Repent or Perish!

“And Jesus said to them, “Do you suppose that these Galileans were greater sinners than all other Galileans because they suffered this fate? 3″I tell you, no, but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. 4″Or do you suppose that those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them were worse culprits than all the men who live in Jerusalem? 5. “I tell you, no: but, unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.” (Luke 13:2-5)

At any time from this minute, any one of us could take our last breath!  The world is becoming a more hostile place to live in, and many thousands are perishing daily – not merely dying.  We don’t like to think of the distinction, to know that many who die, die in their sins, and will not be raised up in glory, but will perish for eternity.  But with every calamity we hear from all over the world, we are reminded that people who might have been saved, in more ways than one, have gone with no more hope for redemption.  Now, more than ever, there is a burden to call all men to repentance, so that though they die, they may live!

I don’t know you.  I don’t know what you do or why.  But I know that one day you will die.  And I know that if you do not know Jesus Christ as your Lord and Saviour, you will perish also.  Jesus is the One sent from God to preach to us the good news of God’s great love for us (John 3:16)…not merely with words, but with His actions.   He taught us, through His life, a better way to live and to love.  He showed us the power of God; the power to heal and to deliver those bound from their chains, calling all to a life of liberty and peace (John 8:36).  And ultimately, by His sacrificial death on the cross, He paid the price for our redemption, so that we will no longer perish in our sins, but be reconciled to God, and live forever with Him.  Read more about Jesus and what He did for us all.

There are two things you must do in response to this message.  You must first believe it.  First and foremost, you need to confess that you are a sinner in need of God’s forgiveness, and accept Jesus Christ’s atonement for your sins, and believe that your sins have ALL been forgiven.  You are free from every wickedness that once held you bound and from the sting of condemnation (Rom 8:1).  When you truly believe in Jesus, you will understand why your life can never be lived the same way.  Jesus calls all who believe in Him to follow Him (Matt 16:24).  The second thing you must do, therefore, is to repent.  This means that you will turn around from the wrong way you are going, to follow in the right way that God has prepared for you to walk in (Eph 2:10).  When you do these, you submit to Jesus Christ as the Lord of your life, as well as your Saviour.

Jesus showed His love for us first (Rom 5:8), so that we will not be hindered from coming to Him.  Do not let unbelief be a barrier.  God has provided undeniable evidence, through creation, of His existence and glory (Rom 1:20).  When you respond by faith, believing and forsaking your sinful ways, and choosing to trust and obey God, you show that you love Him too (John 14:15).   Then Jesus promises that He will come and make His home with you…by giving you His Holy Spirit, which will lead you into all truth (John 14:23, 26).  This is the Spirit that gives you a new life…and will also quicken you at the Resurrection (Rom 8:11), when Christ returns to judge the world.  This is what it means to be born again or born of the Spirit.  Without this rebirth, no one can see the Kingdom of God (John 3:3).

If you have believed the message and accepted the call to repentance and received a new life of liberty in Christ, you are a new creature (2 Cor 5:17).  You have the assurance of God’s salvation, and have been saved by the grace of God, through your faith in Jesus (Eph 2:8).  No longer conform to the world’s standard of love or wisdom, but be renewed in your mind daily (Rom 12:1), as you grow in the faith by studying the scriptures, praying and having fellowship with other believers.  Be careful that you do not carry again the burdens of religion and sin, as many did back then and still do today (Read Galatians 3).  Persecutions and tribulations will surely come; the road will be long, narrow and trying, but if you abide in Jesus, He will empower you to overcome in all things (John 15:4; Phil 4:13).

“May the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God and sweet fellowship of the Holy Spirit rest and abide with you now and forever more” (2 Cor 13:14).  Amen.

If you like this message and are among the redeemed of God, please share this call to repentance with others, and let your light shine!

Photo credit:

If you liked this post, you might also like THE GOSPEL (IN A NUTSHELL)



Categories: Atheism, Christianity, Contributors

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

83 replies

  1. Reblogged this on Grace and Truth and commented:

    Repent or perish, for the Kingdom of God is at hand.


  2. Very good direct, concise & clear message! Thanks for posting this!!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Thanks Truth! I appreciate that. It could have been longer, but I tried to get in the main points for the target audience. Hopefully those interested will follow the links for further study. I’m grateful for the reblog 🙂


  3. Whether or not believing and repenting are separate acts has been debated through the years. Here is some commentary on the subject:

    Lewis Chafer wrote:

    Too often, when it is asserted—as it is here—that repentance is not to be added to belief as a separated requirement for salvation, it is assumed that repentance is not necessary to salvation. Therefore it is as dogmatically stated as language can declare, that repentance is essential to salvation and that none could be saved apart from repentance, but it is included in believing and cannot be separated from it (Lewis Sperry Chafer, Vital Theological Issues, Roy B. Zuck, General Editor, Kregel, Grand Rapids, 1994, p. 119).

    Roy B. Zuck writes:

    Repentance is included in believing. Faith and repentance are like two sides of a coin. Genuine faith includes repentance, and genuine repentance includes faith. The Greek word for repentance (metanoia) means to change one’s mind. But to change one’s mind about what? About sin, about one’s adequacy to save himself, about Christ as the only way of salvation, the only One who can make a person righteous (“Kindred Spirit,” a quarterly publication of Dallas Seminary, Summer 1989, p. 5).

    Jesus said “repent and believe”. I think that repentance and belief are so intertwined that we cannot say that first we believe followed by repentance, but that they are so closely intertwined as to be nearly synonymous. I really don’t think a person first believes and a ‘second’ thing one must do is repent. I think true confession of sin (your first thing to do) would of necessity include repentance.

    Your thoughts?


    • Hi Dan,

      My first thought is that I find that you are someone who seeks out an argument or a debate where there is none. I think that is concerning. Your comments seem often to make a contentious point rather than to encourage your brethren. Are we fighting?

      My separation of believing and repentance was in explanation to the unbeliever and not as any dogmatic formula for salvation. There is no such formula. You might also notice that even under belief I included confession, acceptance of the atonement and faith in your sins being forgiven. I wanted to make it as simple as possible.

      As the focal point of the post is REPENT, it was also important for me to highlight it as a step or requirement, just as the picture reveals.

      However, I do not believe that simply believing is sufficient – James said “the devils even believe and tremble” – I recognise it as separate and different. If they were one and the same, they would be used interchangeably, which they never are. Repentance implies that one has believed, while belief – true belief – as I said in my post, will lead one to repentance.

      You can also argue about seeing and believing being one. One would think so. But many see and never percieve and many hear and never understand. The gift of faith that God gives by His mercy is what makes the difference.

      Sincerely, Ufuoma.

      Liked by 1 person

      • I was just talking about repentance. It’s a serious topic, as you pointed out. ”Repent or perish.” Is an unwelcome but terse reality. I just wanted to offer something to think a bit deeper about. So I offer what just two of many commentaries have to say about it. I also offered what Jesus said “Repent and believe”, which seems to present an ‘order’ (I never thought of it as a formula). You spoke of ‘first’ and ‘second’ things we need to do. That was confusing to me, so I offered what I believe concerning the matter and what I thought might provide a fuller understanding of repentance and asked what you thought. Not exactly what one should try explaining to a nonbeliever, but something I was thinking about. Is that being contentious?


        • It came across contentious to me. Especially because this is a post specifically targeting unbelievers calling them to repentance. Making an issue of a distinction made between believing and repenting will not help an unbeliever who might read the post and then follow on to read the comments will end up reading a debate between two believers which will distract from the issue at hand.

          Now, if there is actually something wrong, unchristian or unbiblical about what I wrote, definitely challenge it, so that the unbeliever will not get the wrong idea. But this point you’ve made is not likely to make someone more or less likely to believe or save them from a false gospel.

          However, if this was a post discussing the meaning of repentance or something like that, maybe to edify believers, then your contribution would be rightly made.

          I also do feel that more often than not, at least with me, you tend towards being critical as opposed to being supportive. You could have actually said it in a less argumentative way, but you presented it like you’re ready for a debate. So my first thoughts were truly, “why the debate?”.

          Thanks for your contribution though. I don’t mean to hinder you from making contributions. I’ll ponder more on it, maybe even do a post on it, as it is worth looking more into. However, I wouldn’t want to carry on a debate here.

          Cheers, Ufuoma.


          • You said “IF this was a post discussing the meaning of repentance or something like that, maybe to edify believers, then your contribution would be rightly made.”

            Would it not be edifying, is not essential, for the unbeliever to understand the meaning of repentance?


          • Hey Dan

            I agree, repentance is a very important topic. I absolutely agree that repentance is a vital part of salvation. Having said that, folks a whole lot smarter then the lot of us combined don’t agree on exactly where it fits into the whole thing. Before, during, or after belief..and so it goes.

            I do think when addressing non believers we have to be careful lest we create the idea that they have to “do” something to be saved. Or, that their are conditions they must meet to be saved..and so it goes.

            Deep theological debates about the nature of repentance have their place, but is it vital that we iron those debates out every time the subject comes up?

            Just a thought to ponder

            Liked by 1 person

          • Thanks for your contribution Wally. You said what I couldn’t say… Cheers!

            Liked by 1 person

          • So the connection between repentance and belief is ‘deep’ theology? I guess I missed that. I just thought it was important. My apologies.


          • Of course the subject is quite important and it is worth much study. And I really don’t want to argue. But I feel bound to tell you it seems there is a real tone going here that you have salvation nailed and the rest of us somehow have it all wrong. You offer what seems to be a lot of correction to folks here. God fact what you just said seemed somewhat sarcastic and even a little bit condescending. If I am wrong I apologize but it seemed that way

            Liked by 1 person

          • Maybe it,s just a case of a monergist being in the middle of a crowd of synergists. I hate to use the Calvinist and Arminian labels. Maybe since atheist trolls have a voice here I have been allowed to stick around with my annoying thoughts centered in sovereign grace. That’s an easy fix. I can be removed as a contributor and never comment.

            Liked by 1 person

          • So there is an agenda behind the questioning. I was actually clueless about what it means to be a monergist or a synergist. I had to google that. I’m disatisfied that you have lumped me in one group. I don’t think I’m either!

            The Bible supports both understanding… and I think the problem with Christianity today is that we want a formula!!! We want it all plain and simple so that we can know those who are in and those who are out. It’s not at all like that!

            I know most Christians hail Paul and live on his every word as captured in the Bible… but he was just a man. He was sharing his GROWING knowledge of God and His love for us, not from a place of complete and infinite knowledge, but from a relationship with God. We can each enjoy that kind of relationship with God.

            It is easily fathomable to me that both views are equally right… the same way it is fathomable to me that God is both the Son and the Father. Why must we bicker about things we do not fully understand (Titus 3:9)? Why do we argue rather than grow in love? If we did the latter, we will find that God will reveal to us more of His truth… even beyond what Paul was able to discover and record in the Bible.

            These arguments don’t grow faith, they stifle our spiritual growth and I want none of it.

            May God work in us to draw us to unity, which is His glorious will for all His children. Amen.

            Liked by 1 person

          • Obviously you missed it that I said ‘maybe’. It might or might not be what is happening here. There seems to be a similarity to previous experiences I have had, and others have also had. Start hinting at sovereign grace doctrine (monergism) and watch out. I do have to say that the bible does NOT teach both. Either God alone God alone saves or God saves with the help of man. It simply cannot be both ways. Therefore, to get away from this in this post, I am posting something under apologetics. Also, you might want adjust your opinion of Paul’s writing in light of 2 Tim 3:16-17.


          • Hi Dan,

            Who wrote 2 Tim 3:16-17? Was it God or was it Paul writing a letter to Timothy? Do you suppose Paul wrote that letter with the foreknowledge that his writing will become among holy scripture…? Or was it preserved by the Church, among other select letters and writings, to guide us in our understanding of the faith. I do believe it is the latter. That being said, I study and use Paul’s teachings a lot and I honour his wisdom. But I will never use his teachings to silence the Spirit of God.

            Have a blessed evening.


          • So you have a problem with the inerrancy of scripture. That explains a lot. So I ask you, if scripture is just a guide for us written by men, why do you seem to balk at the idea that you might err in some of your theology? If that’s an inappropriate question, look me up on Facebook and message me. We can talk privately. Sorry, but you invited that question.


          • Hi Dan, I am not shy to address you here.

            I wrote my views about the teaching that the Bible is the Word of God on my blog. Read “The Classic Conversion Mistake”. I think we could all do with a real persceptive on this, and it is important for new believers to know the place of the Bible in our lives as Christians. Jesus didn’t say He will send us a book, but His Spirit. I am so grateful for His Spirit which inspired Paul and several others to remember the accounts of His life and to share their revelations with us. But if we denounce the power of that same Spirit to continue to lead us into all truth today, we have become like the Pharisees, who study the scriptures but do not know the Spirit behind it.

            I am also curious to know what this new revelation about my belief has “explained” to you. Are my teachings not based on scripture, because I would appreciate a correction if you can point out where I have erred.

            Cheers, Ufuoma.


          • It sounds like you believe in ‘new’ revelation(s). I’ll have to go and read your article, if I can find it. And since you asked, I will respond.


          • You have a really poor understanding of the inspiration of scripture. i left a couple of links on your blog. After all, you wondered why we debate some things so I will let others do that for me. And then invited me to debate you?


          • Your statement that my understanding of scripture is poor is unfounded. You couldn’t even support it with evidence in scripture or my interpretation pf scripture. You think that just because you think so you can make such a claim. I did not make any such claim against you.

            I haven’t seen the links you left on my blog and I didn’t invite you to debate. You wanted to understand my standpoint and I told you where I had previously stated it with evidences so I needn’t start over again!

            Debating appears to be your approach. If the post with all the references I made did not convince you of what is true, that’s between you and God. But I’m not about to declare call something what it is not to satisfy you.

            I’m sorry we disagree, but I don’t need you to agree with me on everything to still love and respect you as my brother.


          • I offered a couple of links that discuss the inerrancy and inspiration of scripture and why it is important, in order not to debate, something you still say I want to do but you don’t. At the same time you want me to personally tell you where you might be in error. That makes very little sense to me. You seem to have a higher view of your own private revelation than scripture. I’m going with scripture. So did Christ. So did the Apostles. So did the Reformers.


          • Hi Dan,

            To finally settle the matter, I was not inviting you to debate with me. I was asking you to support your accusations made by the statements I refuted. Accusations should not be made without immediate back up with evidence. That is what they call slander. You made such statements based on your opinion only, without even quoting my words to show me why you had to make those statements.

            Regarding the inerrancy of scripture, the matter is settled in my mind based on scripture itself. However, I will look into those links, and if necessary, get back to you.

            God bless.


          • Of course you didn’t! If your revelations are inerrant and authoritative there IS no debate. And since the Bible isn’t I don’t expect you to feel the necessity to read a couple of articles and actually comment, other than perhaps with more passages ripped from the context of the Bible, as is your habit.


          • For your unfair hostility towards me, I forgive you.


          • How gracious of you, although I have no hostility toward you. Is this where I need to forgive you for your false read of my heart, or did you get another inerrant revelation?


          • Hi Dan,

            I still haven’t found the comment you said you made on my blog with links to the discussion. It was not in my spam. Please post the links here, and I will follow through.

            Cheers, Ufuoma.



            Please appreciate that I spent some time at other posts of yours at Truth And Grace, and specifically “The Gospel (in a Nutshell)” and “The Classic Conversion Mistake”

            In the former you took a stab at defining law v. grace. Not bed, but I didn’t see Paul’s definition of of the gospel in 1 Cor 15:1-5. You began with John 1:17, talking about law and grace, a bit heavy for someone who needs to know first and foremost that Christ died for OUR sins, a much smaller and more easily digested ‘nut’.

            In the latter, your short dissertation concerning Jesus being the Word of but the Bible NOT being the Word of God. You asked me to tell you if I think you have erred. In that you not only erred, but you succumbed to the original lying question from Satan in the Garden -“Did God REALLY say…”

            You asked for scripture.

            Hebrews 1:1 tells us that long ago God spoke to us through the prophets and in various other ways, but that in these last days he HAS SPOKEN to us by his Son.

            Jude 1:3 tells us about ‘faith once for all delivered to the saints’.

            You believe that only Jesus is the Word of God. That violates the full context of scripture in too many ways to count. If you are correct, we should let our Bibles gather dust; quit reading it, studying it, and teaching “the apostles doctrine” early Christians were devoted to as a primary activity. Instead, we should just listen to all the private revelations we should be receiving directly from God’s mouth to our ears.

            That my dear sister, can have only one result – utter chaos and confusion!

            I could give you reams of paper and volumes of books that have been written concerning the inerrancy of scripture, its critical importance to the church and the chaotic results its denial hashtag given us in the way of heresies, cults, and other abominable acts such as burning at the stake those who would not only give us the Bible in our common languages, but would hold to scripture as being the supreme authority in all matters of faith and practice for the church.

            However, I will leave that to you. Nor will I provide you with more written word that you don’t hold as inerrant (yet frequently quote completely out of context to substantiate your supposedly inerrant (revelations).

            BTW, if I told you that all of the above is direct revelation from God, who would be right, me or you? How dare you deny me MY revelation?

            I’m done for now. I have said what I thought needed to be said.


          • Hey Dan, just a couple of comments and I will leave you in peace

            One, why are you talking about leaving? Chill. I myself value your contribution around here.

            Two. You, like us are a contributor. You aren’t our teacher of professor. When you come around just asking questions to “make us think” rather than just saying what you want to say, it comes across not so good. It seems condescending, as if you have the scripture market cornered and the rest of us have it all jacked up.

            Three, If you can find any comment or writing of mine that even remotely disputes the sovereignty of God, I will cease blogging instantly. Just because I see some scripture differently does NOT mean I feel God is not 100 percent in charge. That assertion is unfounded and inflammatory.

            Four, I believe in the infallibility of scripture. Period. Failure to agree with every position you take does not constitute my doubting scripture; it means I don’t agree with you on all things. Check it out, we can do that and still be brother’s in Jesus Christ.

            Peace my brother

            Liked by 1 person

          • I think it would probably be worse if I just said what I think. I ask people to think because in most cases I thought the same way most do until I read and reread the Bible over and over and studied it in context instead of picking out passages here and there to prove my ‘opinion’. I Heard something recently that struck me as important. ‘If it’s in the Bible I can take it to the bank. If it’s my opinion I need to take it to the Bible. So when I hear something that seems out of context or if I know it’s out of context and used to make a point not intended by the author, I ask questions rather than just say I think it’s wrong.

            Liked by 1 person

          • And peace to you my friend.

            Liked by 1 person

          • If scripture isn’t our sole authority for our faith and practice, as well as the church’s we are left with utter chaos and confusion. I’m with you!


          • If you want to defend your contribution, that’s fine. I gave my response in my first feedback to you. I also think that repentance is well explained for an unbeliever in the post. We could write pages on what every single Christian word means… whether faith or repentance or baptism or atonement…. this is not the place to show how much you know or to give people more reason to back away from the faith because we delight more in proving that we are right.

            Have a great day.

            Liked by 1 person

  4. Dan and Ufuoma

    Just an observation and suggestion, perhaps this might be a good time to step back, regroup and come at this conversation from another direction. I can’t help but think of the Sunday school lesson I am about to teach this morning and the opening verse of our lesson Bible text for the morning:

    Proverbs 15:1 A soft answer turneth away wrath: but grievous words stir up anger.

    I fear the two of you are approaching the point where the issue is moving from truth to personalities.

    Just my 2 cents


    Liked by 1 person

    • Thanks for your two cents. Unfortunately, it’s gone past that stage. I’ve tried to be civil with Dan, but it appears that he’s got an axe to grind… I believe his comments are harsh and unchristian and given the several attempts I’ve made for him to tone down his approach, even your contribution, has not at all softened him. Actually, his witch hunt paid off, because now he knows that I have an unpopular opinion among Christians, and he feels quite vindicated to insult and attack me by his false claims.

      I do not and I have never said that I have inerrant revelations. But I will not argue with him any longer, because it is not bearing any positive fruit. What has resulted is an embarrassing display of Christians bickering… on a post calling sinners to repentance. How ironic!

      God bless you for your efforts, Wally. We all err. We just have to be gracious with one another.

      Liked by 1 person

    • I really have nothing left to say. I might post more under apologetics concerning the need for an inerrant view of scripture and the dangers of adding new personal revelation to the Bible. Perhaps how was part of the chaotic world of Charasmaticism and the journey out of it. Maybe that is something for my own blog. I’ll take a hit for suggesting Ufuoma thought her revelations are inerrant, but my comments still stand concerning the futility of placing personal revelation above the inspired Word of God. Now on to teaching more of Galatians usung John MacArthur’s study guide. It’s a great follow up to Romans, which was agreat follow upmto Acts, which followe a course in evangelism.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. Hey you two, just one last thought and I will put this to bed. Some thoughts from my own writings:

    Matthew 18:21

    Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times?

    We all know for the most part, that Peter was pretty sure of himself most of the time. Peter was known for a certain amount of brashness and confidence, and this was often to his embarrassment. Here, Peter was at it again, and this time I can totally picture how he must have felt.

    “Hey Lord! If my brother offends me, I’m going to forgive him seven times! How cool and special is that! Look at me!” Okay, maybe that’s harsh, but it is basically true, as that is the picture I get from that question Peter asked Jesus. He understood the need for forgiveness, but thought two things:

    To do it seven times was pretty special

    There is a limit to how many times we have to forgive

    How did Jesus respond to that question? He said the following

    Matthew 18:22: Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.

    Things just got a tiny bit more difficult. Even in a literal sense, to forgive a transgression 490 times is a lot! That, in the right situation, could take years! Likely, this was not meant literally, but as a representation of….forever. In effect, Jesus was saying, “No, Peter, not seven times; you forgive him every time, all the time, and for all time.”

    This is hard isn’t it? People are mean, people are cruel, people are many things. People often inflict these traits on us, and harm us. But, Jesus made it clear just how broad our forgiveness should be, and how inadequate it actually is.

    As with most things in life where we don’t quite measure up, we need only look at the example Jesus set for us in order to learn how we ourselves should behave. Today, we are only looking at a couple of short points, as we are going to explore the topic of forgiveness in some depth over the course of a few future posts.

    Jesus’ forgiveness of others was not based on the severity of the wrong done to Him; in other words, a person cannot do something so bad that we are released from our responsibility to forgive them. We often do that don’t we? “Hey, what that guy did was really, really bad; I just can’t forgive that!” Just remember that our Lord had been mocked, beaten, spit upon, and ultimately killed, yet He still uttered those words, “Father, forgive them for they know not what they do.”

    Jesus’ forgiveness of others was not based on how much they did our did not deserve it. Many people have done things that, in our human mind set, are not worthy of forgiveness. We all have done things that, in the mind set of a perfect and holy God, are not worthy of forgiveness. “For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God,” and “There is none righteous, no not one,” come to mind here. Despite our unworthiness, Jesus has extended grace to us all, and we likewise should extend grace to all.

    Jesus set the perfect example of grace and forgiveness, and if we want to grow and become Christlike we need to follow that example. As we work our way through this topic we will put legs on this idea and make it practical in our lives.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. The argument here has turned into a synechdoche where different parts of the gospel message are presented as if they represent the whole – kind of like the blind men arguing that the part of the elephant that they have touched is descriptive of the whole animal. Various scriptures describe what is required for salvation and taken together they include belief, repentance, works (that demonstrate repentance) and obedience. These requirements are also dependent on the context of the situation as someone on his death bed can come to Christ upon genuinely believing without any works that demonstrate repentance as it’s obvious they don’t have much life left in them. The thief on the other cross next to Jesus couldn’t “do” anything either. On the other hand, the rich young ruler wanted to believe but Jesus required that he “do” something first. At some point in time however all Christians need to understand that salvation entails all of the above and that we all need to persevere, overcome and encourage one another to fight the good fight and to finish the race set before us.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Works are never a requirement for salvation. See E ph 2:8-9. it doesn’t get any clearer than that.With the rich young ruler, Jesus was going for the jugular, the young man’s heart and attitude towards his ‘stuff’.


      • Dan, you make the same error that most people do when they quote Eph 2:8-9 – they omit v.10 which states that as a result of God’s workmanship we were created to do good works. As a result of being saved through faith, we are to do good works. Eph 2:8-10 agree with what I specifically wrote – WORKS THAT DEMONSTRATE REPENTANCE. Our good works do not cause our salvation; rather, they demonstrate and are the evidence of one’s salvation and shows that one has truly repented. That is why Js 2:24 states that we are justified by works and not by faith alone. Thus, when you only quote vs.8-9 in Ephesians and leave out v.10 you contradict the scriptures. Yes, Jesus was going after the young man’s attitude. Did he tell the man to change his attitude by THINKING about it or did Jesus tell the man to change his heart/attitude by DOING something? A cognitive faith is utterly worthless as even the demons believe (Js 2:19).
        If one wants to know the gospel message that was preached in the NT, one need look no further than Acts 26:20 where Paul describes in his own words the gospel that he taught: “First to those in Damascus, then to those in Jerusalem and in all Judea, and then to the Gentiles, I preached that they should REPENT and turn to God and DEMONSTRATE their repentance by their DEEDS.”

        Liked by 1 person

        • Are you Roman Catholic? The James passage does not to speak to needing faith for salvation, but to saving faith resulting in works. Go back to the context. To say that human works need to be added to Christ’s finished works is an insult to the Cross and to God.


  7. If you said that that James 2:24 teaches that we are justified by works and not by faith alone, you were stating RC doctrine. Perhaps you don’t understand justification? To say that works are not the cause of salvation and then that we are justified by faith plus works is self contradictory. If works add to faith for justification then you cannot say that are not part of the cause salvation, can you?


    • “If you said that that James 2:24 teaches that we are justified by works and not by faith alone, you were stating RC doctrine.”

      I really don’t care one bit about RC doctrine as I only care about what the Bible states. Js 2:24 is in your Protestant Bible isn’t it? It’s not a matter of “IF” that verse teaches that we are justified by works, it plainly states that we “ARE” justified by works and not by faith alone.

      Just what part of James 2:24 don’t you understand as it is incumbent upon you to explain away the very simple and plain meaning of this verse – so I invite you to wrestle with this verse as you must reconcile it to your view as the scriptures do not contradict each other. James clearly states that we are JUSTIFIED by WORKS and not faith alone – but you choose to not believe what James has written, or you ignore it in order to accommodate your view.

      The golden rule of hermeneutics is: When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense; therefore, take every word, at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths, indicate clearly otherwise.

      Based on this, what say you about Js 2;24?

      Liked by 1 person

      • Perhaps I misunderstood you. I should have asked that since the Bible clearly sates that works do not contribute to our salvation, what is the meaning of ‘justification’ in the James passage. Justification means to be declared righteous. It is by faith alone that we are declared righteous before God. As you say, scripture is clear. So I wrestle with the use of ‘justification’ in the James passage. Take the words off the page and it can, and is used by Catholics and some Protestants alike to add works to faith for justification in a salvific sense. In your opinion, what does ‘justification’ mean in the James passage. You seemed to be talking about justification in a salvific sense in your ‘synechdoche’ related comment. I am not trying to pick a fight. I came across your, comment thanks,to WordPress and wanted to talk about it.


        • I do not perceive us as “fighting” Dan as “iron sharpens iron” (Prov 27:17) when we interact and we both strive to better understand the truth of the Word.

          In order to understand what James wrote about In referencing our faith and works and the part they play in our salvation, it is helpful to understand what the Bible means when it refers to righteousness. The scriptures refer to three kinds of righteousness. One is self-righteousness which cannot and does not save anyone, as works done in our own flesh account for absolutely nothing (Eph 2:9). The other is positional righteousness which is received only through the atoning blood of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Lastly, there is practical righteousness which is related to what should be the pursuit of sanctification and holiness in our Christian lives. The Apostle Paul commanded Timothy who was already positionally righteous to pursue a life of practical righteousness (1 Tim 6:11, 2 Tim 2:22). Similarly, the requirement of being an elder in Titus 1:8 is that he must live a holy and disciplined life. An elder of the Lord’s church is by definition already justified and positionally righteous; yet, he is also required to be practically righteous as well. Just these two examples demonstrate that all believers are commanded to live righteous lives as well. As believers we are warned not to be deceived in this important matter: “Little children, let no one deceive you: The one who practices righteousness is righteous, just as Christ is righteous” (1 Jn 3:7). ‘Little children’ refers to believers who are already positionally righteous – yet this verse specifies that they are declared righteous when they practice practical righteousness in their daily walk. Therefore, practical righteousness is a requirement and not an option in the Christian life. Heb 12:14 states: “Make every effort to live in peace with everyone and to be holy; without holiness no one will see the Lord.” The writer of Hebrews is addressing believers who are already justified and positionally righteous. Yet despite this fact, he declares that none of them will see the Lord unless they live holy lives.

          In light of the above, Js 2:24 makes perfect sense. James writes that we are justified by works [practical righteousness] and not by faith [positional righteousness] alone. A believer cannot possess one without having the other. They are like two sides of the same coin. That is why James wrote: “Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. But someone will say, “You have faith, and I have works.” Show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works” (Js 2:17-18). Works [practical righteousness] are the outward expression of a believer’s inward faith [positional righteousness].

          I hope this clears things up a bit.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Thanks for your reply and discussion and I agree with you concerning righteousness. I also did a study (some time ago now) concerning the meaning of ‘justification’ in James 2, since it can, and is used to add works to faith for salvation. After reading and re-reading those verses in CH 2 I, began to ask if it was in reference to being ‘justified’ before men, that our practical righteousness (obedience)’ seen by men, testify to the reality of our professed faith.

            If I connect justification to salvation with that understanding it would go to the sense of being saved from the power of sin while we yet live, rather than being saved from the penalty of sin when we believe, or being saved from the very presence of sin in the future in God’s presence. You have helped me think this through again.


          • You have brought up an interesting point Dan when you mention the “sense of being saved from the power of sin while we yet live, rather than being saved from the penalty of sin when we believe, or being saved from the very presence of sin in the future in God’s presence.”

            In my initial post, I wrote that situational context also plays a role. I think we both agree that the thief on the cross who was crucified along side Jesus was saved from the “penalty” of sin when he cried out to Jesus and believed. The same case could also be made for someone who genuinely believes upon his death bed. In both of these cases they are justified at the moment of belief and saved from the penalty of sin. However, imagine if these men were somehow allowed to live longer lives – could we say that they are saved from the “power” of sin while they still live? My answer would be it depends. One one hand they are saved from power of sin as result of them being justified and regenerated in Christ.They are made new creatures in Christ and no longer slaves to sin. However, this is conditional as they must first choose to be obedient and follow after the Spirit and not after the flesh. As believers we are faced with choices every day as to whether to walk according to our fleshly nature or to walk according to the Spirit. When we were unbelievers we had no choice other than to walk according to our flesh. When we were regenerated, we became empowered by the Spirit and the grace of God to become obedient sons and daughters and overcome the sin in our lives – if we so choose. We can choose whether to be a slave to sin or a slave to obedience (Rom 6:16). Paul writes that we as believers have this choice whether to yoke ourselves to our sin nature or to yoke ourselves to our new nature in Christ. Our choice in this area, determines whether we are free from the power of sin in our lives. We demonstrate that we are free from sin’s power when we lead obedient lives as manifested by our practical righteousness. If on the other hand we choose to sow to the flesh, it demonstrates that sin is still our master and it maintains its power over our lives.

            This leads us to your last point of “being saved from the very presence of sin in the future in God’s presence.” Does justification which saves at the moment of belief also ensure that we will be saved from the presence of sin in the future – at our glorification?
            If we as believers choose to allow the presence of sin to reign in our present lives by submitting to it instead of submitting to the Holy Spirit, can we really expect to be saved from the presence of sin in the future? I submit that those who do not obey God – those Christians who habitually do not obey God by choosing to sin and to not lead lives of practical righteousness will not be glorified in the future.The Bible says that some will lose rewards but others unfortunately will lose their glorification/salvation as well.
            “Therefore, brothers and sisters, we have an obligation–but it is not to the flesh, to live according to it. For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live” (Rom 8:12-13). Paul’s warning is a sober one as the absence of practical righteousness coupled with the practice of sin in the life of the believer leads to spiritual death.

            Liked by 1 person

          • I believe that because the Hoy Spirit indwells believers we have been freed from the power of sin in our lives. Do we yield to temptation and sin? Yes we do. However, can a person indwelt with the Holy Spirit continue in sin without the conviction of the Holy Spirit? God works in us to will and to do of his good pleasure. Phil 2:13. We cannot continue in a pattern or lifestyle of sin. Concerning the assurance of salvation, I have labored over that one also through the years and my position is that God keeps those whom he saves by his power. I base that on passages of scripture; John 10:28 as the chief passage. If we are given eternal life the moment we genuinely repent and believe we will not one day wake up in hell. Phil 1:6 tells us that he who began a good work in us will bring it to completion. 1 Peter 1:5 tells us that we are kept by God’s power. Well, what about terrible sins? We have the example in 1 Corinthians of the man who was apparently having an affair with his step mother. Paul said that he should be delivered over to Satan or the destruction of the flesh so that in the day of the Lord (judgment) his soul might be saved. Furthermore, if all of the sins of the believer (past, present, and future) were paid for at the cross, to sin one’s way into hell would be some sort of double jeopardy, would it not?

            It was John Owen who proposed that Jesus had to have died for all the sins of all men, some of the sins of all men, or all of the sins of some men. If Jesus died for all of the sins of all men, all men would necessarily be saved, for even unbelief is a sin. If Christ died for some of the sins of all men, all men would wake up in hell. That leaves us with Christ having died for all of the sins of some men.

            I hope I have answered your questions. This is where I stand today and I thank you for the discussion!


          • With all due respect, your view seems to be a contradiction. If as you claim we have been freed from the power of sin because of the indwelling Holy Spirit, how can Christians still practice sin if they so choose? Have they not made sin their master and are therefore still slaves to sin and under its power? Would it not be more accurate to say that the indwelling Spirit makes it “possible” for Christians to be freed from the power of sin – as long as they choose to walk in the Spirit? Rom 8:13 makes it very clear that Christians have a choice indicated by the word ‘IF.’ IF we as Christians choose to live according to the flesh we will die. On the other hand, IF we choose to put to death our flesh and live according to the Spirit, we will live. If you or I choose to ignore the conviction of the Holy Spirit we can certainly do so as we are free moral agents. The Bible calls that grieving the Holy Spirit. Your claim that we cannot continue in a pattern of sin is contradicted by such scriptures as 1 Jn 3:8 “The one who practices sin is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the very start….” The word sin in this verse is a present tense Greek verb ‘poion’ which denotes ongoing action, Therefore the one who continues to sin or practices sin is an accurate translation of this verse.

            Many people who hold to your view are fond of quoting Jn 10:28-30 in support of their belief without realizing that it actually supports the opposite of what they believe. In its proper context the promises of vs.28-30 are conditioned by v.27. Only those sheep who LISTEN and FOLLOW are promised eternal life and not being plucked out of the Father’s hand. Those sheep who are disobedient by not listening and not following have no such assurance of eternal life. Again the Greek verbs for listen and follow are written in the present tense so a believer must continue to listen and continue to follow in order to gain eternal life. Those who cease to do so have no such assurance.

            The Bible does teach that some can still be saved but lose rewards possibly such as the man in 1 Cor which you cited. However to claim that the single example of this man is representative of the whole would be a logical fallacy known as an over generalization or a hasty generalization. After all, Paul warned the Corinthian brethren: “DO NOT BE DECEIVED: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor 6:9-10). You also still need to explain or account for Rom 8:12-13 which contradicts your view. When we form our doctrines and beliefs we not only cite those scriptures that support our view but we need to contend and give a satisfactory explanation to those scriptures that appear to contradict our view.

            Regarding the forgiveness of our sins – be careful with that claim. No where in the entirety of the OT or the NT is it mentioned that future sins are automatically forgiven. That is a man-made belief that has no scriptural warrant whatsoever. Just ask yourself – if repentance is required for forgiveness/salvation how can someone repent of a sin that he has not yet committed? That is an impossibility. If someone plans to murder or even lie to someone else in the future – is that sin automatically forgiven? The Bible says that we all sin and that no one is without sin (1 Jn 18,10). And iIf we confess our sin he is faithful and just to cleanse and forgive us (1 Jn 1:9). HOWEVER, it is vital to note that God’s forgiveness and cleansing from sin is only promised to those believers who are walking in the light (v.7). In contrast those Christians who walk in darkness do not even have fellowship with God (v.6) and no such assurance of forgiveness. “Everyone who makes a practice of sinning also practices lawlessness; sin is lawlessness” (1 Jn 3:4) and he “who practices sin is of the devil” (1 Jn 3:8).

            The quotes of other men carry no weight with me unless they conform to the scriptures as we are all fallible beings and only Scripture is infallible. I learned this lesson the hard way as I graduated from seminary a long time ago and used to believe as you do as all of my professors were Reformed in their doctrinal belief. Much to my chagrin when I began to read the Bible for what it means and not what I was taught it means, did I discover that I was wrong. It literally took me years to change my view as it was harder to unlearn what I was taught instead of learning it correctly the first time around. Views and habits are hard to change, therefore I would urge you to keep an open mind and continue to search the scriptures for the truth and allow the Holy Spirit to be your teacher as He himself promised us.

            Liked by 1 person

          • Thanks for your reply. You are correct in saying there are passages that seem to contradict the doctrine of the assurance of salvation. I’ve studied them all. I think you would agree that they all must mean what they were intended to mean by the original writers. Which ones are so clear that the seeming contradictions must be interpreted in light of their clarity? Certain passages are like that for me. While I might be able to debate all of the passages that you claim contract that God both saves and keeps us, I will only speak to Rom 8:12-13. The believer IS led by the Spirit of God because the Spirit lives in him. That is why the believer is unable to continue in a lifestyle of rebellion and sin against God, although he might sin, and even willfully sin. And of course Jesus did say “I give them eternal life and they will never perish”. And if Eph 2:8-9 is true my human works are not at all involved in my salvation, or I have reason to boast.

            Anyway my brother, this has been a good discussion!


  8. @ Dan and Evan

    Hey Evan, good to see you again friend!

    I have absolutely nothing to add to this conversation. In fact, Evan knows how I feel about the subject.

    I just wanted to say thanks to both of you for such a great discussion. I have read much which has really stimulated some thinking and directed some good study. That is always a good thing, so thanks!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Hi Wally, good to hear from you again! Hope all is going well with you. Be blessed my friend!

      Liked by 1 person

    • Hi Wally! It’s been a good discussion, especially since we both hold current beliefs which are the opposite of what we previously believed!

      Liked by 1 person

      • I meant to mention that actually Dan, as that has really made it all quite fascination. Even and I have had almost the same discussion and finally just agreed to our impasse. I am quite firmly in the eternal security camp myself and believe the Bible teaches that. But, not all are.


        • Hey Wally – since you’re in on this discussion, I thought of another scenario since our last conversation and I would be interested in your response – if you don’t mind? You can decline to answer and that’s fine too!
          I’m not familiar with your eschatological views but this is kinda like a rubber meets the road scenario since discussions about eternal security almost always end at an impasse.
          If you’re inclined to answer here goes:
          Let’s suppose that there is no pretrib rapture and Jesus only returns at his second coming after the great tribulation as he promised he would.That would entail that all of us believers who are alive at that time (whose heads are still intact on our shoulders) will be forced to make a decision whether to accept the mark of the beast as we live through those dark times. My question to you is in this scenario would you accept the mark of the beast? If yes, why would you accept the mark? If no, why would you not accept the mark?
          I realize that not all agree on end-time events but just for the sake of argument what would you do?


          • Evan, that is a really good question. I never really thought much about it, being a pretribulational rapture kind of guy. But, on the other hand, I could absolutely be wrong about that issue. Heck, even in my own church, not everybody agrees on that. Therefore, I could be faced with that very dilemma. I also believe even if we are raptured, that others will be able to come to faith during this period, so the question applies to them.

            Short answer, no I don’t think I would. In the passage concerning it, note that those who received the mark worshiped the beast first, then got the mark. The issue then will be, just as it is now, a question of whom we choose to worship, not any specific action we might take. Those who have been chosen…or have chosen(depending on your view of that) to worship God will not take the mark. Those who have chosen to reject God will take it. It’s sort of like my personal belief that no truly saved child of God can ever lose that status, even to the point of walking away. The point there being that a saved child of God could I suppose slip so far into sin as to seem unsaved, they can never make a final decision to reject what they once truly believed. I true believer cannot walk away.

            I suspect you won’t really agree there LOL. But, that’s okay.


          • Hi all,

            I’ve kept quiet because I didn’t want to fuel whatever ridiculousness is going on here, but since it appears to be never ending… I have a scenario to ask those who profess eternal security.

            You believe that all our future sins are settled…is that based on the situation in which we go back and ask for forgiveness after committing such sins or not?

            My situation is of a Christian saved man, who gives in to temptation and cheats on his wife. Problem is, he has a heart attack duting the act and dies. Where is he going?

            I’m really quite curious to know. I’ll try my best not to butt in again.


            Liked by 1 person

          • Hey Ufuoma, hope you are well.

            You said truly saved? No doubt about it?

            As despicable as what he is doing is, he is still going to heaven.

            But why do you say ridiculousness? We just talking LOL.


            On a more serious note. Even though I believe I am eternally secure, that in no way negates the fact that I need to repent and seek forgiveness for the sins I commit, which are still many. The do not, however, take away my place as a saved child of God, but they certainly disrupt our communion and fellowship and prevent the Holy Spirit which resides in me to work freely. For, when I sin, I have both grieved and quenched Him.


          • Oh..and isn’t this your post? You technically can butt in any time you want to LOL.


          • Unfortunately, it’s my post! Hence my embarrassment. I really wish you’d carry your argument/discussion somewhere else. Have we forgotten the point of this post? I don’t think anyone is coming to Christ with this example. Sure, you say you’re being edified, but no one is shifting their position. No one is listening except our readers. This is what I mean by ridiculousness.

            And your answer is making me want to go on, which I didn’t want to do. You said when you sin, you both grieve and quench the Spirit. If the Spirit is quenched, doesn’t that mean you’ve kicked God out of His throne, and your body is no longer His temple?


          • My apologies for any offense I have caused. I won’t clutter this post anymore.

            Peace and blessings to all.


          • Hey Ufuoma,

            You can weigh in any time you want here, you are always welcome.

            You actually ask a good question that I think many people have.

            I know eternal security is a tough thing to wrap our heads around but that is because it is so far from how humans think and human intuition that it doesn’t make sense. Good news here is that God’s ways are not our ways and we can’t possibly understand forgiveness and redemption as God sees it.

            To your scenario, and it is a good one, what if we change it a little?

            What if the man commits murder then dies? What if he has a lustful thought, then dies? What if he steals something, then dies? What if he just tells a simple lie, then dies?

            Does it make sense that all of these acts are forgiven equally by God? Maybe not but that how it works and this is evident in Scripture when God says, “For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,” (Romans 3:23)

            That means all of us. While Christians are commanded not to sin, and many reach a level of maturity where they don’t sin often, all of us will always sin, it’s in our nature, we can’t help it, God knows that.

            In God’s eyes, adultery is no more a sin than a white lie as even the simplest and most well intentioned lie is a crime against an infinite and holy being that demands eternal damnation.

            This is a difficult subject, I hope this helps, and I am very glad you took the time to comment.

            God bless,

            James 🙂


  9. Dan – This is my last post to you since we both know we can keep going in circles. You wrote: “The believer IS led by the Spirit of God because the Spirit lives in him.” Your statement is one of CERTAINTY as you employ the word “is.” However based on your interpretation you have taken the liberty to add a word to the text of v.13 that is not there. The verse does not contain the word “is” but contains the word “if” – which makes it a statement of UNCERTAINTY. If Paul believed as you do that it is certain that the believer will always be led of the Spirit, he would have employed the word “since” but he did not do that. Instead, he chose to use the word “if” which indicates choice, option, possibility, etc. – not certainty. Thus Paul believed that believers have two choices on how to live their lives – flesh or Spirit – with the attendant consequences accompanying either choice.

    Since we both know that the scriptures do not contradict each other, let’s see if Paul’s writings fit with John’s writings. Paul’s words fits perfectly with John’s words in Jn 10:27-30 where John writes that God gives eternal life to his sheep and they will never perish. As I wrote earlier, this promise only applies to those sheep who are listening and following. From Rom 8:13 we learn that believers/sheep have a choice whether to follow the flesh or follow the Spirit as indicated by the word “if.” Therefore only those sheep who choose to listen and follow Him (Jn 10:27) and by the Spirit put to death deeds of the body will live (Rom 8:13) will never perish and have eternal life (Jn 10:28). The writings of these two Apostles mesh perfectly together and do not contradict each other as always – scripture interprets scripture.

    Lastly in reference to your Ephesians passage, that verse refers to works done in our flesh – works of self-righteousness which I wrote about earlier that account for nothing. No where in the entirety of Scripture is works done out of obedience to God or the leading of the Holy Spirit ever condemned; rather our obedience is commended by the Father. To conflate works of self-righteousness with works of obedience distorts the meaning of the scripture as Jesus himself judges the 7 Churches in Revelation based upon their works or lack of works.

    You can have the last word if you wish but thank you for the discussion and God bless as you continue in your studies!


    • This will be my last comment also and will meet again somewhere else I am sure! yes I did use the term IS. Whether or not a believer always follows the Spirit’s leading is something else again. Phil 2:13 speaks, and clearly in my view, concerning that leading. We know his voice and we follow by nature as his sheep. Peace and great blessing to you!


  10. Thanks for your reply Wally. Here’s the passage in question:
    And another angel, a third, followed them, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and its image and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand, he also will drink the wine of God’s wrath, poured full strength into the cup of his anger, and he will be tormented with fire and sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever, and they have no rest, day or night, these worshipers of the beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name.”
    Here is a call for the endurance of the saints, those who keep the commandments of God and their faith in Jesus. (Rev 14:9-12)

    Notice that the saints are still present in v.12 and you’re right they could be tribulation saints or all of the saints if there is no rapture. Some or all of the saint who are alive will be faced with this decision. The verse does not necessarily imply that worship of the beast comes before taking the mark as the conjunction “and” means inclusion; not necessarily order. For instance I might say if anyone chews gum AND jumps on the trampoline….. – which came first? It could be either one and it could also be simultaneous events; who knows?

    But enough with the speculation and let’s get to the point. I wonder why wouldn’t you take the mark? After all, you’re a believer and you believe that you can never lose your salvation. Therefore, by taking the mark you can still remain alive and still be with the Lord when you die can’t you? Either that or you were never a true believer to begin with (which I doubt applies to you).


  11. All,

    Indeed we should live a life of repentnce, and it’s not ‘ridiculousness’ to discuss the issue of or assurance of salvation and eternal security. It’s an important issue although not a salvific one.Jesus said ‘ I give them eternal life (and it’s a ‘present’ not future gift) and they will NEVER perish. If it means something other than what it says ( I have researched the passage extensively)’, that I could wake up at in hell for having died committing a sin, we are being lied to. Using proper hermaneutics and letting what is absolutely clear interpret what is not as clear means that passages that are used to say our eternal life once granted can somehow vanish. There are many more promises from God (he wrote the book) concerning this. We ARE called to perservere and we WILL. That will be it’s own post, which I will no longer OWN once it is published in a public blog. I will not ever claim to have absolute truth, as some seem to have done, nor will I call the discussion ‘ridiculous’.


    • I agree that it is a matter of utmost importance since the matter of one’s salvation is crucial to what it means to be a Christian. According to my view it is a salvific issue which makes it of paramount importance as some Christians presume to be eternally bound when in fact they could be infernally bound. Using proper hermeneutics, the word ‘give’ in v.28 is a present tense verb in the Greek, thus the verse should read I am giving them or I am continuing to give them eternal life. Therefore eternal life is not a gift that was just given in the past based upon a past moment of belief. God is “giving” us eternal life as long as we are “listening” and “following” him – all three verbs are in the present tense. In other words eternal life is our possession as long as we are abiding in him. Those sheep who refuse to abide by no longer listening and following, no longer have eternal life.

      Out of respect for the original blogger however we should terminate our discussion here. If another contributor – perhaps Wally – wants to start up the topic on his blog he is free to do so and the discussion can continue unhindered. If he so chooses, I would be interested in him elaborating on his not taking the mark of the beast. Since he holds to eternal security he by necessity also has to believe that the consequences of taking the mark of the beast don’t apply to him since he can never lose his salvation. I think the logic is irrefutable in that one who believes in eternal security also has to deny that he will lose his salvation even if he takes the mark. That’s where the rubber hits the road for those who believe in eternal security. Everyone who believes in eternal security should ask themselves if they would they take the mark. After all, they can never be plucked out of the Father’s hand.


  12. Thanks for sharing! God bless you 🙂


  13. So grateful! God bless you 🙂



  1. Repent or Perish! | Uniquely Designed Individuals
  2. Repent or Perish! | StopAndPrayTV

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: