Small Group Bible Study on Sermon on the Mount

[Jess]

Wow! a revelation. I always thought Houston was your last name.

Hope your study goes well.

Blessings,

Jess

[darinhouston]

Just an update -- we're in week 4 of our study, and have made it to Matthew 5:7 (blessed are the merciful).

If you want to follow along, audio and handout questions are posted here:

http://www.duphorne.com/sotm

If you do "RSS" or "podcasts", the feed (for Steve's audio and my pdfs) is http://www.duphorne.com/sotm/rss.php

Again, anyone in the Houston area that would like to join us on the first and third Wednesday nights from 6:30-7:30pm are welcome. Just give me a shout or show up. The details are on the flyer at the site above.

Darin

[TK]

wow- at that rate you will be finished with Ch 7 in 2015. keep up the pace!

actually- thats the way it should be. i usually (try) teach a book of the bible once a quarter and the way I look at it- if we get bogged down over a particular verse, maybe its because that is what needs to happen.

TK

[darinhouston]

The beautiful thing is that we will have covered much of the entire bible's moral teaching just with the scriptural cross-references connected to the sermon on the mount. So, yes - only two chapters, but so much more.

[darinhouston]

Steve, I'm really enjoying our study -- I would appreciate your input on this before I send it to the group if you could -- week 4 was more than a little confusing and controversial...
.............

As amazing as it is, we only covered a single verse in our study last night, and yet I felt like we rushed through some very important parts, particularly near the end. That clock just keeps turning... Consider the below, and so that we aren't bound by that clock, please feel free to continue the dialog by email as you reflect on the lessons during the holidays. If you indicate it's "personal," I'll not share the exchange with the others. Otherwise, I'll distribute for others' edification. If you ever have questions for Steve, let me know -- I'd be happy to ask him for you (or feel free to call in to his radio show).

Anyway, since parts of the study may not have been all that familiar to us, I wanted to elaborate a bit on the forgiveness aspect of mercy because I think we blew threw it pretty quickly and there seemed to be some unresolved questions. It's obviously impossible to fully resolve the difficult issues of the nature of the atonement and God's forgiveness to us in a single lesson on mercy, but I think it does help us to understand our relationships with others and the scriptural aspects of our obligations to forgive. It also likewise gives us an opportunity to reflect on aspects of God's forgiveness towards us which we may not have done in light of what we know about the realities of forgiveness with each other.

The distinction that we made was between "forgiveness of the heart" on the one hand, and "formal forgiveness" (restoration of the relationship) on the other. These may have been new distinctions for us. However, there does seem to be a distinction between those aspects of forgiveness in light of the verses which seem to require unconditional forgiveness on our part and those which seem to place conditions on such forgiveness.

The scriptures we examined make it clear that we are expected and required to unconditionally forgive those who sin against us. That is, we are to "let go" of any sense of debt or obligation to those who wrong us. There is nothing required of them for us to "think well" towards them and to avoid a grudge, etc. We should operate our lives and incline our hearts to be eager to immediately extend this sort of forgiveness in our hearts towards all whether they ask for it or not. This should be an automatic reflex in our lives, and is an act of obedience to God and even seems to be a requirement for us to receive our own forgiveness from God.

That does not mean that we are similarly required to forgive them in a way that our relationship with them is fully restored, or in such a way that we automatically trust them not to wrong us again. Separate from that immediate, automatic, forgiveness that we are expected to have in our hearts is this conditional "formal" forgiveness/restoration. God does not require or expect us to extend this type of forgiveness to others unless they have shown repentance (by word and deed). However, once we have reason to believe that they are truly repentant, which means that they both acknowledge the wrong and fully intend honestly to act differently in the future, then we are expected to then permit the restoration that they seek. Full trust may still need to come with time, but our relationship with them should be restored once they have shown repentance and have sought such restoration. If they wrong us again, we forgive them again in that same measure -- that is, automatically let go of the sense of "debt" in our hearts, and then if they truly are repentant (rebuking as required), then we are to restore the relationship a thousand times. However, the parable of the King shows us that even then, subsequent acts may show that they truly weren't repentant, in which case we may be justified in withholding that restoration. However, nothing should change with respect to our heart's inclination towards them and we should have forgiven them in our hearts even without ongoing condition.

I believe this is a model also of the Father's own forgiveness of us. The atonement allowed the Father to forgive all the world, and I believe that the Father holds no grudge towards even the unbeliever as a result (though this is not a universally held view). This is akin to the forgiveness of the heart that our lesson spoke of. However, this does not mean that He has restored all automatically and without condition. I believe that He likewise requires repentance from us before our relationship with the Father is restored. Consequences may still occur, trust may require testing, but the relationship is solid. If we honestly repent a thousand times, I believe He is faithful and just to restore us a thousand times. However, just as with the parable of the King, He may come to recognize our lack of true repentance and reinstate that debt.

I hope that helps. Please share your thoughts or disagreements with me -- iron can't sharpen iron unless they rub against each other.

[Homer]

Hi Darin,

I hope you are open to discussion with others here on the forum of this most important subject. I can think of no ethical teaching that is of more importance. I believe there is nothing more plainly taught in the scriptures than if we do not forgive others, God will not forgive us.

You wrote:

The distinction that we made was between "forgiveness of the heart" on the one hand, and "formal forgiveness" (restoration of the relationship) on the other. These may have been new distinctions for us. However, there does seem to be a distinction between those aspects of forgiveness in light of the verses which seem to require unconditional forgiveness on our part and those which seem to place conditions on such forgiveness.

Could you list the referenced scriptures?

You also wrote:

The scriptures we examined make it clear that we are expected and required to unconditionally forgive those who sin against us. That is, we are to "let go" of any sense of debt or obligation to those who wrong us. There is nothing required of them for us to "think well" towards them and to avoid a grudge, etc. We should operate our lives and incline our hearts to be eager to immediately extend this sort of forgiveness in our hearts towards all whether they ask for it or not. This should be an automatic reflex in our lives, and is an act of obedience to God and even seems to be a requirement for us to receive our own forgiveness from God.

Could it be that you are confusing loving the offending person, who is unrepentant, with forgiveness? I think there is a distinction. We are taught to love our enemies which does not necessarily imply forgiving them?

How do we go about restoring relationships? The following is my understanding of the process Jesus laid out for us. There are four steps, each has a theological label. They are:

A. Sin
B. Rebuke
C. Repentance
D. Forgiveness

We find the process taught in Matthew 18:15-20 (NKJV)

15. “Moreover if your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he hears you, you have gained your brother. 16. But if he will not hear, take with you one or two more, that ‘by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.’ 17. And if he refuses to hear them, tell it to the church. But if he refuses even to hear the church, let him be to you like a heathen and a tax collector.
That is, unforgiven.

And in Luke 17:3-4 (NKJV)

3. Take heed to yourselves. If your brother sins against you, rebuke him; and if he repents, forgive him. 4. And if he sins against you seven times in a day, and seven times in a day returns to you, saying, ‘I repent,’ you shall forgive him.”

To me, we error if we do not go through the steps as Jesus laid it out. The rebuke is difficult but is the loving thing to do; the person needs to repnt for his own good. Not only that, but absent the rebuke the person may be unaware he has commited an offense (sin).

If it is impractical or for whatever reason you are unable to follow Jesus' process (you may never see the person again) Ephesians 4:30-32 would seem the wise course:

30. And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. 31. Let all bitterness, wrath, anger, clamor, and evil speaking be put away from you, with all malice. 32. And be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God in Christ forgave you.

When Jesus was on the cross He prayed that God would forgive those who crucified Him. It would seem that Jesus was requesting their forgiveness absent any repentance on their part, but I have been sceptical whether that was what Jesus meant. If He wanted them forgiven without repentance, why did He not forgive them Himself on the spot?. He had the power to forgive sins, yet He apparently didn't. I believe He was requesting that God would bring them to repentance and forgive them. On the day of Pentecost, Peter charged his audience with guilt in the crucifixion of Jesus and 3000 of them repented and were saved, and, I believe, Jesus prayer was answered.

I have taught on this subject in the past and it leaves me uneasy. I pray to God I haven't taught wrongly on this most important subject, and I humbly request any criticism or correction you or anyone has to offer on what I have written.

God bless, Homer

[darinhouston]

Hi Darin,

I hope you are open to discussion with others here on the forum of this most important subject. I can think of no ethical teaching that is of more importance. I believe there is nothing more plainly taught in the scriptures than if we do not forgive others, God will not forgive us.

Of course! Especially from you, Homer!

You wrote:

The distinction that we made was between "forgiveness of the heart" on the one hand, and "formal forgiveness" (restoration of the relationship) on the other. These may have been new distinctions for us. However, there does seem to be a distinction between those aspects of forgiveness in light of the verses which seem to require unconditional forgiveness on our part and those which seem to place conditions on such forgiveness.

Could you list the referenced scriptures?

You might want to check out http://www.duphorne.com/sotm/Week04_handout.pdf and the corresponding SG audio at http://www.duphorne.com/sotm/Week04_audio_mercy.mp3.

There are a number of relevant verses, but the main texts in this regard (actually quoted by you below) were:
Mark 11:25 and Luke 17:3-4 (and Matthew 18:21-35 for the parable of the King).

You also wrote:

The scriptures we examined make it clear that we are expected and required to unconditionally forgive those who sin against us. That is, we are to "let go" of any sense of debt or obligation to those who wrong us. There is nothing required of them for us to "think well" towards them and to avoid a grudge, etc. We should operate our lives and incline our hearts to be eager to immediately extend this sort of forgiveness in our hearts towards all whether they ask for it or not. This should be an automatic reflex in our lives, and is an act of obedience to God and even seems to be a requirement for us to receive our own forgiveness from God.

Could it be that you are confusing loving the offending person, who is unrepentant, with forgiveness? I think there is a distinction. We are taught to love our enemies which does not necessarily imply forgiving them?

I think the two must be related, but the distinction here was to square verses seeming to put absolute automatic and unconditional requirements of "forgiveness" on believers, with others which seemed to place conditions on such "forgiveness." This almost requires two separate notions of forgiveness.

When Jesus was on the cross He prayed that God would forgive those who crucified Him. It would seem that Jesus was requesting their forgiveness absent any repentance on their part, but I have been sceptical whether that was what Jesus meant. If He wanted them forgiven without repentance, why did He not forgive them Himself on the spot?. He had the power to forgive sins, yet He apparently didn't. I believe He was requesting that God would bring them to repentance and forgive them. On the day of Pentecost, Peter charged his audience with guilt in the crucifixion of Jesus and 3000 of them repented and were saved, and, I believe, Jesus prayer was answered.

Very interesting observation !

I have taught on this subject in the past and it leaves me uneasy. I pray to God I haven't taught wrongly on this most important subject, and I humbly request any criticism or correction you or anyone has to offer on what I have written.

God bless, Homer

Ditto! Thanks, Homer

The Matthew 18 passage, makes me particularly uneasy (King re-instituting the debt).

These are pretty harsh, too...

Proverbs 22:9; 28:27; Matthew 6:14; Mark 11:25-26; James 2:13

[darinhouston]

I have received some feedback from one of the participants (who couldn't make it that night, incidentally)...

I would provide that the parable in Matthew 18 speaks to the necessity of any true believer having a forgiving heart in light of what has been done for us. Said another way an "unforgiving heart is an unforgiven heart." Look back to the question asked by Peter that led Jesus to give the parable. Jesus answers Peter's specific question with it and I don't see a blue print for how the atonement works in the parable

I would also go on to say that if you have truly forgiven someone in your heart, your actions will reflect that and restoration of the relationship will follow that. I don't see a distinction between "of the heart" and "formal." You can fake actions like the Pharisees did (whitewashed tombs), but you can't disconnect the heart and your actions if it starts from the heart. I guess what I am trying to point out is you can't have true forgiveness in the heart without outward actions following.

As far as the atonement goes, John 10 provides the basis of my belief. To say it quickly,

1. There is a hell and people go to hell.

2. It is an awful place and its a reflection of God's disgust with sin

3. Verses 28- 30 provide the extent of the atonement. We see that all given to Jesus have eternal life and will never perish. So if all who are given to Jesus have eternal life and shall never perish, who is in hell ? The people who weren't given to Jesus. (ie their names are not in the book in life - Revelation 20:15)

4. God doesn't delight in sending people to hell. He is like the just judge who is the judge of his own son's trial. The verdict is returned as guilty and punishment must be given, so the judge sentences his son to his just judgement with a sad heart. If the judge just let the son go, would he be a just judge ? This is the fate of unbelievers. This should put a fire in our step to share the Gospel with everyone we know who is outside Christ today.

I am all for "iron sharpening iron" and believe this is best accomplished by sharing your take on a particular aspect (ie what you believe and why). I understand many may not share my viewpoint and I am fine with that.

Obviously, re: Matthew 18, he is disregarding v. 35. I also think there's a big difference between "faking" something, and doing something you don't "feel" like doing out of obedience to God in faith that the Lord will work on your "heart" and "feelings."

Can anyone share some scriptures that would support this, or do you have any further thoughts on the subject? Here is what I'm sending the group in balance, but I'd love to have some followup thoughts or scriptures, as well.

Good thoughts, ___ -- to further our "sharpening" here, I certainly agree about what you say about hell and God's attitude about it and those destined for it. However, it may not surprise you that I do disagree about some of your ideas here -- your position is pretty widely held, but I would suggest (among other things) that it ignores the concluding verse 35 of Matthew 18, in which Jesus says to Peter (certainly a "believer") after telling the parable...

"[s]o also my heavenly Father will do to you, if each of you does not forgive your brother from your heart.”

We certainly can't resolve all the difficult views surrounding the atonement (or eternal security) during our study on "mercy," but I definitely don't think John 10:28-30 says all there is to be said about it (or that those referenced are meant to refer to all saved people from all times). Certainly, a declarative statement like that has to be balanced by other scripture to determine the range of its application. There are many ways people have interpreted that passage when balanced against other scripture -- however you read it, though, the fact that nothing and no one can "take" someone from Jesus' hand doesn't mean he won't cast them away under certain conditions, or that one can't willfully depart from Jesus' care. That doesn't have to mean we're kept by a "clean scorecard" with God (so we who do guard our will towards Christ should have nothing to fear), but Scripture does contain many warnings in this regard (Matthew 18 being one of them), and I think we should take them as seriously as the apostles appear to have done.

Concerning our "hearts" -- I do think we have to be careful not to confuse obedience and feelings -- there is a big difference, I think, in "pretending" to be spiritual (as the Pharisees) and leading our hearts with obedience, trusting in the Holy Spirit to work on our hearts as we continue in obedience to the commands of God (in forgiveness or otherwise).

[darinhouston]

I have received some feedback from one of the participants...

I would provide that the parable in Matthew 18 speaks to the necessity of any true believer having a forgiving heart in light of what has been done for us. Said another way an "unforgiving heart is an unforgiven heart." Look back to the question asked by Peter that led Jesus to give the parable. Jesus answers Peter's specific question with it and I don't see a blue print for how the atonement works in the parable

I would also go on to say that if you have truly forgiven someone in your heart, your actions will reflect that and restoration of the relationship will follow that. I don't see a distinction between "of the heart" and "formal." You can fake actions like the Pharisees did (whitewashed tombs), but you can't disconnect the heart and your actions if it starts from the heart. I guess what I am trying to point out is you can't have true forgiveness in the heart without outward actions following.

As far as the atonement goes, John 10 provides the basis of my belief. To say it quickly,

1. There is a hell and people go to hell.

2. It is an awful place and its a reflection of God's disgust with sin

3. Verses 28- 30 provide the extent of the atonement. We see that all given to Jesus have eternal life and will never perish. So if all who are given to Jesus have eternal life and shall never perish, who is in hell ? The people who weren't given to Jesus. (ie their names are not in the book in life - Revelation 20:15)

4. God doesn't delight in sending people to hell. He is like the just judge who is the judge of his own son's trial. The verdict is returned as guilty and punishment must be given, so the judge sentences his son to his just judgement with a sad heart. If the judge just let the son go, would he be a just judge ? This is the fate of unbelievers. This should put a fire in our step to share the Gospel with everyone we know who is outside Christ today.

I am all for "iron sharpening iron" and believe this is best accomplished by sharing your take on a particular aspect (ie what you believe and why). I understand many may not share my viewpoint and I am fine with that.

Obviously, re: Matthew 18, he is disregarding v. 35. I also think there's a big difference between "faking" something, and doing something you don't "feel" like doing out of obedience to God in faith that the Lord will work on your "heart" and "feelings."

Can anyone share some scriptures that would support this, or do you have any further thoughts on the subject? Here is what I'm sending the group in balance, but I'd love to have some followup thoughts or scriptures, as well.

Good thoughts, Matt -- I appreciate the interaction -- looks like we might have a bit of a detour into "eternal security" here (what I might prefer to call "conditional security" or "security of the believer").

To further our "iron sharpening" here, I certainly agree about what you say about hell and about God's attitude towards it and those destined for it. However, it may not surprise you that I do disagree about some of what you have said -- your position is pretty widely held, and may well be correct, but I would suggest that it ignores (among other things) the concluding verse 35 of Matthew 18, in which Jesus actually says to Peter (certainly himself a "believer") and to the others after telling the parable ...

[s]o also my heavenly Father will do to you, if each of you does not forgive your brother from your heart.”

I think Jesus Himself gives us a pretty good indication of what He meant to convey by the parable.

This is a controversial topic. We certainly can't resolve all the difficult views surrounding the atonement during our study on "mercy," but I definitely don't think John 10:28-30 says all there is to be said about it. Certainly, understanding a statement like John 10:28-30 has to be balanced by otherwise seemingly conflicting scripture to determine the range of its application. There are many ways people have interpreted that passage when balanced against other scripture -- however you read it, though, the fact that nothing and no one can "take" a sheep from Jesus' hand doesn't mean that one can't cease to become a sheep or willfully (or practically) depart from Jesus (and cease to abide in Him). That doesn't have to mean we're "kept" by a "clean scorecard" with God (so those of us who do guard our will towards Christ should have nothing to fear even if we fail Him at times), but Scripture does contain many warnings in this regard (Matthew 18 being one of them), and so I think we should take these warnings as seriously as the apostles appear to have done. I have heard it said that a Christian is not measured by the "amount" of his sin, but in his "response to" and "attitude toward" his sin. To be clear, I don't think we can unwillingly "lose" our salvation, but carelessness can lead our hearts away from Him so that our will is no longer inclined towards Him, and we should guard against that by heeding the scriptural warnings in that regard.

As long as we meet the conditions of a right relationship with Him, then nothing can snatch us from His hands, but that doesn't mean that if we quit believing and quit following Him as rightful ruler of our lives that we still meet the condition. Our willingness to forgive others and let go of our own "rights" does seem to be one of those conditions of receiving (and maintaining) God's forgiveness of us. Anyone interested further in this should simply explore and meditate on some of the scriptures below clearly suggesting it is possible to (or warning against) falling away, etc.

This is not to suggest we who "seek" to endure have anything to fear, but we need to value our faith daily as the treasured possession it is so that we don't become obsessed with the "world" and fall away in self-absorption and "neglect" our faith. We are secure as long as we don't think our works save us, seek to do His will, and continue to rely on Christ to lead our lives and effect our salvation. That's the "easy" part -- it's just a conscious decision and matter of the "will," but it shouldn't be taken for granted - like any relationship, we can't just "ignore" it and expect it to continue. Many people are afraid to acknowledge what seems to me to be a clear biblical reality (and serious admonition). I think many are afraid that if it is true that we can "fall away" in this life, then what would keep us "in eternity" from falling away at some point - however, recall that the tempter will no longer exist -- without temptation, we will not sin. It's hard to imagine such a condition, but what a glorious hope we have if only we "fight the good fight," "finish the race," and "keep the faith" in this life. 2 Tim 4:6-8. I believe the church is full of people who think they're saved because they made a confession of faith once in their lives (we all know them, and some may be in our families). It is at least as important to me that these people (many, perhaps a majority) understand the need to "abide" and actually follow Christ in their lives to be in eternity as it is important to evangelize those who haven't heard the name of Christ (not many)

Concerning our "hearts" -- I do think we have to be careful not to confuse obedience and feelings -- there is a big difference, I think, in "pretending" to be spiritual (as the Pharisees did) and in leading our hearts with obedience, while trusting in the Holy Spirit to work on our hearts as we continue in that obedience to the commands of God (in forgiveness or otherwise).

Finally, I'm not sure I agree that restoration with my brother follows, necessarily, from my own forgiving heart -- even if I truly forgive my brother in my heart without condition, and even if I also wish for the relationship to be restored, it's still subject to the willingness of the one who wronged me whether the relationship is to be truly restored. I don't think it can reasonably be "made right" until there is at least a measure of repentance from that brother, and also a desire by him as well as myself for that restoration.

Oh, yeah -- you asked "who's in Hell?" I'd say those who never come to be in Christ (with a caveat) and also those who don't "abide" in Christ (aka "the unforgiven").

Peace bro,
D

P.S.

Here are a few select verses of note, with some interpretative comments:

1Jn 5:11-12 - note, the "life" is "in Christ." We must be "in Christ" to enjoy this life (it is the life which is eternal)
Gal 5:4 - the Galatians had become "estranged" from Christ (can't be estranged if you didn't previously have a relationship) -- they were no longer "in Christ" - they "fell" from grace (can't fall from it if you never had it)
Jn 15:5-6 - it is only those who "abide" (remain/continue) in Him who remain attached the vine -- if not, they are "cast out" and burned, etc. (can't be cast out if you weren't in Him in the first place).
Rom 11 - same imagery but olive tree instead of a vine - "elect" or "saved" "community of God" etc. were likened to the olive tree - original members (jews) were broken off because of their unbelief - gentiles were grafted on because of their faith - it is "faith" that is the condition of being on the tree -- v. 17 says those grafted on ("believer" gentiles) should not be haughty but "fear" (doesn't sound like an unconditional security, but one of condition based on continued belief). v.22 reminds us of the goodness (if we continue) and severity (if we don't continue).
Heb 3:12 - "depart"ing from the living God
Collosians 1:21ff - Paul says restoration and the presenting of us as blameless is conditioned on "continuing in the gospel hope/faith"
2 Tim 2:11-13 - "if" we die with Him, "if" we endure, "if" we deny Him (the "we" here at least included Paul and Tim, both present believers)
Eph 2:8-9 - by grace, through faith (faith is a condition of entrance)
Rom 5:2 - through Christ, by faith (faith is a condition of entrance)
1 Peter 1:5 - we are kept by the power of God through faith (faith is a condition of "keeping")
Heb 10:37-39 - quoting from Habbakuk,the "just" shall live "by faith" - but, then "if he (the just man) draws back to perdition" (seems like some do), we're not like those... (our "present" salvation is now but our "ultimate" salvation is from continuing in faith unto the end)
Rev. 3:5 - Jesus said "he who overcomes shall be clothed in white garments, and I will not blot his name out of the book of life" (at least implies it's "possible" and conditional)
Rev. 22:19 - warning again implies it's possible for some to be taken from the book of life.

Unconditional promises always seem to pertain to the "flock" in general and not to individual sheep which can join and wander - this is why God rejoices so when the sheep returns. God's will is certain (for the corporate body), but always seems conditional on our own response (as individuals).

Just for a balancing commentary, here's a pretty straightforward one from an early "Wesleyan," Daniel Whedon on the subject...

27. My sheep hear my voice—As the blind-born did. Those who are bent on holiness and salvation show it by listening to Christ and his Gospel. It is very illogical to infer from all this the doctrine that no man will lose or abandon the character of a sheep of Christ, that is, of a true believer. Qualities or conduct ascribed to persons as possessed of a certain character, do not imply that the character itself may not change. A hireling fleeth because he is a hireling; but that does not prove but that the man may cease to be a hireling. A thief and a robber will kill and destroy; but that does not prove that a thief or robber may not, like Saul of Tarsus, cease to be a thief and robber. So a sheep will follow Christ; but that does not imply but that the man may cease to be a sheep and even become a goat. For a man may as truly from a sheep become a goat, as from a goat become a sheep.

28. Shall never perish—No sheep of Christ can ever perish. The unbeliever and the apostate will perish, but neither the unbeliever or the apostate is a sheep of Christ. Perish… pluck—The literal sheep of the human shepherd may perish by the robber, or be plucked away by the thief; but the spiritual sheep of the true Shepherd no robber can kill, no thief can steal. He must by his own free act abandon or forfeit his spiritual character before he can lose his eternal privilege.

and Wesley's own...

27-29. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me, etc. - Our Lord still alludes to the discourse he had before this festival. It is as if he had said, "My sheep are they who: (1) Hear my voice by faith; (2) Are known (that is, approved) by me as loving me; and (3) Follow me and keep my commandments with a believing, loving, heart. And to those who truly believe (observe still three promises annexed to three conditions) I give eternal life. He does not say, I will, but I give. For he that believeth hath everlasting life. Those whom I know truly to love me shall never perish, provided they abide in my love. Those who follow me, neither men nor devils can pluck out of my hand. My Father who hath, by an unchangeable decree, given me all that believe, love, and obey, is greater than all in heaven or earth, and none is able to pluck them out of his hand.

[Homer]

Hi Darin,

You might want to look here (and maybe not):

http://www.theos.org/forum/viewtopic.ph ... &sk=t&sd=a

Lots to read re the atonement and forgiveness.

God bless, Homer