What does work out your own salvation mean?

Posted by Christopher Noel Boggess in Facebook's Pentecostal Theology Group View the Original Post

What does work out your own salvation with trembling and fear mean?

94 Comments

  • Reply December 23, 2017

    Timothy K. Wiebe

    It means to allow God to be at work in you

  • Reply December 23, 2017

    Timothy K. Wiebe

    Christopher Noel Boggess, you were quoting Philippians2:12. Verse 13 says .. ; 13 for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure.

  • Reply December 23, 2017

    Christopher Noel Boggess

    What about verse 14 15 16

  • Reply December 23, 2017

    Christopher Noel Boggess

    We do everything by and with god but it also takes efforts on our parts too

  • Reply December 23, 2017

    Timothy K. Wiebe

    Without Him you can do nothing

  • Reply December 23, 2017

    Timothy K. Wiebe

    Romans 3:27
    [ Boasting Excluded ] Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? Of works? No, but by the law of faith.

  • Reply December 23, 2017

    Timothy K. Wiebe

    We do good works, but it is by faith, and by the power of His Spirit. Anything else creates legalism

  • Reply December 23, 2017

    Timothy K. Wiebe

    Wearing no makeup, for example, is fine, UNTIL the woman without it looks down on the one with it. Then it’s no longer about Christ but legalism

  • Reply December 23, 2017

    Christopher Noel Boggess

    Ok

  • Reply December 23, 2017

    Timothy K. Wiebe

    Or wearing super long dresses, or no pants, or putting hair in a bun

  • Reply December 23, 2017

    Christopher Noel Boggess

    But god tells us to be modest

  • Reply December 23, 2017

    Christopher Noel Boggess

    And not have braided hair

  • Reply December 23, 2017

    Christopher Noel Boggess

    Or costly array

  • Reply December 23, 2017

    Christopher Noel Boggess

    I think we need to decide are we going to submit to gods will or our own

  • Reply December 23, 2017

    David Lewayne Porter

    Before you get to
    “Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling”,
    You have to
    First
    Philippians 2:12a
    Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only,

    Once they have been trained and discipled proving they can obey and walk it out,
    Then they are told to tend to their devotion and personal Christianity as is told
    “now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling”.

  • Reply December 23, 2017

    Varnel Watson

    Cant work your salvation without the Spirit entirely sanctifying you first. God will not do Synergism with unclean vessel. Here’s a little Pelagiyan reasoning Street Preacherz

  • Reply December 23, 2017

    Street Preacherz

    That verse always gave me trouble until the Lord opened verse 13 “For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.”
    It is God working in you in the new man. Holy desires beget holy actions. He takes the evil desires out and puts in the things he likes. Righteousness Peace Joy. An illustration might be like when the pastor comes over. What’s on T.V. public telivision? or something sleazy. Or when your mom comes over and wants to see you use the plates she gave you. lol

    And there’s the do’s and don’ts for an intemperate man they’re helpful.
    Verse 14 “Do all things without murmurings and disputings:’

  • Reply December 23, 2017

    Varnel Watson

    Has to be God which worketh in you
    Cant be you which worketh in you

  • Reply December 23, 2017

    Ify Divine Nsoha

    It means this: you’ve been justified by faith. It means simply to let the word of Christ dwell in you, let the gospel be always on the brain, and the focus all on God. You have to understand the gravity of sin and the depth of God’s love, and then work from there

  • Reply December 23, 2017

    Street Preacherz

    I wouldn’t think people could get saved or born again by behaviour modification. Unless it a thorough repentance which I would think would be impossible apart from knowing right from wrong and a spirit of prayer. But I got alot to learn. Words and definitions who know what they mean? Beats me some of them aren’t in the Bible.
    I’ve deleted my earlier statement because things can “heated”. I’ve taken the liberty include what I’ve always stated repentance is not simply turning away from evil it is turning to and clinging to Christ the Saviour also

  • Reply December 23, 2017

    David Lewayne Porter

    It is us doing our part through determination of our will as and after we allow Him to do His will in and through us.

  • Reply December 23, 2017

    Randy Buchanan

    It’s just like Paul speaks in other passages about works which follow salvation.

    He has made clear we are not saved by works but that we have been saved to perform the works of God through the power of God. Ephesians 2:8-10
    James 2:8-24

    It is on the basis of those works we receive our rewards or we “are saved, as by fire.” It is on this standard we are judged and by which we work out our final aspect of salvation, judgment, through our works.

  • Reply December 23, 2017

    Christopher Noel Boggess

    No im not saved by works

  • Reply December 23, 2017

    Christopher Noel Boggess

    Only grace but what do you think of this verse

  • Reply December 23, 2017

    Christopher Noel Boggess

  • Reply June 3, 2018

    Louise Cummings

    Yes the Bible says fear and trembling. Phil. 2:12. Paul was commending them for their constant obedience , even if it wasn’t in his presence only. But much more in his absence. Working out their own Salvation with fear and trembling. Refers to going on to maturity, to the ultimate conclusion of total Christlikrness. Verse 13. Says For God which works in you ( Devine enablement) both to Will and to do Of His good pleasure. ( the Holy Spirit , Who energizes the the Saint , makes him not only willing, but desirous of doing Gods Sweet Will.

  • Reply June 3, 2018

    Varnel Watson

    you tell em grandam Louise you tell em younguns

  • Reply June 4, 2018

    Scotty Searan

    Louise Cummings most people don’t quote first 13 when they talk about working out their own salvation but you work out your own salvation following God who is working in us after we follow God we work out our own salvation

  • Reply June 4, 2018

    Varnel Watson

    Timothy K. Wiebe had a good explanation on this one

  • Reply June 4, 2018

    Louise Cummings

    Yes He has. That’s why I Quote so many Scriptures. But I didn’t realize it was that many before I got to my main point.

  • Reply June 10, 2018

    Varnel Watson

    Scotty Searan restitution means your salvation is paid in full. You dont have to work FOR it. The opposite would be pelegianism Joe Absher Terry Wiles and IMP borders legalistic nomism even when is explaine dwith Jewish roots or else Tom Steele

    • Reply June 10, 2018

      Scotty Searan

      Explain your meaning of restitution
      Definition of restitution

      1: an act of restoring or a condition of being restored: such as

      a : a restoration of something to its rightful owner

      b : a making good of or giving an equivalent for some injury

      2: a legal action serving to cause restoration of a previous state

  • Reply June 10, 2018

    Joe Absher

    You lost me on the terminology.

  • Reply June 10, 2018

    Varnel Watson

    I would like to quote pastor Timothy K. Wiebe

    When you are born again, you are not the same person (literally). Your spirit within you is transformed and all things are new!

    We call this ENTIRE sanctification Melvin Harter

  • Reply September 9, 2019

    Varnel Watson

    RichardAnna Boyce The phrase “Free Grace” Theology (note the quotation marks) refers to a specific set of teachings that originated in the late 20th century among a minority of professors at Dallas Theological Seminary, foremost of whom was the late Zane Hodges. It is currently promoted by organizations like Free Grace Alliance and Grace Evangelical Society , and by theologians like Charles Bing, Robert Wilken, Fred Lybrand, and Joseph Dillow. Free grace theology is a Christian soteriological view teaching that everyone receives eternal … including the Lutheran Churches, Reformed Churches and the Methodist Churches, regard free grace theology as an antinomian heresy. Basically free grace is a plain BAPTIST heresy

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      Free Grace is Biblical.

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      Varnel Watson

      RichardAnna Boyce The BIBLE calls us to turn away from sin and justification by faith alone – why does free grace deny that the BIBLE teaches this?

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      Troy Day bible verse please

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      Varnel Watson

      RichardAnna Boyce Lk 13: 3 unless you turn away from your sins, you will all die too.

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      Luke 13:3 The Lord Jesus responds to His own question with an unequivocal “no.” This does not deny the notion of degrees of sin (see 12:47-48). Rather, the very question presupposes different intensities of evil and sin. The question deals with the comparative level of sin between the killed Galileans and the others who had not suffered their fate. The Lord does not assign greater sin to those who died. Jesus’ answer transitions into a warning: “unless you repent you will all likewise perish.” His warning echoes the selfsame message of John at the outset of Luke’s Gospel (see 3:7-9).

      Luke 3:7-:9

      3:7. John accused the religious leaders (cf. Matt 3:7) and those who followed them of being a “brood of vipers.” The “wrath to come” references the temporal judgment that would befall the nation in the Jewish War of AD 66-70.

      3:8. John then gives them the ideal solution for their perilous position. They needed to “bear fruits worthy of repentance.” They must exhibit righteous behavior corresponding to their confessed disobedience and decision to change. Furthermore, they should not assume their pedigree would deliver them. In fact, God could “raise up children to Abraham from these stones” if necessary (cf. 19:40). National heritage cannot replace the spiritual relationship that God calls them to.

      3:9. Further, the crowd should not delay in setting things straight with God because “even now the ax is laid to the root of the trees.” John’s very preaching evidenced God’s mercy in providing them an opportunity of escape. Should they choose to disobey they would bear the consequence. Though fire in the Scripture can refer to eternal judgment, it most often refers to temporal judgment. The OT uses fire to speak of God’s judgment and cleansing of the disobedient nation (cf. Lam 4:12; Ezek 22:21). The context indicates which meaning the biblical author has in mind. Here, the fiery judgment again looks forward to the Jewish War of AD 66-70.

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      Varnel Watson

      RichardAnna Boyce oh OK so now you are gonna start copy pasting in order to twist the verse explain away its meaning and change what Jesus is saying – OK 🙂

  • Reply September 9, 2019

    Varnel Watson

    RichardAnna Boyce First, FGT doesn’t accurately reflect the Reformation teaching of justification by faith alone, which was often summarized in the formula “We are justified by faith alone, but the faith that justifies is never alone”

  • Reply September 9, 2019

    RichardAnna Boyce

    never alone is the basis of Lordship Salvation.

  • Reply September 9, 2019

    Varnel Watson

    RichardAnna Boyce FGT teaching weakens the gospel by “avoiding any call to unbelievers to repent of their sins” – repentance appears in key New Testament summaries of the gospel message, even in places where faith isn’t explicitly mentioned (Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38). Additionally, passages like Acts 20:21 tie repentance and faith closely together

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      Ive already exegeted that repentance for Jewish generation who murdered God, was PREPARATION for believing, NOT A CONDITION of believing, many many times here brother

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      Varnel Watson

      RichardAnna Boyce note where Paul says ALL

      “There is no distinction: for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,

      and are justified by his grace as a gift,

      through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.”

      – Romans 3:22b–24

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      Troy Day Romans 3:22-:24
      Thus, faith alone in Christ alone is the sole means to acquire God’s righteousness.

      The freeness of this universal offer reminded Paul of mankind’s universal need from vv 9,19, and he reiterates that need: For there is no difference; for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.

      The Greek term husterountai translated fall short may best be rendered as lack, specifically a lack of God’s glory. Man’s sin separates him from dwelling in the presence of a holy God, because he lacks God’s glory of sinlessness as a perfect being.

      3:24. Every person may be justified freely by His grace. Just as there is no difference regarding condemnation (3:9-20), so also there is not difference regarding the offer of justification.

      Justification (dikaioœ, cf. 1:17) is contextually a legal term that means “to declare righteous.” It does not mean “to make righteous” (cf. Ex 23:7; Deut 25:1; Acts 13:39). This distinction is extremely important. Upon justification a sinner changes position before God, not the condition of his character or practices. Changing one’s character is a matter of growth through progressive sanctification that should follow justification (Rom 6:8; Eph 2:8-10). In justification, the unrighteous sinner is declared righteous in his position before God, even though he is still unrighteous in his earthly experience and practice.

      Justification is a “free grace” gift that comes by faith alone, because it comes without cost and merit to the recipient through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. Redemption came through Christ’s ransom payment at the cross (cf. Matt 20:28; Gal 3:13; 4:5) and freed humanity from the slave market of sin.

  • Reply September 9, 2019

    RichardAnna Boyce

    repentance is COMPULSORY for BELIEVERS to earn rewards in the Millennium for FG

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      Varnel Watson

      NOT what the BIBLE says in ACTS 3:19

      Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord.

      says to REPENT AND be converted – NOT to earn rewards

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      Acts 3:19-20 The Apostle Peter again spoke to them from the perspective of Israel as God’s special people—and in the context of their recent rejection of the Messiah in Jerusalem. Despite their grievous sin, God the Father had both allowed them to live and granted them an opportune time to respond to the message: “Repent therefore and be converted.”

      3:20. Peter assures them of a complementary consequence that would result from their repentance—the Father would “send Jesus Christ”—Jesus would return to establish His Messianic reign in Israel; and believers would earn rewards to co-reighn with Christ in the Millennium.

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      Varnel Watson

      RichardAnna Boyce Turn away from your sins, because the Kingdom of heaven is near!” (Matthew 4:17).

      “In those days John the Baptist came, preaching in the wilderness of Judea and saying, ‘Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near.’” – Matthew 3:1-3 (NIV)

      “Whoever conceals their sins does not prosper, but the one who confesses and renounces them finds mercy.” – Proverbs 28:13

      “I tell you that in the same way there will be more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who do not need to repent.” – Luke 15:7 (NIV)

      “Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out, that times of refreshing may come from the Lord.” – Acts 3:19 (NIV)

      “Opponents must be gently instructed, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth.” – 2 Timothy 2:25

      “But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not die. None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live?” – Ezekiel 18:21-23 (NIV)

      “But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God’s wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed.” – Romans 2:5 (NIV)

      “But unless you repent, you too will all perish.” – Luke 13:3 (NIV)

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      all luke and acts gospels of repentance are to Jews, not Gentiles, and are preparations for believing, not conditions for believing

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      2 tim is to believers to earn rewards; not unbelievers as condition of believing

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      Varnel Watson

      RichardAnna Boyce are you explaining away again what the BIBLE clearly commands all ppl to repent?

  • Reply September 9, 2019

    Varnel Watson

    RichardAnna Boyce justifying the classical Protestant understanding that faith and repentance are like two sides of the same coin, or better—two perspectives on the same conversion event, with repentance being a turning from sin and faith being a turning to Christ. In short, we can’t preach the full gospel without preaching repentance. Even apart from its polemical purpose, this chapter provides a helpful overview of the biblical teaching on repentance.

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      James 2:14-17

      2:14. James opens this section of admonition by confronting the fundamental issue. Suppose someone lays claim to faith but cannot point to acts of obedience of the kind James has been discussing (1:26-2:13). What then? Can he expect his faith in God’s Word to “save his life” (1:21) if he is not a work-doer (v 25)? In other words Can faith save him?
      Actually the question (in Greek) implies its own answer and might better be translated, “Faith can’t save him, can it?” The expected response is, “No, it can’t!” But, of course, faith can and does save when one is speaking of eternal salvation (e.g., Eph 2:8-9). But here—as James makes plain—faith cannot save under the conditions he has in mind (see discussion at James 1:21).
      Thus in James 2, the writer plainly makes works a condition for salvation. The failure to admit this is the chief source of the problems supposedly arising from this passage for most evangelicals. Readers need to recognize that James cannot be discussing salvation by grace. But instead of admitting these points, many interpreters dodge them.
      This is frequently done by trying to translate the question, “Can faith save him?” (2:14), by “Can that [or, such] faith save him?” But the introduction of words like “that” or “such” as qualifiers for “faith” is really an evasion of the text. The Greek does not support this sort of translation.
      Nevertheless, support for the renderings “such faith” or “that faith” is usually said to be found in the presence of the Greek definite article with the word “faith.” But in this very passage, the definite article also occurs with “faith” in vv 17,18,20,22, and 26. (In v 22, the reference is to Abraham’s faith!) In none of these places are the words “such” or “that” proposed as natural translations. As is well known, the Greek language often employed the definite article with abstract nouns (like faith, love, hope, etc.) where English cannot do so. In such cases the Greek article is left untranslated. The attempt to single out 2:14 for specialized treatment carries its own refutation on its face. It must be classed as a truly desperate effort to support an insupportable interpretation.
      These statements by James cannot be willed away. As clearly as language can express it, faith by itself does not “save,” according to James. But “save” in what sense? Or better, “save” from what? From eternal hell? Or from something else? The only appropriate answer, in the light of the whole epistle, is to say that James is picking up the theme of 1:21 (expressed again in 5:19-20). This theme is the truth that obedience to God’s Word can “save” the life from the deadly outcome of sin (see 1:15 and discussion). Faith alone cannot do this. Works of obedience are completely indispensable.
      2:15-17. If one keeps in mind the concept of “saving the life by obedience,” then the words of 2:15-17 can be heard in a fresh light. Can the fact that a person holds correct beliefs and is orthodox “save” him from the deadly consequences of sin? Of course not! The very thought is absurd. That is like giving one’s best wishes to a destitute brother or sister when what they really need is food and clothing (2:15-16). It is utterly fruitless. As a matter of fact, this kind of callous conduct on the part of one Christian toward another is precisely what James has been warning against (see 1:27; 2:2-6). It superbly illustrates his point.
      Such idle words are as “dead” (ineffectual) as a nonworking faith. So James says, Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. It needs to be carefully considered why James chose the term dead to describe a faith that is not working. Yet the moment this term is related to the plainly expressed concept of “saving the life” (1:21), everything becomes clear. The issue that concerns James is an issue of life or death. Can a faith that is dead save the Christian from death? The question answers itself. The choice of the adjective dead is perfectly suited to James’s argument. Just as the idle words of some ungenerous believer cannot save his brother from death in the absence of life’s necessities, a nonworking faith cannot save a believer’s life from the death–dealing consequences of sin. For that purpose faith is sterile and ineffective by itself, because it cannot accomplish the needed result.
      Commentators often deal with the word dead simplistically. As a metaphor dead is often treated as though it could refer to nothing other than the death/life terminology employed to describe salvation from hell. But every linguist knows that “death” and “deadness” are concepts that have given rise to numerous and diverse metaphors in nearly every language. English itself has many (“this law’s a dead letter,” “you’re dead wrong,” “he’s dead drunk,” “he’s a dead duck,” “that idea is dead,” “they navigated by dead reckoning,” etc.). So also the Greek language (and the NT itself) abounds in such metaphors. In Romans alone, Paul says Abraham’s body was “dead” while it was still alive, and attributes “deadness” to Sarah’s barren womb (Rom 4:19). Paul says that “apart from the law sin was [or is] dead” (Rom 7:8) (although sin can be quite active apart from the Law [Rom 5:13]), and then declares that “sin revived and I died” (Rom 7:9). So too the Christian’s body, in which the Spirit dwells, can be described as “dead” (Rom 8:10), although the Christian himself is regenerated. The complexity in Paul’s use of the term “dead” is clearly evident from these texts. A concordance study yields examples in other parts of the NT as well (e.g., Luke 15:24,32; Heb 6:1; 9:14; Rev 3:1). It is simply wrong to think that James’s metaphor about “dead faith” can have only one meaning, namely, a soteriological one. To claim this is to beg the question.
      So when faith is described as “dead” in James 2, this can easily be understood in context as meaning that (for the purpose being considered) faith is sterile, ineffectual, or unproductive.

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      Varnel Watson

      RichardAnna Boyce Free grace weakens the gospel by giving many professing Christians a false assurance of salvation. It’s not hard to see why this would happen. If repentance, good works, and continuing in belief don’t necessarily follow saving faith, then the lack of them can’t serve as evidence that our faith is dead, and the answer to James’s question “Can that faith save him?” would seem to be “yes” (James 2:14–17).

  • Reply September 9, 2019

    Varnel Watson

    OK RichardAnna Boyce IF your teaching is correct then tell us “How many good works does one have to do in order to be assured of salvation?”

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      none

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      Varnel Watson

      RichardAnna Boyce then your doctrine is invalid

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      John 3:16 God sees the believer as eternally saved and a believer for eternity

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      Varnel Watson

      RichardAnna Boyce eternally saved? says who?

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      you are not rightly dividing ‘were saved’ of justification; from ‘being saved’ of sanctification; from ‘will be saved’ of glorification.

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      Troy Day John 4 and John 6

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      Varnel Watson

      RichardAnna Boyce pls dont attack me personally with something I never said but attack the issue I asked says WHO? Certainly not the BIBLE – Jn 3 16 speaks NOTHING about eternal salvation

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      The Evidence from John 4:13-15:
      Ho Pinōn Equals Ho Pisteuōn
      When Jesus evangelized the woman at the well, He used the figure of living water to refer to the saving message and the figure of drinking to refer to believing that message.
      In v 13 Jesus used a present articular participle, ho pinōn, the one who drinks, as a clear figure for ho pisteuōn, the one who believes. Using Wallace’s reasoning, ho pinōn must refer to a lifetime of drinking.2 Yet Jesus specifically contradicts this, and the woman shows that she understands Him to be speaking of gaining the benefit the very moment one drinks.
      “‘Whoever drinks [ho pinōn] of this water will thirst again, but whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him will never thirst. But the water that I shall give him will become in him a fountain of water springing up into everlasting life.’
      “The woman said to Him, ‘Sir, give me this water, that I may not thirst, nor come here to draw.’”
      Jesus doesn’t rebuke her understanding on the permanence of the gift. She understood Him correctly. One drink would quench her thirst forever. She would be eternally secure that very moment. What He corrected was her mistaken notion that He was speaking literally of drinking physical water.
      The Evidence from John 6:35:
      Ho Erchomenōs Equals Ho Pisteuōn
      There is a clear verbal tie between John 4:13-15 and John 6:35. The one who drinks (ho pinōn) the water of life will never thirst again (4:14). Likewise, the one who believes (ho pisteuōn) in Jesus will never thirst again (6:35). Unmistakably ho pisteuōn and ho pinōn are parallel.
      Also in John 6:35 is ho erchomenos, the one who comes. The one who comes to Jesus “shall never hunger.” Clearly, as the bread of life, Jesus promises that the one who eats that bread, that is, the one who believes in Him, will never hunger again.
      Wallace’s understanding of ho pisteuōn is impossible in light of John 4:13-15 and John 6:35. It appears that he has let theological bias lead him to make a statement that is not grammatically correct.
      The Evidence from John 11:26:
      Ho Zōn and Ho Pisteuōn Are Co-Conditions
      As “the life,” Jesus promises Martha, “Whoever lives [ho zōn] and believes [ho pisteuōn] in Me shall never die” (John 11:26a).
      If we carried Wallace’s understanding of present participles to this verse, we would understand that anyone who ever ceased living, that is, anyone who physically died, would die spiritually. The only ones who would have everlasting life and hence, never die spiritually, would be those who 1) continuously live, and 2) continuously believe.
      Yet in the preceding verse Jesus said that believers do cease living. That is, they die physically. Thus, ho zōn cannot mean, “the one who keeps on living.” Nor can ho pisteuōn mean “the one who keeps on believing.”
      Of course, Jesus explicitly stated that a believer’s faith can cease. He did so in the parable of the four soils. A comparison of Luke 8:12 and 8:13 makes this clear. The second soil believed for a time. Then it stopped believing. Yet the seed, which is the saving message, clearly germinated in this soil, for Jesus said that “it sprang up” (Luke 8:6).
      John 11:26 shows that all who simply believe in Jesus for everlasting life while they are yet alive will never die. If the person’s physical life or faith dies, the promise remains true. The moment a person believes in Jesus, he’s eternally secure. (Note: some may come to believe the gospel after they die. If so, this passage shows there will be no everlasting life for them.)

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      Varnel Watson

      RichardAnna Boyce Ho Pinōn DOES NOT Equal Ho Pisteuōn – if they were the same the same word would have been used but it was not There is a reason they are not the same and the Greek gives you that reason Try again

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      CONTINUOUS FAITH IS NOT IN VIEW IN JN 3:16
      & IS NOT REQUIRED TO BE SAVED

      I) “WHOEVER BELIEVES” IS A NOMINATIVE PRESENT PARTICIPLE PORTRAYING A SINGLE MOMENT OF BELIEVING AND NOT A CONTINUOUS ONE

      A) “PAS HO PISTEUON” = “WHOEVER BELIEVES” IS A NOMINATIVE PRESENT PARTICIPLE = A NOUN WHICH ONLY REQUIRES AN INSTANT OF BELIEVING
      The phrase “whoever believes” in Jn 3:16 = “pas ho pisteuon” = relative pronoun “pas” = “everyone who” with a definite article “the” = “ho” + the present participle verb functioning as a noun, lit. “everyone who is the believing one”.
      [The Language of the New Testament, Eugene Van Ness Goetchius, Chas. Scribner’s Sons, N.Y., 1965, p. 173]:
      “Present participles may be used substantively [as a noun]… In the translation of such constructions into English one must usually resort to paraphrases of the types illustrated…

      1) [Compare Ro 12:7]: “If it is serving, let him serve; if it is teaching, let him teach;”
      “o didaskon” = the teaching one, the one teaching, the one who is teaching, the one who teaches.
      So “pas ho pisteuon” = “everyone who is the believing one”,
      i.e, everyone who is the believer at the moment one begins believing.
      [“Syntax of New Testament Greek”, Brooks & Winbery, 1979, University Press, Lanham, Md, pp. 144]:
      “THE SUBSTANTIVAL PARTICIPLE
      The participle, like an adjective, may be used in the place of a noun or other substantive. The participle itself then functions as a noun. Its case, gender, and number are determined by its use in the sentence. It may be used in most of the ways in which a noun is used, e.g. as a subject nominative, as a dative of indirect object, as an accusative of direct object, etc. It may be used with or without an article. It always stands in the attributive position [following the article].”

      2) [Compare Mk 6:14]: ”’King Herod heard about this, for Jesus’ name had become well known. Some were saying, “John the Baptist has been raised from the dead, and that is why miraculous powers are at work in him.”’
      “John the Baptist” = “iOannEs ho baptizOn” =
      “ho baptizOn” = “the baptizing one” = present, active, participle as a noun = “the Baptist”

      [Bob Wilkin states, Grace in Focus periodical, Jan/Feb 2006, Vol 21, Number 1, Grace Evangelical Society, Irving Texas, p. 2]:
      “Herod had put John to death after imprisoning him for some time. John had not baptized anyone in a long time, yet Herod still called him “ho baptizOn”
      We still call him that today, even though he hasn’t baptized anyone for 2000 years!
      John was only the Baptist when he was in the water baptizing people. Each time he came out of the water after conducting bapisms, he would cease being ho baptizOn.
      Of course, using that reasoning, since John stoped baptizing forever when he was imprisoned, his baptism was a false or spurious baptism all along!”

      3) [Compare Jn 1:33]: “I would not have known him, except that the one who sent me to baptize with water told me, `The man on whom you see the Spirit come down and remain is he who will baptize with the Holy Spirit.’
      [Notice that “ho baptizOn” refers to Jesus, with the clear implication is
      that our Lord will not forever baptize people with the Holy Spirit.
      Once the church age ends, this ministry of Jesus will end forever]
      Just as John the Baptist was still considered the Baptist even while he was in jail, (Mt 14:8), and the one who baptizes, even after he was beheaded, (Mk 6:14);
      so a believer is a believer from the moment he trusts in Christ for eternal life.
      So “pas ho pisteuon” in Jn 3:16 = “everyone who is the believing one”,
      i.e, everyone who is the believer at the moment one begins believing.
      Thus a believer is legitimately referred to as a believer from the moment he trusts in Christ for eternal life, at which moment he receives possession – continuous and forever –
      of eternal life because possession of eternal life is forever.
      The nominative present participle is thus referring more to the person than the act of believing, and therefore it is clear that the focus is on momentary action rather than continuity.

      [Dr. Robert Wilkin states, The Grace Report, Monthly Report of the Grace Evangelical Society, Irving, Tx. ges@faithalone.org, Mar 1999, Notes and Letters, p. 4]:
      ”’The articular participle (=the article “the” [=’ho’] plus a participle [ex. pisteuon = believing] functions as a verbal noun.
      Thus [‘ho pisteuon’ =] ‘the one who believes’ does not mean
      ”he who keeps on believing and believing and believing’ but means ‘the believer.’
      [i.e., one who at some time exercised a single moment of faith alone in Christ alone]. Anyone who comes to faith in Christ is from that moment forward ‘the believer.’ ”’
      In other words, the nominative present participle has in view one who at some moment in present time exercised a single moment of faith in whatever is specified, in this case, trusting that God gave His one and only Son for one as a believer.

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      B) “PAS HO PISTEUON” = “WHOEVER BELIEVES” IS NOT A SIMPLE CONTINUOUS PRESENT TENSE & THUS DOES NOT CONVEY CONTINUOUS ACTION
      The phrase “whoever believes” in Jn 3:16 is not a simple continuous present tense
      as some contend in order to demand that one maintain a constant state of believing
      so that one will continue to possess eternal life otherwise lose it;
      rather, as previously indicated, it is the relative pronoun “whoever”
      with the definite article “ho” = “the” and the present, active nominative participle verb “pisteuon” = “pas ho pisteuon”= “everyone who is the believing one” = a noun.

      Consider the individuals who are found guilty of various offenses before a magistrate in a court in the times of the ancient Roman Empire – New Testament times.
      The magistrate declares before the group of guilty people in koine Greek, the language of the New Testament, in a statement that directly parallels the second half of Jn 3:16, ‘Whoever pays his fine shall not perish in jail, but have freedom to go, with his life.’
      Does the present tense of ‘Whoever pays’ demand continuous – uninterrupted payment
      of the fine in order for an individual to “have freedom to go, with his life?”
      The answer is obvious, the present tense does not always demand continuous uninterrupted action in the present.
      Just as the payment of the Magistrate’s fine was done once in present time
      such that it results in freedom – the payment not having to be continuous;
      so the believing in Christ as Savior, when it begins in present time,
      immediately results in the aorist tense completed action of never perishing
      and the present tense reception of eternal life such that the believing need not continue
      in order to keep the result of never perishing and possession of eternal life continuous because the never perishing is a completed action
      and the eternal life by its very nature once received is continuously eternal.

      If I were to say, “In the morning I get on a bus, pay my fare with a bus pass,
      and get off where I work;” does the phrase ‘pay my fare’ mean I continually pay the fare until the ride ends, or is it in a moment of present time until the end is achieved,
      i.e., about 1 second to swipe the pass through the slot on top of the fare box?
      Same with ‘I get on the bus’ is not continual nor is ‘get off’.
      Present tense is simply a present moment of action
      until the context determines when the action ceases. This is true in the koine Greek also.

      Furthermore, even if the simple present tense were the verb in the original Greek text –
      and it is not – a special context and/or additional words such as “diapantos” = continually, must be inserted into the text in order to convey the idea of continuous believing.
      The Greek present tense by itself does not convey such an idea –
      nor does its counterpart in English.
      Simple present tense action in the absence of qualifiers demands a singular action in the present moment without requiring that it continue into later moments in any language.
      No first century Greek reader or hearer was likely to get a meaning such as ‘continue to believe’ without the necessary additional qualifiers to the simple present tense.

      1) [Compare Hebrews 13:15]: “Through Jesus, therefore, let us continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise–the fruit of lips that confess his name.”
      “anapherOmen ..thusian .aineseOs diapantos”
      “we should offer sacrifice of praise continually”
      Notice that “anapherOmen” = “we should offer” is present tense.
      Yet in order to emphasize continual action the word “diapantos” = “continually”
      must be inserted.
      In addition to this, the appeal to force the simple present tense to mean continuous action would lead to havoc in many passages in the New Testament.
      For example, 1 John 1:8 reads, “If we [born again believers] say that we have no sin [=”ouk echomen” = present tense] we deceive ourselves”.
      If this verse is rendered in the continuous mode, it would be read,
      “If we say we do not continuously have sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.” This indicates that in spite of becoming born again believers there is no time
      in the believer’s life that he can claim not to be living a lifestyle of continuous, unadulterated sin – no time for anything else!!!

      Since eternal life is immediately received at the first instant of believing according to numerous salvation passages whereupon it is also established – often stipulated, that
      a believer has an absolute assurance of his eternal destiny in heaven, (ref. 1 Jn 5:9-13);
      and since eternal life once received by definition is continuous and everlasting for
      that individual believer without interruption or cessation from then on no matter what, then to insist that continuous believing is thereupon required in order to continue
      to have eternal life is nonsensical, contradicts normative rules of language
      and violates the doctrine of assurance, i.e., eternal security.

      In the final analysis “whoever believes” = “pas ho pisteuon” in the Greek,
      the form of the verb to believe in Jn 3:16, is not a simple present tense form at all;
      but it is actually a nominative, singular, masculine, present active participle, i.e., a participle acting as a noun indicating “one who believes” [in Christ as Savior], i.e., a believer.
      The participle acting as a noun does not require a perfection of continuous action
      such as continuous believing in order for an individual to be qualified as a believer.

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      C) A CONTINUOUS STATE OF BELIEVING IN CHRIST IS NOT POSSIBLE WITH MAN
      According to Scripture, a continuous and perfect state of believing in Christ
      is not possible with man which would necessitate sinless perfection.
      For any sin a believer commits reflects a degree of unbelief
      and no one can claim to be without sin, nor maintain a perfect state of continuous faith:

      1) [Compare 1 Jn 1:8, 10]: (v. 8) “If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.
      (v. 10) If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives.”
      No believer can claim to maintain a perfect, uninterrupted record of faith in Christ
      as he is bound to commit acts of unbelief throughout his life.

      2) [Compare 1 Jn 4:7-12]: (v. 7) “Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God.
      (v. 8) Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.”
      [Notice that “whoever does not love does not know God” in the sense of being out of fellowship with Him for the moment, acting as one who does not know God, an unbeliever. Since sin is an act of not loving, and since all believers sin, then at those moments
      they do sin, they do ‘not know God’, i.e., their faith in Him is imperfect]
      Can an individual express saving faith in Christ as Savior continuously –
      without any interruption all his life even during moments when he is asleep –
      completely in unconscious sleep?
      Suppose while in a deep sleep with your active mind unconscious,
      you no longer are continuously maintaining faith in Christ as Savior,
      you die in your sleep and then because of this unconscious lapse, wake up in Hell –
      after a long life of faithful service to God!!!!

      Can an individual maintain perfect, uninterrupted saving faith in Christ as Savior
      throughout his waking day?
      Consider an accountant who is in deep concentration, keying in figures on a spread sheet making sure of his accuracy. Can he also be maintaining a deep concentration on trusting in Christ as Savior without interruption?

      Have you ever lost your salvation during the moment when you are considering what to have for lunch instead of continuing to believe in Christ to save you – as your thoughts
      are not for the moment on Jesus Christ but on the Tuna Melt sandwich on the menu?

      What do you then need to do to get it back? Is it really eternal life if you keep losing it every time your mind wanders to some other subject?
      Wouldn’t it be better to call it ‘For the Moment Life’ rather than eternal life?
      And how do you get eternal life back after your momentary lapse?

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      II) ETERNAL LIFE ONCE RECEIVED IS FOREVER

      A) “ETERNAL LIFE” = “ZOEN AIONION” = LIT. LIFE FOREVER
      When an individual expresses a moment of belief in the Son being given for him
      he receives possession of life with God forever.
      Since eternal life has a unique quality about it of being everlasting in duration;
      then such a life will not cease once it has begun to be the possession of the individual
      at the beginning moment of faith when he became “ho pisteuon eis auton”
      = the believer in the Son of God being given up for him.
      Otherwise eternal life would not be called eternal life,
      it would be called 10 year life or 10 minute life as the case may be.
      So if the believer does not maintain a continuous state of believing in the Son after that
      first moment of faith, the duration of the believing will not have an effect on the duration of the eternal life since the latter has begun to be the forever possession of the believer.

      B) ETERNAL LIFE ONCE RECEIVED
      IS AN INTRINSIC PART OF AN INDIVIDUAL WHICH CAN NEVER BE LOST

      1) LIFE IS AN INTRINSIC PART OF AN INDIVIDUAL
      [Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary [G & C Merriam Co., Springfield, Mass, 1980]:
      Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary defines life as “a principle or force that is considered to underlie the distinctive quality of animate beings; an animating and shaping force or principle.” Hence, this principle is inherent in the individual, an intrinsic part that animates every part of ones being.

      2) ETERNAL LIFE CANNOT EXIST SEPARATELY FROM THE INDIVIDUAL –
      BEING ETERNAL, ONE THUS WILL NEVER LOSE IT
      In the same way as one’s physical/mortal life, eternal life once received
      becomes an intrinsic part of one and it is for eternity.
      It cannot be for less than eternity because it could not then be called eternal life.
      When mortal/physical life ceases
      it does not exist outside of one like a separate entity like a diamond can.
      It is an intrinsic part of one and once it is lost, it simply no longer exists.
      It is gone and ones existence has changed without it.
      Furthermore, once one receives eternal life it becomes an intrinsic part of one
      but now it is for eternity by definition.
      It cannot be lost and exist outside of one any more than mortal/physical life can.

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      hahaha i have been blocked

  • Reply September 9, 2019

    Neil Steven Lawrence

    Phil. 2:12b “… continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling,”. Why do we have to have fear and trembling if we have “eternal security“ like the Calvinists emphasize.

    I believe in eternal security, just not the way the Calvinist explain it.

    “Working out your salvation“ does not exclude justification by faith nor grace. Rather it simply shows an attitude of ours toward God that we are supposed to maintain. If we lose this attitude it shows a potential loss of salvation as well.

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      potential loss of salvation compared with all of God’s promises of eternal security?

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      Neil Steven Lawrence

      RichardAnna Boyce most of the promises are conditional not automatic.

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      Varnel Watson

      Neil Steven Lawrence Joe Absher What is your salvation ? Is this the salvation GOD has given us freely on the cross? Jim Price Nelson Banuchi

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      Neil Steven Lawrence

      Troy Day Grace is free but not “cheap.” (Bonhoeffer) I preach an evangelistic message called: Heaven is Free: But it Will Cost You Your Life. https://youtu.be/2axZGOLvGWw

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      Jim Price

      Neil preaching to a crowd in Uganda is a perfect example of working out your own salvation. These people come from a different place and while repentance, baptism and turning to Jesus may be the same the rest of the journey will be somewhat different. That’s why we are to withhold judgement, give them a chance to see what Jesus wants them to do where they are.

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      Nelson Banuchi

      Salvation is conditional; nevertheless, freely offered and freely received.

    • Reply September 10, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      Neil Steven Lawrence assuming we are both referring to the one time, one event, justification salvation; then how can it be conditional if God sees the new believer as a noun and a believer for eternity (receiving everlasting life), in the spirit? Only we judge people believers in the flesh (adjective).

    • Reply September 10, 2019

      Neil Steven Lawrence

      RichardAnna Boyce Just as sanctification is both punctiliar and linear so is salvation. God gives us the grace to except him but we must use our broken free will to except him the first time and daily.

    • Reply September 10, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      Neil Steven Lawrence my belief is when we accept Jesus the first time we receive eternal life and God sees us as a believer for eternity. In the unimaginable situation we apostasie we are still guaranteed eternal security. But then as a believer our daily works will be judged to earn/lose rewards in the Millennium. In the unimaginable situation we lose all rewards we still go through the fire into the Millennium with great shame; but at the end of 1000 years every tear will be dry and I’m sure all believers will be treated the same as there is no sin in heaven.

  • Reply September 9, 2019

    Jim Price

    Each of us are unique, thus perfecting our walk, trying to understand what is right in our special case is how I look at this verse. If you are a lawyer, a policeman or a judge working out your salvation would come from a different angle.

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      Joe Absher

      Jim Price “trying to understand what is right in our special case?” is this a veiled apology for your recent racist post.

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      Joe Absher

      You was a little close to the edge friend

    • Reply September 9, 2019

      Varnel Watson

      But NOT too unique to receive salvation from the same cross

  • Reply September 10, 2019

    Mike Partyka

    Can’t really explain this verse without going on to verse 13. Paul also gives examples of what it means to obey God and work out our salvation in verses 14-18. Perseverance in faith alone. We are not saved by signing a card, speaking in tongues, walking an altar call but saved by the possession of an authentic living faith. Those resting on Jesus alone will demonstrate their faith by their works.

    • Reply September 10, 2019

      Varnel Watson

      so we are saved BY

      saved by the possession of an authentic living faith

      NOT by the sacrifice of Christ?

    • Reply September 10, 2019

      Mike Partyka

      Troy Day yes. Faith in who and what Christ has done.

    • Reply September 10, 2019

      Varnel Watson

      Mike Partyka isnt GOD the source of our faith?

    • Reply September 10, 2019

      Mike Partyka

      Troy Day 2 Peter 1, Hebrews 12:2 Yes.

    • Reply September 11, 2019

      Varnel Watson

      Mike Partyka how is this related to OP

    • Reply September 11, 2019

      Mike Partyka

      Troy Day you asked the question I answered.

    • Reply September 11, 2019

      Varnel Watson

      Mike Partyka with saying

      Can’t really explain this verse?

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.