Mark

Cheryl,

What do you understand as a conditional clause?

I’m trying to follow your exegesis here and see where it leads logically.

The way i read you, her future salvation is conditional on several things (faith, love etc) which is fine and i think biblically since elsewhere salvation is portrayed as futuristic like this aswell, e.g those who persevere will be saved.

Where your exegesis becomes troublesome is when you appeal that the ‘they’ is husband and wife, since then it inevitably means that the future salvation of the wife is not only dependant on certain things but also on several people. Her salvation is conditional on not only her, but also on him remaining in faith etc.

I do not think your statement “I already told you. She is fully deceived. She is not coming out of her deception without help. Do you need more help to understand this?” solves the problem of your exegesis. This is becasue we are not just talking about ‘coming out of her deception’, we are talking about her eternal salvation which is what you take sozo to mean. I’ve asked this a few times now. If you can’t answer, that is fine, just admit that this is a exegetical hole in your argument.

Finally, i stated from the beginning that i’m not here to engage in more battles over and over. I simply wanted to comment on your exegesis, that’s all. You often ask for people to critique it so this is what i offer. I’m not going to engage in an exegetical argument back and forth between your view and mine- we have been there unsuccessfully.

I do admit that this verse is hard. But so does everybody else. It is not a weakness to admit that you don’t understand a certain verse. Since this is the case, we ought to be very cautious of people who think they have a flawless exegesis of this passage. History should tell us otherwise.

If you do not wish to answer any further on my comments that is fine, but please stop asking me to show you my proof or my exegesis etc-i’m not here for that. And frankly to try and throw it back onto me doesn’t help your cause in defending your case, it makes it look as if you would just rather attack the opposition than defend the fort.

I hope you are willing to answer why and how the woman’s salvation can be conditional on her husband’s faith, love, sobriety and sanctification. I hope you can offer a stronger case for your position.

God bless.

P.S i would think that Paul is a good example of a decieved false teacher being named? Isn’t this obvious considering your exegesis relies heavily on Paul’s personal refelction in chapter 1. But of course that is based on the assumption that this passage IS dealing with false teaching, which is truly an assumption with no other evidence to support it.