The Wonderful Dispensation of Grace

[lightninboy]

Dear Lighthouse,
Thank you for your reply.

The only scripture relevant to today's dispensation is the one in Cor. about communion. And nothing shows it to be a sacrament, or an ordinance. I do not need to take communion for any reason, but there is nothing wrong if I do, and there is definitely no reason to take it twice a month.

This is a rather non-crucial issue. But Paul baptized.

Yes. But I am reevaluating, based on some scripture I have come across. But I do still find that it is relevant to initial salvation.

If you agree with Jerry Shugart that salvation is always by grace through faith plus nothing, you should agree that John 3:16 teaches eternal security.

Are the following eight statements true or false?

1. In the dispensations before Christ called the Apostle Paul, there was no eternal security.

2. Jesus offered eternal security in the Gospel of John.

3. John 6:47 and John 3:16 look good, but in that dispensation, even after they believed, they could fall away.

4. Continual belief is a necessary condition of salvation.

5. God must honor His word by giving everlasting life to one who believes upon Christ for it. Salvation comes instantaneously with saving faith.

6. "God"-the greatest person
"So loved"-the greatest devotion
"The world"-the greatest number
"He gave"-the greatest act
"His only begotten Son"-the greatest gift
"That whosoever believeth"-the greatest condition
"Should not perish"-the greatest mercy
"Hath everlasting life"-the greatest result

7. John 3:16 says that everyone in every dispensation who believeth in Him hath everlasting life, and thus eternal security.

8. If Nicodemus had taken Jesus at His word and believed on Him for everlasting life, he would have had eternal security.

We must look at the underlying Greek. Daniel Wallace, a professor at Dallas Theological Seminary, who believes similarly to you, wrote in his Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, pp. 620,621, “everyone (His bold, Greek, and italics.) who believes.

Here’s the important part.

“The idea seems to be both gnomic and continual: “everyone who continually believes.” This is not due to the present tense only, but to the use of the present participle of (pisteuw), especially in soteriological contexts in the NT.”

Then in the f.n. 22, he wrote, “The aspectual force of the present (ho pisteuwn) seems to be in contrast with ho pisteusas. . . The present occurs six times as often (43 times), most often in soteriological contexts (cf. John 1:12; 3:15, 16, 18; 3:36; 6:35, 47, 64; 7:38; 11:25; 12:46; Acts 2:44; 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 3:22; 4:11, 24; 9:33; 10:4, 11; 1 Cor 1:21; 14:22 [bis]; Gal 3:22; Eph 1:19; 1 Thess 1:7; 2:10, 13; 1 Pet 2:6,7; 1 John 5:1, 5,10, 13). . . The present was the tense of choice most likely because the NT writers by and large saw continual belief as a necessary condition of salvation.”

That’s why it is significant that God inspired Paul to write additional statements about the believer’s security by being sealed and predestined.

Notice that in Pauline verses also words for saving faith are said to be in the continuous state. How can you push aside John 3:16 without pushing aside Pauline verses?

Didn't work. Can you give me a basic outline, like a sentence or two?

Lordship Salvation is basically a teaching that works and/or perseverance are required for salvation.
That was a good book to read, though the writer was Mid-Acts. Didn’t you have Adobe Reader?

 

[godrulz]

Lordship salvation is not necessarily works based. It is a reaction to easy believism that says you can have Jesus as Savior, with claiming Him as Lord a later option.

Jesus and Paul talked about His Lordship. Jesus is Lord and Savior. You cannot accept one aspect of His being and reject the other aspect. He must be Boss, not us. He is #1, not us. We are to love Him and others, not continue in selfish rebellion. Faith expresses itself in loving obedience. We do not just believe like the devil does in James. We trust and obey, for there is no other way...as the hymnist says.

The Greek present tense is usually continuous, not one time. Even in Jn. 3:16, the type of faith that saves is one that continues. The conditions of salvation, in all dispensations, are repentant faith and continuance in the faith. The grounds of salvation are grace and the person and work of Christ, not works.

 

[Lighthouse]

Dear Lighthouse,
Thank you for your reply.

You're welcome.

This is a rather non-crucial issue. But Paul baptized.

A few, yes. But he wasn't sent to baptize.

"For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect."

-1 Corinthians 1:17
​

If you agree with Jerry Shugart that salvation is always by grace through faith plus nothing, you should agree that John 3:16 teaches eternal security.

Not directly it doesn't.

Are the following eight statements true or false?

1. In the dispensations before Christ called the Apostle Paul, there was no eternal security.

I can't answer this with a simple yes or no, because there were dispensations without eternal security, and only one dispensation other than the current one where I believe they had eternal security.

2. Jesus offered eternal security in the Gospel of John.

Not until after He rose.

3. John 6:47 and John 3:16 look good, but in that dispensation, even after they believed, they could fall away.

In that dispensation, true.

4. Continual belief is a necessary condition of salvation.

False. It is an effect of salvation.

5. God must honor His word by giving everlasting life to one who believes upon Christ for it. Salvation comes instantaneously with saving faith.

True.

6. "God"-the greatest person
"So loved"-the greatest devotion
"The world"-the greatest number
"He gave"-the greatest act
"His only begotten Son"-the greatest gift
"That whosoever believeth"-the greatest condition
"Should not perish"-the greatest mercy
"Hath everlasting life"-the greatest result

True.

7. John 3:16 says that everyone in every dispensation who believeth in Him hath everlasting life, and thus eternal security.

False.

8. If Nicodemus had taken Jesus at His word and believed on Him for everlasting life, he would have had eternal security.

Not until after the resurrection.

Notice that in Pauline verses also words for saving faith are said to be in the continuous state. How can you push aside John 3:16 without pushing aside Pauline verses?

See above.

Lordship Salvation is basically a teaching that works and/or perseverance are required for salvation.

I see.

That was a good book to read, though the writer was Mid-Acts. Didn’t you have Adobe Reader?

This isn't my computer.

 

[godrulz]

Paul the itinerant preacher did not always stick around to baptize all his converts. He left that to local pastors. Billy Graham is the same way. Your argument does not disprove believer's baptism (see Acts 16 that contradicts your view...it is not a strong argument to say that Paul did it here, but let it die out later...it was either right or wrong after Paul's conversion..you can't have your cake and eat it too to retain a questionable view).

Your wrong assumption that baptism was ever a requirement in the early church (your so-called circumcision gospel...baptism is never a condition for salvation...see Jn. 1:12; 3:16, 36...Jesus, not Paul...Johannine theology is renowned for belief/faith emphasis, not works) leads to a wrong conclusion.

 

[Lighthouse]

Paul the itinerant preacher did not always stick around to baptize all his converts. He left that to local pastors. Billy Graham is the same way. Your argument does not disprove believer's baptism (see Acts 16 that contradicts your view...it is not a strong argument to say that Paul did it here, but let it die out later...it was either right or wrong after Paul's conversion..you can't have your cake and eat it too to retain a questionable view).

I stand by 1 Corinthians 1:17.

Your wrong assumption that baptism was ever a requirement in the early church (your so-called circumcision gospel...baptism is never a condition for salvation...see Jn. 1:12; 3:16, 36...Jesus, not Paul...Johannine theology is renowned for belief/faith emphasis, not works) leads to a wrong conclusion.

I never said baptism was a condition for salvation, did I? But Acts 2:38 and the Great Commission [above all else] show that it was required as an act of faith.

 

[godrulz]

I stand by 1 Corinthians 1:17.


I never said baptism was a condition for salvation, did I? But Acts 2:38 and the Great Commission [above all else] show that it was required as an act of faith.

Grammatically, repentance, not baptism, is linked with forgiveness, consistent with other verses (including Pauline ones). This is more obvious in Greek than English (see The Bible Knowledge Commentary for explanation or my post to Bob Hill somewhere online...I forget the thread). Jesus, Peter, and Paul were in agreement about the Great Commission, another reason to reject Mid-Acts!

I Cor. 1:17...I also believe this verse, but interpret it properly! Baptism is not essential to the gospel, but it was a normative practice in the early church as evidence of saving faith. It never saved anyone, nor is it a requirement to prove faith. The thief on the cross had faith without opportunity for baptism and was saved.

(BKC) "Paul's imitation of Christ apparently touched every aspect of his ministry According to Jn. 4:2 Jesus did not baptize, but left it to His disciples. This was USUALLY Paul's practice too. Could Paul then have believed baptism was necessary for salvation? Such is impossible (cf. I Cor. 4:15; 9:1, 22; 15:1-2). Not that baptism is pointless. It was commanded by Christ (Mt. 28:19) and practiced by the early church (Acts 2:41), which makes it, with the Lord's Supper, an ordinance of the church. But it is what an ordinance gives testimony to, not what it effects, that is more important."

Just because Paul's primary itinerant duty was to preach (like Billy Graham) does not mean he was against Christ's teaching and the practice of the early Church birthed at Pentecost that predated Paul's conversion and ministry of that one gospel primarily to the Gentiles. Acts 16 (Gentile baptism) flies in the face of your assumptions. You can loop hole it away, but why? Change your view, not the Bible.

Mid-Acts is not the best interpretation of the evidence and relies on proof texting and deductive reasoning.

If you are to be consistent in your logic, you will have to say that Jesus did not teach baptism because He did not routinely baptize disciples (He did baptize JB).

I love you LH. I trust we can embrace either position without creating division between us. Speaking of division, I hope sozo comes back soon.

 

[Lighthouse]

Grammatically, repentance, not baptism, is linked with forgiveness, consistent with other verses (including Pauline ones). This is more obvious in Greek than English (see The Bible Knowledge Commentary for explanation or my post to Bob Hill somewhere online...I forget the thread). Jesus, Peter, and Paul were in agreement about the Great Commission, another reason to reject Mid-Acts!

The Great Commission was not just about preaching the gospel, you twit! It also included baptism, and we've already been over where Paul stood on baptism. So while we should go into all the world and preach the gospel, we do not have to baptize!

I Cor. 1:17...I also believe this verse, but interpret it properly! Baptism is not essential to the gospel, but it was a normative practice in the early church as evidence of saving faith. It never saved anyone, nor is it a requirement to prove faith. The thief on the cross had faith without opportunity for baptism and was saved.

Idiot.

(BKC) "Paul's imitation of Christ apparently touched every aspect of his ministry According to Jn. 4:2 Jesus did not baptize, but left it to His disciples. This was USUALLY Paul's practice too. Could Paul then have believed baptism was necessary for salvation? Such is impossible (cf. I Cor. 4:15; 9:1, 22; 15:1-2). Not that baptism is pointless. It was commanded by Christ (Mt. 28:19) and practiced by the early church (Acts 2:41), which makes it, with the Lord's Supper, an ordinance of the church. But it is what an ordinance gives testimony to, not what it effects, that is more important."

Just because Paul's primary itinerant duty was to preach (like Billy Graham) does not mean he was against Christ's teaching and the practice of the early Church birthed at Pentecost that predated Paul's conversion and ministry of that one gospel primarily to the Gentiles. Acts 16 (Gentile baptism) flies in the face of your assumptions. You can loop hole it away, but why? Change your view, not the Bible.

Mid-Acts is not the best interpretation of the evidence and relies on proof texting and deductive reasoning.

If you are to be consistent in your logic, you will have to say that Jesus did not teach baptism because He did not routinely baptize disciples (He did baptize JB).

I love you LH. I trust we can embrace either position without creating division between us. Speaking of division, I hope sozo comes back soon.

Show where Jesus baptized.

 

[lightninboy]

Dear Lighthouse,
Thank you for your reply.

I will post my reply in pieces, and we can discuss the pieces.

 

[lightninboy]

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28166&page=9&pp=15&highlight=Jerry

Workman: John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. Christ was giving LIFE, spiritual LIFE to men even BEFORE he died for their sins. Again, the New COv't did not even come untill he died for sins. You know that they can't loose their identification with Christ because it says that they ARE passed (not "shall pass") from death to life. Since THIS is so, nobody can say that they must KEEP BELIEVING in order to avoid condemnation. Or else, they NEVER PASSED from death to life.

Sozo: No one was in Christ until the Holy Spirit had come to dwell in the lives of believers.
"It is the Spirit who gives life"
There was no freedom from condemnation until the debt had been paid. The ability to "believe on Him" was not possible until Jesus had accomplished what God had prepared for Him.
No one was "in Christ", before Christ paid the debt for sin. Christ proclaimed the inheritence that would come for those who believe/believed.

Jerry Shugart: If the "benefits" were not in effect at the time the Lord Jsus spoke those words,then why in the world would He say that they already have everlasting life--"hath everlasting life"?
And why would the Lord Jesus say that that they have already passed from death unto life?
If what you say is true,the Lord would have used "future" tense at John 5:24,25.But He did not! Instead,He was speaking in the "present" tense.
And although it was not until after the Cross that believers were dwelled by the Holy Spirit,it is a fact that even during the time that the Lord walked the earth that the Holy Spirit was quickening dead sinners.
Instead,the Scriptures state that the sins of believers before the CRoss were "covered":
"Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,
7 Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered"(Ro.4:6,7).

Sozo: They have the promise of salvation (just as did any one under the first covenant), but not the reality. Belief in God was accounted as righteousness, but NONE of them received the promise! You negate the cross, by teaching this heresy of yours, which is damnable!

Jerry Shugart: According to you we must believe that no one was saved before the Cross.But what about the following words of the Lord Jesus?: "I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living"(Mt.22:32).
And are we supposed to believe that Moses and Elijah were not saved,even though the Apostles saw them with the Lord Jesus at the tranfiguration?
The vast majority of dispensational teachers say the same thing that I am saying.Here are words from the "New Scofield Study Bible":
Before the cross man was saved in prospect of Christ's atoning sacrifice,through believing the revelation thus far given him"(note at Genesis 1:28).
The words there are speaking of the "indwelling" of the Holy Spirit and not the "quickening" of the Holy Spirit.
And what about Enoch?
The promises which they did not receive are in reference to "eschatological hopes".As a result,the perfecting (Heb.10:14;12:23) of the OT worthies--that is,the realization of their hopes--awaits that of all believers.
"And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise them up again at the last day"(Jn.6:39).

 

[Lighthouse]

Dear Lighthouse,
Thank you for your reply.

You're welcome.

I will post my reply in pieces, and we can discuss the pieces.

Okay.

 

[lightninboy]

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28166&page=10&pp=15&highlight=Jerry

Round 1-Jerry Shugart: However,despite this overwhelming Scriptual evidence that these Jewish believers do in fact enjoy eternal security,there are those who will still continue to insist that they can lose their “eternal life” if they do not continue to do “works”.It was not only the Jewish believers who lived during the present dispensation who possessed eternal security,but also those who lived in previous dispensations:
”For the Lord loveth justice,and forsaketh not His saints;they are preserved forever”(Ps.37:28).

Round 2-Jerry Shugart: The "works of the Law" were indeed necessary for "salvation",but that salvation is not in regard to "eternal salvation" but instead in regard to "temporal" or "physical" salvation.When a Jew committed a sin that was punishable by "physical" death he could bring an "offering" to be killed in his place.The Mosaic Covenant was never in regard to "eternal salvation" but instead was only in regard to temporal things:
Here is your "reasoning".You say that in past dispensations the believer must "demonstrate" their faith by "works" in order that they might be saved.But the Lord knows who has true "faith" and who does not.He does not need "outward" demonstrations in order to know if one has true faith or not:
" …for the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart"(1Sam.16:7).

Round 3-Jerry Shugart: have already pointed out that the Scriptures reveal that the Jewish believers were "born again" (the same thing as being "born of God" and "born of the Spirit"),
This born again experience comes upon all those who "believe God",no matter what that Revelation is.And that new brth is not a result of "works" because John makes it plain that the birth of God is not accomplished by the "will of the flesh":
The Jews did not understand this until Paul was converted and he revealed a "righteousness of God" which is "apart from law" and comes upon ALL who believe:
"But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;Even the righteousness of God which is by the faithfulness of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them who believe"(Ro.3:21,22).
Psalm 19:7a
7a The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul
Yes,and in this case "the Law" can indeed convert one into living a "physical" life that brings rewards.That is what Paul means when he says:
" But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them"(Gal.3:11,12).
1. Did the man in Numbers 15:32 go to hell?
Only the Lord knows the answer to that question.However,if he "believed God" then he was a "saint" of God,and this is what the Lord says about those who are His "saints" in the OT:
2. Does Hebrews 10:26-29 refer to people who were sanctified by the blood of Christ, and then fell away?
Yes,but again the "punishment" that is handed out to those people is not in regard to "eternal" punishment but instead to "temporal" punishment.After all,the author of Hebrews tells these Jewish believers the following:
"Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us"(Heb.9:12).
These same Hebrew Christians are told that they are being sanctified,and those who are being sanctified are "perfected forever"(Heb.10:14).
So the warning in regard to sinning presumptuously is in reference to the "temporal" state and not to the "eternal" state.

Round 4-Jerry Shugart: Jerry does not have to “hope” that “faith alone” was preached to them as we can see that Peter was sent there for that express purpose—”who shall tell thee words by which thou and all thy house shall be saved”(Acts11:14).
Here is what Peter said to these Gentiles immediately before the Holy Spirit fell upon them:
” To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in Him shall receive remission of sins”(Acts10:43).
” For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life”(Jn.3:16).
Not one word about doing any works!
Jeremy knows that this verse is fatal to his idea,so he attempts to change the plain meaning of the Lord’s words.He says that the “tense” of the word “believeth” refers to a “continuous” action of believing.
However,an examination of the “tense” of the word “believe” demonstrates the the word is in the “present” tense (“Present Active Participle”).It does not indicate “continuous” action,as the following verses indicates:
” But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:Who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God”(Jn.1:12,13).
The word “believe” in this verse is in the “present” tense (“Present Active Participle”) just as in John 3:16.If Jeremy is correct that this “faith” must be continuous then it is evident that those who “believed” would not be “born of God” and become His “sons” until the end of a life evidenced by a “continued” belief.However,we can see that the Jewish Apostles were indeed “born again” before they died:
” Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever”(1Pet.1:23).
The Greek present tense by itself does not convey the idea of “continuity” - nor does its counterpart in English.If someone wishes to express the idea of “continuity” then 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. No first century Greek reader or hearer would understand these words to mean to 'continue to believe' without the necessary additional qualifiers to the simple present tense.And that is why the author of Hebrews uses such a “qualifier” in order to express the idea of “continuious action”:
” By him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his name”(Heb.13:15).
The word “offer” in this verse is the “action”,and it is in the “present” tense.But since this “tense” does not express a “continuous action” the author of these words added the word “continually” in order to say that this “offfering” is to be “continuous”.
If continuous believing is necessary to provide one with a state of not perishing then Jn 3:16 must be changed to read "whoever continuously believes in Him will (future) not perish but will (future) have eternal life."
The words at John 3:16 cannot be denied.The one who “believes” in the Lord Jesus “should never perish”.They will not come into condemnation.The Lord Jesus told the Jews:
” He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life”(Jn.5:24).
Once again the word “believeth” is in the “present” tense (“Present Active Participle”).Those Jews who were “believing” Him when He spoke His words already posssessed a life which the Lord describes as “everlasting”.At the moment they belived Him they are assured that they will not come into condemnation.
Jeremy knows that if the Jewish believers possessed “eternal security” then his idea that “works” were required for “eternal salvation” comes tumbling down like a child’s house of cards.Therefore,he is forced to attempt to prove that those who “believe” and are “born of God” can indeed perish despite the words of the Lord Jesus to the contrary.
Quote:
If “eternal life” is a free gift then why should we believe that works are required in order to acquire that free gift?
Despite the fact that in this debate he is indeed arguing that “works” were required for salvation in previous dispensations he now says that he is “not saying that ‘works are required’ to obtain the free gift” of eternal life!

Round 5-Jerry Shugart: When a “gospel” went to the Jews after the resurrection the “message” is the fact that the Lord Jesus is the promised Messiah,the Son of God.
” Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ”(Acts2:36).
As soon as Paul was converted he also preached the same message to the Jews:
” And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures,Opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead; and that this Jesus, whom I preach unto you, is Christ”(Acts3,4).
Those Jews who believed this “good news” were “born of God” at the very moment they believed.They were “regenerated” or “born again” when they believed that the Lord Jesus is the Christ,the Son of God:

 

[Lighthouse]

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28166&page=9&pp=15&highlight=Jerry

Workman: John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. Christ was giving LIFE, spiritual LIFE to men even BEFORE he died for their sins. Again, the New COv't did not even come untill he died for sins. You know that they can't loose their identification with Christ because it says that they ARE passed (not "shall pass") from death to life. Since THIS is so, nobody can say that they must KEEP BELIEVING in order to avoid condemnation. Or else, they NEVER PASSED from death to life.

Sozo: No one was in Christ until the Holy Spirit had come to dwell in the lives of believers.
"It is the Spirit who gives life"
There was no freedom from condemnation until the debt had been paid. The ability to "believe on Him" was not possible until Jesus had accomplished what God had prepared for Him.
No one was "in Christ", before Christ paid the debt for sin. Christ proclaimed the inheritence that would come for those who believe/believed.

Jerry Shugart: If the "benefits" were not in effect at the time the Lord Jsus spoke those words,then why in the world would He say that they already have everlasting life--"hath everlasting life"?
And why would the Lord Jesus say that that they have already passed from death unto life?
If what you say is true,the Lord would have used "future" tense at John 5:24,25.But He did not! Instead,He was speaking in the "present" tense.
And although it was not until after the Cross that believers were dwelled by the Holy Spirit,it is a fact that even during the time that the Lord walked the earth that the Holy Spirit was quickening dead sinners.
Instead,the Scriptures state that the sins of believers before the CRoss were "covered":
"Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,
7 Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered"(Ro.4:6,7).

Sozo: They have the promise of salvation (just as did any one under the first covenant), but not the reality. Belief in God was accounted as righteousness, but NONE of them received the promise! You negate the cross, by teaching this heresy of yours, which is damnable!

Jerry Shugart: According to you we must believe that no one was saved before the Cross.But what about the following words of the Lord Jesus?: "I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living"(Mt.22:32).
And are we supposed to believe that Moses and Elijah were not saved,even though the Apostles saw them with the Lord Jesus at the tranfiguration?
The vast majority of dispensational teachers say the same thing that I am saying.Here are words from the "New Scofield Study Bible":
Before the cross man was saved in prospect of Christ's atoning sacrifice,through believing the revelation thus far given him"(note at Genesis 1:28).
The words there are speaking of the "indwelling" of the Holy Spirit and not the "quickening" of the Holy Spirit.
And what about Enoch?
The promises which they did not receive are in reference to "eschatological hopes".As a result,the perfecting (Heb.10:14;12:23) of the OT worthies--that is,the realization of their hopes--awaits that of all believers.
"And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise them up again at the last day"(Jn.6:39).

Was any of this directed to me?

 

[lightninboy]

Was any of this directed to me?

Dear Lighthouse,

Yes, it is to show you that John 3:16 teaches eternal security.

I would like to compose another piece on the continuous tense of the words used for saving faith in John and Pauline verses.

 

[godrulz]

The Great Commission was not just about preaching the gospel, you twit! It also included baptism, and we've already been over where Paul stood on baptism. So while we should go into all the world and preach the gospel, we do not have to baptize!


Idiot.


Show where Jesus baptized.

Touchy, touchy...

Jesus baptized John the Baptist, did He not? He did not baptize other people, but His disciples carried out that act of discipleship for Him in obedience to Him.

 

[godrulz]

Dear Lighthouse,

Yes, it is to show you that John 3:16 teaches eternal security.

I would like to compose another piece on the continuous tense of the words used for saving faith in John and Pauline verses.

John 3:16 teaches conditional eternal security. A believer is secure if they believe and continue to believe (Greek present, continous tense). If they cease to believe, they are no longer believers, but apostate unbelievers.

 

[lightninboy]

Pauline verses in which saving faith is said to be in the continuous tense:

Rom 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
3:22 Even the righteousness of God [which is] by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
4:11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which [he had yet] being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:
4:24 But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;
9:33 As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
10:4 For Christ [is] the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.
10:11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
1 Cor 1:21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
14:22 [bis] Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying [serveth] not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.
Gal 3:22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.
Eph 1:19 And what [is] the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power,
1 Thess 1:7 So that ye were ensamples to all that believe in Macedonia and Achaia.
2:10 Ye [are] witnesses, and God [also], how holily and justly and unblameably we behaved ourselves among you that believe:
2:13 For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received [it] not [as] the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.

I shall return!

 

[lightninboy]

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=29870&page=1

I find the suggestion that “continual belief [is] a necessary condition of salvation” unbelievable. The evidence is overwhelmingly against it.

The Evidence from John 4:13-15: Ho Pinōn Equals Ho Pisteuōn
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.[ii][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.

The Evidence from John 6:35: Ho Erchomenōs Equals Ho Pisteuōn
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.

The Evidence from John 11:26: Ho Zōn and Ho Pisteuōn Are Co-Conditions
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).

Other Present Articular Participles Show the Same Truth

The baptizing one (Mark 6:14 ). John had not baptized anyone in a long time, yet Herod still called him ho baptizōn. We still call him that today, even though he hasn’t baptized anyone for 2000 years! Using Wallace’s understanding, John was only the Baptist when he was in the water baptizing people.

The one who hears (John 5:24 ). A person need only hear His words once. If a person hears and believes, at that moment he is eternally secure.

The one who speaks (John 4:26 ). Clearly Jesus didn’t speak to the woman at the well continuously!

The one who sows (John 4:36 ). This sort of sowing does not go on forever.

A great multitude of sick people (John 5:3). The Greek for “sick people” is another present articular participle, tōn asthenountōn, in this case. Yet Jesus healed him and he left the ranks of sick people at the pool of Bethesda.

The one who comes into the world (John 6:14 ). After Jesus fed 5,000 men plus about 15,000 women and children with one Happy Meal, the crowd said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come [ho erchomenōs] into the world.” Again, we have another present articular participle. Jesus didn’t keep on coming into the world forever.

Examples could be multiplied. Present articular participles are verbal nouns that say nothing as to whether the action is continuous or not.

Conclusion: Eternal Faith Not Required
We are not born again because our faith is eternal. Our faith may falter and even fail. However, Jesus remains faithful to His promise. We are born again because we at one time put our faith in the eternally faithful Savior. Once we believe in Him, He is obligated by His promise to keep us secure (John 4:14 ; 6:35 ). That is the will of the Father for Him (John 6:39 -40). If anyone who believed in Jesus and later fell away failed to make it into the kingdom, then Jesus would have failed to do the will of the Father! If you are a believer, rejoice that you are eternally secure no matter what might happen in the future. Even apostasy cannot undo the work of regeneration.

More coming.

 

[godrulz]

An unbelieving believer is a contradiction in terms, an oxymoron.

 

[lightninboy]

Gen 15:6. He explained that because the word "believed" is in the past tense, it means that Abraham was saved the instant he believed God. Abraham supposedly was saved, having eternal security from then on, based upon his one-point-in-time mental assent. My friend then moved to John 3:16 and tied Abraham's belief to our belief in Christ.
John 3:16 is an important verse with an interesting twist that doesn't immediately appear in the English translation. I asked my friend if he had ever looked carefully at the tenses of the action words in John 3:16. He hadn't, and because his tradition tells him that one-time-belief is the basis of salvation, he automatically understood John to mean that, by a momentary mental assent to Christ, one could be assured of eternal security and be guaranteed a place in heaven.
In Greek, the language of the New Testament, there are many tenses for verbs. We will discuss two: aorist and present. To put it simply, the Aorist tense describes one point in time, [Aorist Tense: The aorist tense is characterized by its emphasis on punctiliar action; that is, the concept of the verb is considered without regard for past, present, or future time. There is no direct or clear English equivalent for this tense, though it is generally rendered as a simple past tense in most translations. The events described by the aorist tense are classified into a number of categories by grammarians. The three most common of these are (1) a view of the action as having begun from a certain point ("inceptive aorist"), or (2) having ended at a certain point ("cumulative aorist"), or (3) merely existing at a certain point ("punctiliar aorist"). The categorization of other cases can be found in Greek reference grammars. The English reader need not concern himself with most of these finer points concerning the aorist tense, since in most cases they cannot be rendered accurately in English translation, being fine points of Greek exegesis only. The common practice of rendering an aorist by a simple English past tense suffices in most cases.] while the present tense is used for current, ongoing action.[Present Tense: According to Dana and Manatee in their Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, "The fundamental significance of the present tense is the idea of progress. It is the linear tense . . . the progressive force of the present tense should always be considered as primary, especially with reference to the potential moods, which in the nature of the case do not need any 'present punctiliar' tense." Narrowing it down further, they say, "There are three varieties of the present tense in which its fundamental idea of progress is especially patent. Under 'the progressive present: "This use is manifestly nearest the root idea of the tense. It signifies action in progress , or state of persistence." In short the present tense expresses ongoing action in the present time.] Another way of contrasting the two is to think of Aorist as being geometrically represented by a point, and present by a continuous line.
"For God so loved [aorist, a past point in time] the world, that he gave [aorist, a past point in time] his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth [present, current, progressive action] in him should not perish [aorist, a past point in time], but have [present, current, progressive action] everlasting life."
The present tense, "that whosoever believeth in him," or in other words, "that whosoever is believing in Him" sheds a different light on the entire verse. One would expect, according to Protestant tradition, the word "believe" to be aorist, showing that it is a "one-point-in-time" event. It could be asked why Jesus switched to the present tense in a verse full of aorists. The answer is that Jesus makes it utterly clear what he is really trying to say; that this belief is an acting, continual belief, and not just a past act of faith.
Notice that "have everlasting life" is also in the present tense. It does not say you will have eternal life in the past or future, but that you will currently be having eternal life. One Greek grammar [James Hewitt, New Testament Greek Hedrickson Publishers,1986).13.] explains the present tense in this way, "The present tense is basically linear or durative, ongoing in its kind of action. The durative notion may be expressed graphically by an unbroken line, since the action is simply continuous. This is known as the progressive present. Refinements of this general rule will be encountered; however, the fundamental distinction will not be negated." Applying this definition here, he who is currently, habitually and continuously believing will be currently and presently having eternal life.
Next, I asked him to consider whether the word translated "believe" means a mere mental assent. The word in biblical times carried with it the concept of obedience and reliance. Kittel [Gerhard Kittel, Theological Dictionary of the NewTestament Eerdmans, 1968] states, "pisteuo means 'to trust' (also 'to obey')." Vines [W. E. Vines, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1984)] says, "[R]eliance upon, not mere credence." This is confirmed further by John the Baptist's statement in John 3:36, "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not (apeitheo) the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him." The word "apeitheo" is understood by all good translators and commentators to mean obedience. The opposite (antonym) of believe is disobey. The verse in the RSV says, "He who believes in the Son . . . he who disobeys the Son . . ." The NASB translates the verse as, "He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him." Kittel, a Protestant reference work, clearly defines apeitheo to mean "to be disobedient." The word belief has the element of obedience wrapped in its arms and the opposite of biblical belief is disobedience.
My Fundamentalist friend has never responded to my explanation of these verses.

 

[lightninboy]

"whoever believes in Him" = "pas ho pisteuon" = lit, whoever [is] the believer, nominative particple, i.e., a noun
"should have eternal life" = "all echE zOEn aiOnion" = present tense verb (echE)
If the present tense were the verb in the original Greek text of John 3:16, "whoever believes" - and it is not, it is the noun, 'pas ho pisteuon' = whoever [is] the believer', then a special context and/or additional words such as "diapantos" = continually and the future tense 'will have eternal life' instead of 'have eternal life', must be inserted into the text in order to convey the idea of continuous believing in order to have eternal life.
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 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.

"WHOEVER BELIEVES" IN JN 3:16 IS A NOUN NOT A PRESENT TENSE VERB, SO A SINGLE MOMENT OF BELIEVING AND NOT A CONTINUOUS ONE IS THEREFORE IN VIEW IN ORDER FOR ONE TO BECOME A BELIEVER
"whoever believes" = "pas ho pisteuon" = relative pronoun "pas" = "everyone who" with a definite article "the" = "ho" + the present participle verb, 'pisteuon', functioning as a noun, lit. "everyone who is the believing one" = a believer.
["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 aritcle. It always stands in the attributive position [following the article]."

'''The articular participle (= the article "the" [='ho'] plus a participle [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.
IF THE PHRASE "WHOEVER BELIEVES" WERE PRESENT TENSE, (AND IT IS NOT - IT IS A NOUN), THE CONTEXT WOULD DEMAND THAT IT BE IN THE AORISTIC PRESENT IN VIEW OF THE AORIST TENSES OF "GOD SO LOVED THE WORLD", "THAT HE GAVE HIS ONE AND ONLY SON", AND "SHOULD NOT PERISH"
The aoristic present tense presents the action as a simple event or as a present fact without any reference to its progress.

The phrase "should not perish" in Jn 3:16 is in the aorist tense providing a completed state of never perishing
at the moment in the present one becomes the believer.
This is all as a result of the aorist tenses of God so loving the world that He gave His one and only Son. Since all of the above actions are completed action moments, the aoristic present "whoever believes" would be in view if ."whoever believes" in Jn 3:16 were to be in the present tense.

THE DURATION OF EVERLASTING LIFE ONCE RECEIVED IS EVERLASTING
The duration of everlasting life is not dependent upon the believer maintaining a continuous state of believing or the present tense verb "should have" to be continuous and everlasting but on the eternal characteristic of eternal life itself once it is received. Eternal life, after all, is eternal, so its possession is eternal.
THE AORIST TENSE "SHOULD NOT PERISH" IS A COMPLETED ACTION THAT PROVIDES A BELIEVER WITH A STATE OF NEVER PERISHING AT THE MOMENT HE BECOMES A BELIEVER
Notice that "should not perish" is in the aorist tense providing a completed state of never perishing at the moment one becomes the believer. A completed action of never perishing is thus not effected by whether or not the believing continues on after that. Furthermore, a completed action of never perishing is another way of saying one is in a state of having eternal life which immediately follows in parallel in Jn 3:16 after the connective word, "but" = "whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life". The two are inseparable, you are never perishing when you have eternal life.
One would then ask the question, 'Why would a continuous state of believing be necessary if a completed action of the aorist tense of 'never perishing' resulted at the moment one becomes a believer?' Answer: it is not necessary.
If continuous believing were necessary to provide one with a state of not perishing then Jn 3:16 must be changed to read "whoever continuously believes in Him will not perish but will have eternal life."

"SHOULD NOT PERISH" IS AORIST = COMPLETED ACTION OF NEVER PERISHING AS A RESULT OF THE FIRST MOMENT OF BELIEVING TO BECOME THE BELIEVER
Once one expresses that first moment of believing, he becomes "pas ho pisteuon" = "whoever is the believer" and immediately receives a completed state of never perishing, i.e., he has everlasting life forever. Never perishing = having everlasting life, same concept expressed in different words.
"WHOEVER BELIEVES" IS A NOUN NOT A PRESENT TENSE VERB = LIT. "WHOEVER IS THE BELIEVER"
The nominative participle 'pas ho pisteuon' = a noun, the believer has the same effect as the aorist tense: the initial moment of believing in Christ and one is immediately 'the believer' which then provides the result of aorist completed action tense state of never perishing and present tense possession of eternal life forever because never perishing is never and eternal

OTHER SALVATION PASSAGES DO HAVE THE AORIST TENSE SUCH AS ACTS 16:31 WHICH INDICATES COMPLETED ACTION OF A MOMENT OF BELIEF IN ORDER TO BE SAVED UNTO ETERNAL LIFE
In Acts 16:31 the word rendered "believe" is aorist, a point action completed in a moment's time and salvation is then the promised result.

CONTINUOUS - UNINTERRUPTED SAVING FAITH IS NOT POSSIBLE WITH MAN EVEN IF IT IS IN VIEW IN JN 3:16 - AND IT IS NOT
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 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?
IF CONTINUOUS UNINTERRUPTED ACTION IS ALWAYS REQUIRED OF THE PRESENT TENSE THEN SCRIPTURE TEACHES THAT NO ONE CAN BE SAVED - ALL WILL GO TO THE LAKE OF FIRE

ACTS 16:31 DOES STIPULATE THAT ONE WILL BE SAVED (FUTURE TENSE) AS A RESULT OF A COMPLETED ACTION MOMENT OF BELIEVING (AORIST TENSE) IN THE LORD JESUS CHRIST
Note that Acts 16:31 does stipulate that one will be saved (future tense) as a result of a completed action of belief (aorist tense) in the Lord Jesus Christ.

ENGLISH AND FIRST CENTURY GREEK REQUIRES SPECIAL CONTEXT OR ADDITIONAL QUALIFYING WORDS TO MAKE PRESENT TENSE ACTION CONTINUOUS THROUGHOUT THE PRESENT

Present tense signifies action in present time for the duration of whatever the context indicates. The Greek present tense by itself does not automatically convey continuous action - nor does the English equivalent. It may or may not be continuous - depending upon the context and/or the presence of qualifying words. Present tense action in the absence of qualifiers demands a singular action in the present moment without requiring that it be continuous throughout the present. 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 present tense.
THE PRESENT POSSESSION OF ETERNAL LIFE FOR THE ONE WHO IS THE BELIEVER IS FOREVER CONTINUOUS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF ETERNAL LIFE ITSELF BEING CONTINUOUS AND ETERNAL
The present possession of eternal life must be a forever possession, never to be lost. This is so not because of a verb tense or some continued action on the part of an individual but because the context of the word eternal itself which is everlasting. Once you have it you have it forever because it is forever!

BELIEVE IN NT GREEK IS DEFINED AS MENTAL ASSENT

"(4100)... [pisteuo] 1 pers. sg. pres. act. indic., fut... [pisteuso] ...to believe, give credit to, Mark 1:15; 16:13; Luke 24:25; intrns. to believe, have a mental persuasion, Matt. 8:13; 9:28; James 2:19; to believe, be of opinion, Rom. 14:2; in N.T. [pisteuein en, eis] to believe in or on, Matt. 18:6; 27:42; John 3:15, 16, 18; absol. to believe, be a believer in the religion of Christ, Acts 2:44; 4:4, 32; 13:48; trans. to intrust, commit to the charge or power of, Luke 16:11; John 2:24; pass. to be intrusted with, Rom. 3:2; 1 Cor. 9:17"
Note that the Greek word used in the Bible which is translated into forms of the verb 'to believe' is defined according to the Greek dictionary to mean a trust in the information presented, i.e., a mental assent - devoid of additional actions on the part of an individual other than the mental agreement.
BELIEVING UNTO ETERNAL LIFE ACCORDING TO SCRIPTURE IS SIMPLY A MENTAL ASSENT, A MENTAL ACCEPTANCE - AN ACCEPTANCE OF THE TESTIMONY OF GOD ABOUT HIS SON:
[1 Jn 5:9-12]

Accepting God's testimony that eternal life is in His Son, which is a mental assent that what God is saying about eternal life being in His Son is true, is equated with believing in God's testimony that eternal life is in His Son - which results in eternal life. So saving faith is indeed a mental assent.

TO OBEY THE GOSPEL IS TO SIMPLY OBEY WHAT IS COMMANDED OF ONE: BELIEVE ON THE LORD JESUS CHRIST AND YOU WILL BE SAVED - ACTS 16:31 - A SINGLE MOMENT OF MENTAL ASSENT

JOHN 3:36 DOES NOT INDICATE ANYTHING MORE THAN TO BELIEVE IN CHRIST AND YOU HAVE ETERNAL LIFE AND IF YOU DISOBEY THIS COMMAND TO BELIEVE THEN YOU DO NOT HAVE ETERNAL LIFE. IT DOES NOT ADDRESS THE IDEA OF AN OBEDIENT LIFESTYLE AT ALL

1) "Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life" = "Whoever believes" = "ho pisteuon" = "pisteuon" = nominative participle = "the believing one", i.e., the believer.
Contrary to objectors who insist that Jn 3:36 stipulates that one must maintain a constant state of believing as result of the phrase "He who believes" = "ho pisteuon", the form of the verb to believe is not a present tense form 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 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 aritcle. It always stands in the attributive position [following the article].

Just as John the Baptist was still considered the one who baptizes even while he was in jail, (Mt 14:8), and even after he was beheaded, (Mk 6:14 quoted above);
and just as Paul referred to the Corinthians as "sanctified in Christ Jesus", (v. 1:2), "in Christ", (v. 3:1) yet they were not acting faithfully at all, (3:3);
so 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.
Therefore, Jn 3:36 stipulates that the believer, i.e., one who has expressed a belief in the Son for eternal life "has eternal life" which must by definition be eternal and even lapses in faith cannot take away that which is permanent and eternal in duration once it has begun in the believer.

This second half of verse 36 is the opposite of the first half = the opposite result of believing and having eternal life. Therefore not ever having become a believer is in view in order to not see [eternal] life and remain under God's wrath:
"but whoever rejects the Son" = "ho de apeithon" = lit., "but the one disobeying" = "apeithon", pres., active participle noun = but the unbeliever.

"The fact that the two halves of verse 36 are antithetical (opposites) makes it easier to understand what.. [the speaker] ...was saying. The first half deals with eternal salvation, the second with eternal condemnation. The condition of eternal salvation is believing in Christ. The condition for eternal condemnation, we would expect, is failing to believe in Him.... In this and other contexts... the Greek verb 'apeitheo' is an antonym of "pisteuo", referring to disbelief... This word 'apeitheo' is consistently used in the New Testament to refer to the disobedience of unbelief."
So to disobey the command to believe is to disbelieve.

"for God's wrath remains on Him." = This very last phrase of the verse has the word "remains" which signifies that the individual never had eternal life in the first place in order for God's wrath to remain on him, i.e., he never began believing in Christ at any time so that he could be out from under God's wrath.
So the second part of Jn 3:36 refers to those who never ever believed and so remain under condemnation. Notice faith alone saves and never having believed causes one to remain under God's wrath.

Grace is not cheap it is free - no obligation - no strings attached. The grace of God which saves an individual is not from anything the individual does, it is a gift, not by works.

So salvation is by "grace" = "chariti" = unrecompensed and unmerited favor - it is free! One is "justified freely" = "dikaioumenoi dOrean", i.e., you do - NOTHING - to receive your salvation at any time and have nothing to offer to recompense God for it at anytime - it is totally free. This PRECLUDES - EXCLUDES - PROHIBITS - any contribution on ones part for any reason; for that would lead to a meritorious situation canceling out the grace basis of God's offer of salvation and continuining one under God's eternal condemnation.
Furthermore, if salvation by a one time mental assent without ongoing obedience is unbiblical then Acts 16:31 (aorist: believe), John 3:16 (noun: believer), Eph 2:8-9 (perfect participle + present: saved by faith), and hundreds more passages which stipulate a moment of faith and you are saved, i.e., have eternal life forever - these passages must be stricken from God's Word including the ones mentioned about Abraham being justified by a moment of faith.