13

Dev, Houston Rocket fan || Faith without works is dead

[13 @Kinhswill]

The cave you fear to enter holds the treasure you seek

- Joseph Campbell

[Grove Kifasi ✟ @GroveRKifasi]

JESUS IS GOD

[Marrket @marrket_africa]

We are here again.

[(fan) Trey @UTDTrey]

THE GREATEST THERE IS, THE GREATEST THERE WAS AND THE GREATEST THERE EVER WILL BE❤️

[Big Sheddy 🦅 @coder_blvck]

https://t.co/OTr6HslDm1

[dele osunmakinde @deleosunmakinde]

Eternal security is found in Christ, not apart from Christ. Our confidence is not in a doctrine detached from a Person; it is in the living Christ, who is able to keep, preserve, and perfect all who abide in Him. "He is able to save completely those who come to God through Him" (Hebrews 7:25). "He is able to keep you from stumbling and to present you faultless before the presence of His glory" (Jude 24).

However, sonship does not abolish human responsibility. Becoming a child of God does not mean you cease to be a free moral agent. God does not save you by destroying your will. Love cannot be coerced, and covenant cannot exist without response. You still possess the capacity to obey or rebel, to remain or to depart, to persevere or to forsake.

This is precisely why Jesus repeatedly commands, "Abide in Me" (John 15). Such an exhortation would be unnecessary if abiding were automatic. He warns that branches that refuse to remain in the Vine wither and are cut off (John 15:6).

Paul echoes the same truth: "Continue in His kindness; otherwise you also will be cut off" (Romans 11:22). The writer of Hebrews warns believers against "departing from the living God" (Hebrews 3:12) and repeatedly calls them to hold fast their confidence to the very end.

The believer's security is therefore the security of abiding union, not independent immunity. Christ has never failed to keep anyone who remains in Him, and He never will. His grip is unbreakable, but Scripture never encourages us to let go of Him.

The New Testament holds two glorious truths together without contradiction: God is mighty to keep, and believers are commanded to continue. We must never magnify one truth by silencing the other.

Eternal security is not a licence to drift from Christ; it is the triumphant assurance that everyone who abides in Christ is eternally secure because Christ Himself is their Keeper.If your goal is to provoke theological reflection, this version strikes a firmer, more compelling tone while staying closely aligned with the biblical exhortations to persevere.

[Sam @DrFeruke]

Q: What is The difference between biblical assurance and hypergrace?

A: 1 John 3:9-10 (ESV)
9 No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God’s seed abides in him; and he cannot keep on sinning, because he has been born of God. 10 By this it is evident who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is the one who does not love his brother.

[Sam @DrFeruke]

Is once saved always saved? How will Peter answer?

[Gideon Odoma @gideonodoma]

IS Grok REALLY, REALLY an AI chatbot?

Stuck in traffic this morning and trying to distract myself from the prospect of missing my flight, I decided to grok a bit, just to confirm if I am the only mad one or if Grok shares in some of my alleged insanity.

"This guy you want to marry, is he really, really born again?" Whenever I reference such popular statements in my teaching, it is usually to say how theologically inaccurate it is, even though the intent may be noble. I would then say that the born again experience itself cannot be improved, therefore there are no degrees of born-againness, meaning that you are either born again or not born again. I would then clarify that what such statements actually intend to query is transformation and not regeneration. Anyone who has not heard me teach this hasn't heard me teach on holiness or transformation, at all.

So, seeing that there has lately been some noise about a clip of me saying there is a gradient in holiness or something of that hue (truth is, I haven't watched that clip, but I know what I have said – here & there – in that regard), I decided to disturb Grok this morning.

First I asked Grok to theologically differentiate between Righteousness & Holiness. It came back with the typical, orthodox response associating Righteousness with Justification (imputed & positional) and linking holiness with Sanctification (practical & progressive).

I followed up with the question in the screenshot. I asked:
"Theologically therefore, can a Christian be more holy than another, even though they are both equally righteous?"
First line of Grok's response, was:
"Yes, theologically, one Christian can be more (progressively) holy than another, even while both are equally righteous in the sight of God."

The last paragraph of Grok's response went:
"In short: Equal in Christ’s righteousness and positional holiness—yet capable of real differences in progressive holiness here and now. This is the consistent biblical and theological framework across historic Protestant, Reformed, and evangelical teaching."

I chucked to see Grok appealling to "historic Protestant, Reformed, and evangelical teaching." As if to say, "if you think I am insane in saying theologically, a Christian can be said to be more holy (progressively) than another, I got my view from historic Protestant, Reformed, and evangelical teaching."

WHERE THE CRITICS ARE RIGHT, but...
Granted, a theological case can be made for the view that in a sense a believer can be more holy than another, yet, it is another matter how believers express it.
Some believers pray in tongues more than others, yet, it isn't Christlike to boast to a whole church: "I thank my God that I pray in tongues MORE THAN you ALL..." Therefore, if you wake-up and begin to flaunt your supposed superior holiness in the faces of believers, it may actually be the evidence that you are not so holy after all, because flaunting in this case is synonym for boasting. Boasting, in context is not one of the evidences of holiness. Here then, the critics would be right, if there was no context to the clip other than just an attempt to say I am more holy than some believers (real or imagined).
But there is a context. It is that everytime some believer comes up to charge the church to holy living, some other believers (trying to discredit or discourage the preacher), would say things like: "see how he is talking as if he is more holy." It is against the backdrop of this blackmail strategy that I usually respond with, "So what? I may actually be holier than you, and you may truly be holier than me, because we are not all holy to the same degree." I say it in more or less a polemical context, to bite the bullet and return to the main issue of advocating for purity.

If context is missing in clip, I'd still expect critics to at least say, "I can grant the theology, but I don't see the piety – without context."
But Gotcha!

NB:
I just asked Gemini too
https://t.co/VjIBwRXvMp

[13 @Kinhswill]

@Flicky0ps Na ai na

[NBACentral @TheDunkCentral]

Giannis Antetokounmpo reportedly doesn’t want to leave Milwaukee — he wants to leave the Bucks, per @ESPNMilwaukee

[NBA @NBA]

FOR THE FIRST TIME IN 53 YEARS, THE KNICKS ARE NBA CHAMPIONS 🏆

New York defeats San Antonio 4-1 in the NBA Finals, capturing their third championship in franchise history!

[Bunmi 👓 @oadefisayo]

I apologize to Mr. Lazarus. His plan all along was actually to attract Non Christians to the gospel of Jesus Christ by not speaking about Jesus (as he says) but introducing his principles to people.

So brilliant!! Shocking that most of us never thought of this...

[OTUNBA @ManLikeIcey]

Under Goodluck Jonathan, APC supporters blamed him for insecurity.

Under Tinubu, APC supporters are telling us to hold Governors accountable.

If you allow them gaslight you, it’s your choice.

[Alex Veremeyenko @alex_verem]

Let me trace the timeline here because nobody's connecting it.

Step 1: Scrape the entire internet. Every book, every article, every conversation, every piece of art, every forum post. Do it without asking. Do it without paying.

Step 2: Train a model on all of it. Call it "artificial intelligence."

Step 3: Go to BlackRock's Infrastructure Summit and announce: "We see a future where intelligence is a utility, like electricity or water, and people buy it from us on a meter."

Step 3 is where you sell people's own knowledge back to them. On a meter.

They took the collective output of human thought, compressed it into a model, and now they want to charge you by the token to access a version of what you and everyone you know already created.

One Reddit user put it perfectly: "They stole all this data from us, the people, our life's work, creativity, art, by devouring the internet and blowing through all copyright laws. Now they want to sell it back to us in the form of a utility."

Imagine if someone photocopied every book in the public library, burned the library down, and then opened a subscription service for the copies.

That's the metered intelligence business model.

And they're pitching it to infrastructure investors as though they invented water.

[Grove Kifasi ✟ @GroveRKifasi]

IT IS A SCAM

[Adika @Adikastakes]

Mohammed Salah is the GREATEST Premier Player of all time!

[Gideon Odoma @gideonodoma]

Una no serious!

[13 @Kinhswill]

@MrAlaboRoland I agree with you, but there is a promise from the presidency. And that is why the governor went ahead with buying the nomination form

If there was no nod, he would not have made the move

[ToluwalogoAgboola @RevToluAgboola]

Intercession is not an Emotional Labour..