Mark

Dave,

Final point. Let’s take your understading of the conditional clause just for arguments sake.

Let’s assume the (husband) falls away, rejects Christ and shows lack of self control, love and no signs of sanctification.

How then is this decieved false teacher saved? How can she come to know the truth if her husband no longer has any faith?

Now, my guess is that you would say that we don’t know. She could be saved by many various different means apart form her husband. After all, this verse is not saying this is the ONLY way she will be saved.

Why then have this verse? What does it then actually teach? Nothing really, just a hypothetical situation that might just happen in the future, that this woman might just be saved.

Hardly an acceptable understanding of this verse i would have thought?

This woman’s salvation according to Cheryl is conditional on something. Why are you trying to water that down? Perhaps you and Cheryl don’t actually agree at this point.

Here are some quotes of you and CHeryl to show the conflict i see…

You say…”The conditional clause does not say he will be saved even if he does continue in faith, only that she will. This is simply following your logic of how a conditional clause works.”

Cheryl saids…””First of all there is no question on his salvation, just hers”

Cheryl believes that his salvation is not in view. THe clause is ONLY set up for her. To quote her again…
“The conditional clause is set up only for her salvation. ”

But then Dave saids
“Your interpretation of the clause insists that the clause is ‘exclusive’, that the condition supplied is the ONLY way the outcome can occur.
“you claim that because of the conditional clause her ONLY chance of salvation rests not only with her but also the other party.

So Dave, perhaps you and Cheryl need to reconcile the differences. As i see it, you are saying different contradictory things but arguing for the same outcome or interpretation. Cheryl saids the conditional clause is only about her salvation, yet you critique me for not discussing the husband, when in actual fact you are critiquing Cheryl not me.

Remember this is not my interpretation. I’m adopting CHeryl’s and seeing what verse 15 actually then means.

Thanks