the son of perdition."  Herein the clause of exception indicates that "the son of perdition" had indeed already been lost.  Yet Judas Iscariot had not come to any physical harm by this point in time.  Judas was not physically lost.  On the other hand, by this time it was quite certain that Judas was spiritually lost, and that for eternity.  So then, even the context of John 17:11-17 does not seem to allow for us to view this keeping work as encompassing only physical protection.  Certainly, as I have acknowledged, the declaration of John 18:8-9 indicates that physical protection was included within our Lord Jesus Christ's responsibility of the keeping work.  However, that physical protection was not the primary aspect of that keeping work.  Rather, spiritual protection was the primary aspect of that keeping work.

However, the author of the article presented one more main point in his argument.  Therefore, there is yet more for us to consider.

Sister Rose, are you following this information thus far; or do you have any questions about this information?

All of this makes sense, it's very complex to me, I'm having to really try to rap my head around all of the information, it does certainly cause me to see that the writer of the article wasn't thinking all of his stuff through, before writing the article. Thank you for explaining this portion, to me!

By the way, I'm sorry I didn't respond sooner, I didn't get a notification for your comment for some reason! 

[Pastor Scott Markle]

Sister Rose,

I am sorry if I am giving you information overload.  It is simply my nature to be thorough and detailed in such matters.  Furthermore, I believe that a consideration of ALL the details reveals the faultiness of the authors presentation and point.

As far as the lack of a sooner response, no offense was taken.

[Roselove]

18 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Sister Rose,

I am sorry if I am giving you information overload.  It is simply my nature to be thorough and detailed in such matters.  Furthermore, I believe that a consideration of ALL the details reveals the faultiness of the authors presentation and point.

As far as the lack of a sooner response, no offense was taken.

I certainly appreciate it, it definitely helps me to get as much info as possible, it helps a lot. I just have to put the pieces together, which might take me a bit, but I'm beginning to understand things more clearly!  

 

[Roselove]

I had a question on the side that I wanted to ask you. In church last Sunday, the preacher was talking about the prodigal son, one of the points he made was, in the Old Testament, if a son abandoned the family, they were considered dead to them and were taken out of their family's genealogy book or something, but Jesus was saying that we are now sons and daughters even if we leave and He'll take us back. I found it very encouraging, especially when cross referencing it with Jesus in Revelation saying He won't blot our name out of the Book Of Life, but as I was reading Luke 15, verse 24 stuck out to me, the father says his son was dead and is now alive again and that he was lost and now found. It kind of sounded like he was saying that he was lost until he came back and repented. I looked up in the Greek, the word "dead" in that verse, it said it was literal physical or spiritual death from what I could tell? I wasn't sure what to make of it, do you think you could address this question also on your next reply? It's been kind of confusing me. Thanks!