|
Post by Kerrigan on Jan 12, 2006 21:29:06 GMT -5
Let’s reason together. Ask yourself this question: If someone is saved, that is they are on their way to Heaven, then how did they get that status in the first place? Well they got it by Grace (a word that seems foreign to many people who believe you can lose your salvation). What is Grace? It is unmerited favor. It is getting something that you didn’t deserve and will NEVER deserve. How does someone get this Grace? They get it through faith. What is faith? It is believing in something you can’t see. It is taking God at His Word and believing it even though you can’t see the “proof” of it. But faith goes further than that. If we look at the rest of Scripture, then it must include repentance. Because true faith must be followed by works. What kind of works? Well...good works. Works that show repentance. Obedience to Christ and His commands. Loving Him with all your heart, soul, mind and strength and loving your neighbor as yourself. Yes, you aren’t saved by works, but you ARE saved TO works. The people that say works aren’t required by quoting Ephesians 2:8-9, forget to read on to verse 10. Such people have also not read the book of James or the book of 1 John. So someone is saved BY Grace, THROUGH Faith (which includes everything we just talked about). They are saved by the Blood of Jesus who washes away all our sins. If such a person...who TRULY was saved....then loses their salvation, we have to ask ourselves this question: Which sin or sins aren’t covered by the Blood of Jesus? Which sin or sins did Jesus’ Blood not have the power to save that person from? Is the Blood of Jesus not powerful enough to save us from ALL our sins? And if Jesus died on the cross for the sins of those who will trust in Him in the future, then how can that person who trusted in Jesus, and now has supposedly fallen away, take the punishment for his sins as well. That would be ludicrous! Only one person can be punished. Ever heard of the legal term “Double Jeopardy”? One person can’t be punished for the same crime twice and two people can’t be punished for the same crime. Next, let’s look at a word that Paul used. Paul used the word “adoption” many times to speak of the believers relation to God after they Repent and put their faith in Jesus Christ (Romans 8:15, 23; 9:4; Ephesians 1:5; Galatians 4:5-6). This is the Greek word õἱïèåóßá (youiothesia) and it means to be accepted by God as a son (or daughter). He used that term because he knew what it meant legally to the people of his time. He knew that it meant that someone who once wasn’t a child has now become a child. And guess what? Once you adopt a child you have them for good. They can never again be put up for adoption. That was true of Paul’s time and it is also true of today. That child is yours for good. You can’t...let me repeat that..you CAN’T put that child back up for adoption. They are yours always and FOREVER. It is the same way with God. Once we are His children, we are ALWAYS His Children. Then there is the concept of being sealed. This is the Greek word óöñáãßæù (sphragizo) and it is found in numerous places in the New Testament. Just take a look at 2 Corinthians 1:22; 5:5; Ephesians 1:13-14; 4:30. A seal in the time of Paul was used as a means of identification. When seal was placed on a letter and sent to someone, the receiver could be assured that it truly was sent by the owner of that seal and that he approved of all the contents found within that letter. When an animal had a seal placed on it, it was a mark denoting ownership and denoting who’s protection and care that animal was under. The verses listed above speak of God sealing us and not sealing us with just anything, but with the seal of His Holy Spirit. This backs up Romans 8:16 and 1 John 3:9. The believer receives the Holy Spirit upon conversion. And the Holy Spirit “isgiven as a pledge (or down payment) of our inheritance” (Ephesians 1:14). The word translated as “pledge” is the Greek word ἀññáâþí (harrabon) and it literally means a first installment which secures a legal claim to the article in question, or makes a contract valid; a payment that obligates the contracting party to make further payments. When you put a down payment on something (house or car for example) and then you sign the contract to purchase it, you are in legal obligation to go through with the agreement signed. God is saying here, in these verses, that He put His Holy Spirit inside of us as a down payment to us showing his pledge to fulfill his promise to save us and bring us into His glorious presence in Heaven someday. If someone is saved and then becomes “unsaved” does God then go back on His pledge, His promise? Does God break the contract with the believer who has now become an “unbeliever”? To say such a thing is to call God a liar. What about this: when does someone lose their salvation? What sin causes someone to lose their salvation? Or how much sin causes someone to lose their salvation? At what point does God say, “Ok you are now not my child any longer, but if you start doing things right again I will make you my child once again.”? Would you ever disown your child? I know that I wouldn’t and God is much more merciful and patient than I am. My son is of my own flesh and blood. And if we are God’s children then we are of His Blood, that is the Blood of Jesus. If someone could lost their salvation, at what point do they regain it? James 2:10 say, “For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all.” So, if a Christian can lose his or her salvation and we reason correctly, that would mean that a person would lose their salvation every time they sin. How many times have you lost your salvation? How many times have you been saved? Are you saved right now? What does Jesus mean when He says to Nicodemus, you must be “Born Again.” If Jesus believed in losing your salvation then why didn’t He say that you must be “Born Again and Again and Again”? Take a look at Romans 8:29-30. It says, “For those whom Heforeknew, He alsopredestined to becomeconformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be thefirstborn among many brethren; and these whom Hepredestined, He alsocalled; and these whom He called, He alsojustified; and these whom He justified, He alsoglorified.” The ones God “foreknew” are His Children. The ones that God knew ahead of time (because He is God, is outside of time and sees everything at all times- past, present and future) were the ones He knew would repent of their sins and Trust in His Son Jesus Christ. Those are the ones that He predestined (NO, not predestined to save- God does NOT choose whom He will save) to be Conformed to His likeness. When I look back on my life before I became a Christian I see God working in my life. He was working on making me who He wanted me to be before I even became a Christian. Anyway, to the point of this passage. It says, “these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.” If some Christians “slip through the cracks”, if some become “unsaved”, then why doesn’t that verse instead say something like this: “these whom He predestined, some He called, those whom He called, some were justified, those whom He justified, just a few he glorified.” If a Christian can lose his salvation, that is what that verse would have to read. But this verse doesn’t say that. In fact, it makes it quite clear that every single one that is predestined (to be conformed) is called, each and every one that is called is justified and every single one that is justified is also glorified in Heaven. When you get the chance Steve, I would like to see how you would respond to some of this....thanks...
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Jan 13, 2006 0:44:32 GMT -5
In Hebrews 6:6, the word translated as “fallen away” (NASB), is the Greek Word parapipto. It literally means to fail to follow through on a commitment. So, it seems that the person might have made some sort of false commitment without really following through on it. It was therefore not genuine.
The Greek word for “fall away” in Mark 4:17 is skandalizo. This word could also be translated as “offended”, “repelled” or a “stumbling block” It is the same word that is used to speak of Jesus being a “stumbling block.” Just look at these verses for that: Romans 9:32, 33; 1 Corinthians 1:12; Galatians 5:11; 1 Peter 2:8. In all these verses, it is clearly talking about Christ being a “stumbling block” because people just refuse to believe that He was and is the Messiah, the Savior, and the Son of God. Most Jews had problems believing that Jesus was the Messiah because He didn’t fit their mold of whom and what they thought the Messiah should be. The fact that He died on a cross, He wasn’t rich, He was rejected by the Jewish religious leaders and He didn’t deliver them from bondage to the Romans was a stumbling block for many Jews. Since Jesus didn’t fit their mold of what they thought the Messiah should be like, most rejected Him. In fact, most Jews didn’t even recognize the Messiah when He came. It must have been real embarrassing to the Jews that God had religious people from a foreign land (the magi) come and announce the birth of the Messiah. The magi probably didn’t even have the Scriptures unless Daniel had left some behind for them to read. It seems that the people who “fall away” in Mark 4:17 didn’t realize that they were going to be tempted or persecuted like they were. And when those things came, they were “offended” and “repelled.” The temptation and persecution were a “stumbling block” to them in the same way that Christ was a “stumbling block” to many Jews.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Jan 13, 2006 9:08:42 GMT -5
Think of the unforgiving servant. He was first forgiven of his debt by the King, but later because of his actions he was condemned and put to death by the King. So first he was saved (forgiven of his debt) and then he was condemned (executed by the King) and of course the King is suppose to be God. And Jesus said that the very same could happen to any of us.
So did the unforgiving servant lose his salvation?
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Jan 13, 2006 9:22:13 GMT -5
We must be careful to not read into Scripture what we think it should say. That parable says nothing of the person being saved and then losing their salvation. Therefore, we can't assume that is what it is saying...
|
|
|
Post by Steve Noel on Jan 13, 2006 17:29:12 GMT -5
Rev K I plan on getting into your article as time permits. I need to be careful not to get too engrossed in this topic. As you've stated earlier we have higher priorities. I want to maintain the fire of God in my heart for revival and for souls. As I'm sure you are aware this issue takes up a lot of study time. By the way I thank God for your passion Rev K. I was listening to L. Ravenhill earlier and he was talking about God raising up a new breed of people. I believe both you and I want to be part of that people.
Now, regarding the unforgiving servant I have to agree with Jesse here. I would also request that you explain what it does mean if this is not it.
Matthew 18:21-35 21Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, "Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to seven times?"
22Jesus answered, "I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times.
23"Therefore, the kingdom of heaven is like a king who wanted to settle accounts with his servants. 24As he began the settlement, a man who owed him ten thousand talents was brought to him. 25Since he was not able to pay, the master ordered that he and his wife and his children and all that he had be sold to repay the debt.
26"The servant fell on his knees before him. 'Be patient with me,' he begged, 'and I will pay back everything.' 27The servant's master took pity on him, canceled the debt and let him go.
28"But when that servant went out, he found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii. He grabbed him and began to choke him. 'Pay back what you owe me!' he demanded.
29"His fellow servant fell to his knees and begged him, 'Be patient with me, and I will pay you back.'
30"But he refused. Instead, he went off and had the man thrown into prison until he could pay the debt. 31When the other servants saw what had happened, they were greatly distressed and went and told their master everything that had happened.
32"Then the master called the servant in. 'You wicked servant,' he said, 'I canceled all that debt of yours because you begged me to. 33Shouldn't you have had mercy on your fellow servant just as I had on you?' 34In anger his master turned him over to the jailers to be tortured, until he should pay back all he owed.
35"This is how my heavenly Father will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother from your heart."
What is the point of this parable?
Jesus teaches here that God's forgiveness freely granted to undeserving sinners remains conditional. It is conditioned on the forgiven ones subsequent response to the forgiveness which he has received.
Once again the context of this passage is dealing with those in the church who sin (see Mt 18:15-19). Peter's question is directly related to relationships within the church. Jesus' clear warning is that if Peter does not forgive his "brother", then he will not finally be forgiven.
Once again you can start right and end wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Noel on Jan 13, 2006 17:53:20 GMT -5
Rev K,
The information on "fall away" in Mark 4:17 is interesting, but it seems to me that you are trying to transpose it's meaning in other texts to this text. As I have demonstrated from Luke 8 it is unwarranted to interpret believe in verse 13 as something short of genuine saving faith. The context of this passage doesn't allow it. Verse 12 establishes the meaning of believe in the parable. You cannot justify changing the meaning of believe in verse 13. The parable says that they believe and that they fall away. To bring in possible meanings of fall away from other passages and then interpret believe by them is (in my humble opinion ;D) unwarranted.
In Hebrews 6 the meaning of the fallen away must be established by it's context. If the context is speaking of Christians, then fallen away cannot refer to not real Christians. Again, I ask, how can you fall away from something you never were really in? I would also say that the point you made about not following through on a commitment could just as easily support my position.
Also, concerning Hebrews 6. To expound on what I was saying about v. 6. The scholar Leon Morris (An advocate of OSAS) writes in his commentary on Hebrews that "the tense [in this verse] connotes a continuing attitude". The point would be that the reason they can't be restored is becasue their rebellion is a present attitude and not just a past event. That's why I pointed out the Amplified reading. It brings out the fact that it's a present attitude and not only a past event in mind here.
"If they then deviate from the faith and turn away from their allegiance--[it is impossible] to bring them back to repentance, for (because, while, as long as) they nail upon the cross the Son of God afresh [as far as they are concerned] and are holding [Him] up to contempt and shame and public disgrace."
By the way, where did everyone else go?
Steve
|
|
|
Post by Steve Noel on Jan 13, 2006 20:58:41 GMT -5
Rev K wrote, Next, let’s look at a word that Paul used. Paul used the word “adoption” many times to speak of the believers relation to God after they Repent and put their faith in Jesus Christ (Romans 8:15, 23; 9:4; Ephesians 1:5; Galatians 4:5-6). This is the Greek word õἱïèåóßá (youiothesia) and it means to be accepted by God as a son (or daughter). He used that term because he knew what it meant legally to the people of his time. He knew that it meant that someone who once wasn’t a child has now become a child. And guess what? Once you adopt a child you have them for good. They can never again be put up for adoption. That was true of Paul’s time and it is also true of today. That child is yours for good. You can’t...let me repeat that..you CAN’T put that child back up for adoption. They are yours always and FOREVER. It is the same way with God. Once we are His children, we are ALWAYS His Children. I would point you to one of the verses that you listed - Romans 9:4 (In context): 1I speak the truth in Christ—I am not lying, my conscience confirms it in the Holy Spirit— 2I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. 3For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, those of my own race, 4the people of Israel. Theirs is the adoption as sons; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises. 5Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen. Those spoken of as being adopted here are the people of Israel. This passage clearly shows that adoption does not equal unconditional eternal security. In fact Romans 9-11 form a unit and the context strongly favors conditional eternal security. Let me illustrate from Romans 11: "17If some of the branches have been broken off (unbelieving Jews), and you (believing Gentiles), though a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root, 18do not boast over those branches. If you do, consider this: You do not support the root, but the root supports you. 19You will say then, "Branches were broken off so that I could be grafted in." 20Granted. But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but be afraid. 21For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either. 22Consider therefore the kindness and sternness of God: sternness to those who fell, but kindness to you, provided that you continue in his kindness. Otherwise, you also will be cut off. 23And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. 24After all, if you were cut out of an olive tree that is wild by nature, and contrary to nature were grafted into a cultivated olive tree, how much more readily will these, the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree!" I would really like to see how anyone can reconcile unconditional eternal security with Romans 11:22. I would also contend that Romans 11:23 makes it clear that if you lose your salvation, then you can be restored. I believe that this is one of those clearer verses that sheds light on Hebrews 6:4-6. Note: I will take a break from this for the weekend. Be blessed, Steve
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Jan 13, 2006 22:46:05 GMT -5
You know what Steve...I truly think that this COULD go on forever. I am enjoying this debate and in my flesh I would like to continue on, but I cannot. I think that we just see Scripture differently altogether on this issue. So, I conclude that we must agree to disagree on this. But, you have to agree with the point I made before: that we both believe that the end is the same for the person who continues in sin: Hell and Damnation. Whether the means is losing salvation or having never been saved, the end is the same. God Bless brother and I will probably (95% sure) be seeing you Super Bowl weekend to witness. Looking forward to that!
|
|
|
Post by GeekforGod on Jan 14, 2006 12:06:57 GMT -5
My search in the scriptures in regards to this issue brought me to the Book of Life. It seems that if you get written in you are saved:
And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. Rev 20:15
It stands to reason that one must be written in this book in order to not be in that group that "are not written in the book of life". But are we automatically written in from birth? I dont know this if we are born into sin....
But I did find one reference that was interesting:
And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and [from] the things which are written in this book. Rev 22:19
Here it is clear that one can be removed from the book of life. This is clear that at one time you can be in the book of life and according to other references such as the first one I listed, Rev 20:15, if you are in the book you are saved from the lake of fire.
I do note the verses that pastors have raised to support osas such as:
And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any [man] pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave [them] me, is greater than all; and no [man] is able to pluck [them] out of my Father's hand. John 10:28-29
I do see that someone other than the individual in the Hand cannot pluck them or take them away but it does not infer that the one in the Hand cannot step away such as the prodigal son. How was the Father able to save the son who separated himself from the Father? Yes God can do anything but I dont feel He is forceful in implementing His grace. One must believe, repent and be saved.
Despite countless examples of backsliders not being saved (Isaiah shows this and instead of isolating the verse its best to read all of Isaiah to get the fullest message, awesome book), I am still hopeful that perhaps I am misled in my thinking so that many more will be saved as a result of osas but the road is narrow and few will find it, right? If osas is correct then broad would be the road.
I defer to Paul where he said:
Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. Phillipians 2:12
"work out your own salvation with fear and trembling"? What is that all about? I see it as Paul saying dont take advantage of God's grace and dont take your gift of salvation for granted by sinning and trusting in osas as a means of escaping the flames despite your dissobedience.
|
|
|
Post by Miles Lewis on Jan 14, 2006 23:35:59 GMT -5
Ok... Round Two... Ding! Ding! Ding! Not to deviate too much. But I was thinking earlier and I know that some think that David lost his salvation and then got it back again. This sort of came up on another MB and I found the most simple clear biblical answer I think that exists... Quote: From this here it looks like David was, uh oh, predestined to be saved . (Just so you know, the above is my answer to someone's question.) Now, for the record, I am a believer in conditional security. From so many scriptures supporting, I have to conclude also that someone can be saved and then lose their salvation. I think a lot of the previous posts have argued the case well. gospeljohn.com/osas.htm John Duncan has a really good clear article on this. I would like to see a similar article that has all the OSAS verses people use to prove the point. I have seen an article before that takes all the OSAS verses and refutes them scripturally and shows the misinterpretation. I couldn't find it though.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Jan 15, 2006 0:23:49 GMT -5
uh oh. You brought up the name "John Duncan". Be careful. That name could get you into a lot of trouble. Johns a great brother. And that's a great article with some good scriptures. The John Fletcher quote certainly is thought provoking. I just read a bio on Fletcher by Oswald J. Smith. He was one of Wesleys men. He has a two set volume on arminian teachings. It's a very good set I hope to get someday. Here is the Fletcher quote:"What need is there of attacking sin with so much eagerness since, even in the Name of the Lord, I can not destroy it? And why should I resist it with so much watchfulness, since my eternal life and salvation are absolutely secured, and the most poisonous cup of iniquity can not destroy me, though I should drink of it every day for months or years? If ye fondly think that you can neither go backward into a sinful, cursed Egypt, nor yet go forward into a sinless, holy Canaan, how natural will it be for you to say, "Soul, take thy ease," and rest awhile in this wilderness on the pillow of self-imputed perfection!" John Fletcher I have not known one so uniformly and deeply devoted to God ... nor do I expect to find another such, on this side of eternity." - John Wesley.
|
|
|
Post by Messenger Micah on Jan 15, 2006 0:42:01 GMT -5
Steve,
I have been following the discussion all along and enjoying it. I stopped posting because it seemed my posts were not being dealt with. I still want to know how OSAS defends 2 Peter 2:20 and 2 Peter 3:17.
Johnandpaulahicks,
I never see anywhere in the Bible where anyone had there name written in the Book of Life but several times where they were blotted out. See Exodus 32:32-33. I do not see how men can be born sinners (Ecclesiastes 7:29). Sin is a choice (Romans 6:16, 1 John 3:4). If men are born sinners then Jesus could not have been tempted in all points like as we are (Hebrews 4:15).
John 10:28-29 are conditional based on John 10:27.
How do OSAS defend passages like Ezekiel 18:24, 33:12-20, where it says if the righteous turn from there righteousness and commit iniquity then all the righteousness they have done will not be remembered?
|
|
|
Post by Armen on Jan 15, 2006 11:49:25 GMT -5
Hi brethren!
Came across this topic with interest. Noting the quote below Miles avatar I would safely say that most of you have heard of Dr. Ian R. K. Paisley. He is moderator of the denomination to which I am a member in Northern Ireland.
I am surprised and slightly disappointed that those of you who engage in the open air work do not believe in eternal security for the penitant sinner. I mean, basically you are taking glory away from our Almighty God. If salvation is "by grace ALONE" then it is NOTHING to do with us. Our adoption into the family of God is therefore done completely by God. Even our faith is a gift FROM God. So the faith that we walk by each day is given by God.
Salvation is entirely "of the Lord" and when God does something He does it right, unlike man. If you believe that you have something to do with your salvation then of course you will fall away from the faith, man is always a failure. I don't even really like the phrase "I got saved..." because YOU didn't GET saved. God saved you at His appointed time.
A salvation that is based partially on our works is a type of romanism. There are multitudes of believers who when they are witnessing of their Saviour then they find prayer much easier because they feel more accepted of God and when they commit a sin they find it difficult to pray because they feel they have failed the Lord (which in a sense they have). But this is wrong, ALL WRONG. No matter how we live, whether it be as holy as possible or falling into sin, our approach to God and acceptance with God is ENTIRELY based upon the merits of Christ. THAT is salvation! THAT is justification! THAT is our redemption! ALL of Christ! His work has provided eternal security because HE did it and it has nothing to do with us.
You should read some of Spurgeons material on the topic, very informative and scriptural.
God bless you all and keep you in a place of personal revival.
Armen
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Jan 15, 2006 13:28:21 GMT -5
Hi brethren! Came across this topic with interest. Noting the quote below Miles avatar I would safely say that most of you have heard of Dr. Ian R. K. Paisley. He is moderator of the denomination to which I am a member in Northern Ireland. I am surprised and slightly disappointed that those of you who engage in the open air work do not believe in eternal security for the penitant sinner. I mean, basically you are taking glory away from our Almighty God. If salvation is "by grace ALONE" then it is NOTHING to do with us. Our adoption into the family of God is therefore done completely by God. Even our faith is a gift FROM God. So the faith that we walk by each day is given by God. Salvation is entirely "of the Lord" and when God does something He does it right, unlike man. If you believe that you have something to do with your salvation then of course you will fall away from the faith, man is always a failure. I don't even really like the phrase "I got saved..." because YOU didn't GET saved. God saved you at His appointed time. A salvation that is based partially on our works is a type of romanism. There are multitudes of believers who when they are witnessing of their Saviour then they find prayer much easier because they feel more accepted of God and when they commit a sin they find it difficult to pray because they feel they have failed the Lord (which in a sense they have). But this is wrong, ALL WRONG. No matter how we live, whether it be as holy as possible or falling into sin, our approach to God and acceptance with God is ENTIRELY based upon the merits of Christ. THAT is salvation! THAT is justification! THAT is our redemption! ALL of Christ! His work has provided eternal security because HE did it and it has nothing to do with us. You should read some of Spurgeons material on the topic, very informative and scriptural. God bless you all and keep you in a place of personal revival. Armen Finally I am NOT alone! Amen and Amen!
|
|
|
Post by Avery on Jan 15, 2006 17:09:33 GMT -5
I just had a great discussion with a neighbor on this subject...
he attends a Mennonite church(where Arminianism is heavy), and he went through their doctrinal statements...
He asked me if I agreed, and I said... some of those ideas are taught in the Bible, and some aren't..
He then asked me if I knew what calvinism taught...
I said, yes, but some of those ideas are taught in the Bible and some aren't...
I then said that men like to set up a set of doctrines(whther in the bible or not), to conform to their lifestyles... but Christians should have a reverence for the teachings of their master, and hold to these rather than justify their own faith.. (Psalm 119)...
I told him that the bible teaches both eternal security, and apostasy... (which means to walk away, or fall away)...
1 John says that you can know you have eternal life, and there are many that say you can walk away from the faith...
regardless of how well we can comprehend what the scripture teaches... we should conform to the apprehension of what it teaches, and let God change our understanding...
it is apostate to pull teachings out and conform them to our theology... because God is the author of our faith.. unless we are in another faith, or religion...
So I personally do not adhere to either doctrine, and I believe the Bible teaches you can be eternally secure, and apostasize.... the only condition is who is the author of your faith.. is it you, or God? our response to this question delineates the answer...
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Jan 15, 2006 17:17:57 GMT -5
I believe in eternal security for repentant sinners. Repentance is the condition. They must turn way from the sin which seperates them from God if they are to come to God. You cannot have sin and have God, since it is sin which seperates, and in Him is no darkness. If a man is in sin, whether he's been saved or not, he is seperated from God.
If a man leaves Jesus Christ for sin, he does not have salvation. I think we can all agree that apart from Christ there is no salvation.
|
|
|
Post by Avery on Jan 15, 2006 17:36:57 GMT -5
exactly...
in Christ, we have great security.. outside of Christ, we are hopeless... a man can walk away from Christ, his teachings, and the faith, by being a God to himself...
believing and trusting in doctrines, is like moving furniture around to clean the house...
not matter how much you move the couch over a carpet stain, or move a lamp in front of a dirty window.. instead of cleaning.. the house will be dirty...
Many people will move this doctrine here, and that one their to cover up the sin in their life...
most arminians trust in their works.. it is their faith...
most calvinists trust in God's will...
but the truth is god has given us testimony about the cleanisng blood of his Son... and it is by faith that we recieve this... not by works, or by misplaced faith... but cleaning the heart is by faith, in God's truth,
a daily surrender to Christ, his teaching, and His watchful care.. He is the good sheepherd...
1 Thessolonians 5:23-24...
Abide in him... and you will bear much fruit.. apart from Him, you can do nothing....
This is the Christian faith...
The blood of the lamb, and the word of their testimony... produes a clean heart and mind...
and no matter how much doctrines are moved around... he heart is desparately wicked, decieving even its owner.. apart from this faith!!!
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Jan 15, 2006 17:48:24 GMT -5
I think that is a common mis-conception. Arminians believe that it is the blood of Jesus Christ which cleanses from all sin. Just as justification is by faith, so also is sanctification by faith.
I hope to right an article soon called "Sanctification by Faith". Entire sanctification comes through the love of Christ in the heart of a Christian.
Often one is accused of as being proud if he says he has been cleansed from all sin. But if the work was done by God, then the glory belongs to God. I would say Arminians believe in the cleansing power of Christs blood.
|
|
|
Post by Messenger Micah on Jan 16, 2006 0:31:43 GMT -5
Hey Avery,
I appreciate your thoughtful posts and believe you are a true brother.
You claim you do not believe in either conditional security or unconditional security but then you admit you actually believe in both.
What big problem do you have with doctrine? Paul certainly believed in doctrine. 1 Timothy 4:16, "Take heed unto thyself and unto the DOCTRINE; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself and them that hear thee."
See also Titus 1:9 and Acts 2:42 (Luke wrote that so he believed in it too).
|
|
|
Post by Avery on Jan 16, 2006 6:40:21 GMT -5
I love doctrine.... but not doctrines of men.....these I detest...
Peter the apostle said...no prophecy of scripture is subject to the prophets interpretation, but men were moved by the Holy Spirit to speak and write these things... this isn't a direct quote...
now we are commanded to test the Spirits to see whether or not they are from God...
and this is where doctrine comes into play for anyone who wants to know God... test the Spirits... are they in accordance with sound doctrine that comes from God... Revelation says the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy... and I trust that total submission to Jesus, his blood, and His Lordship is sufficient to save me... I bear this testimony, and the fruits of the spirit in my flesh..along with those who are in accordance or agreement with sound doctrine...
and I believe the bible teaches unconditional security in Christ... and conditional security outside of him..
some Calvinists rely on the will of God, but never make Christ Lord...
some Armininists rely on works and never make Christ Lord...
now I won't steretype them all, because I cannot se there hearts... but I have seen the power of christ bring both groups of these doctrines of men, under His Lordship, and the change is remarkable...
Men who were under the "circumcision of the law" became free...
and men who used God's grace as a license to sin became free... and were changed by the spirit's power..
and I beleive it is because they stood in the presence of th Lord and he changed them...
I have seen it!! And it is His doctrines I love...
|
|
|
Post by Avery on Jan 16, 2006 6:43:59 GMT -5
Hi Jesse...
I hear what you are saying...
I don't think it is prideful to say that you are entirely sanctified if it is true.... then you are telling the truth....
but I have never met anyone who this has been true of... have you?
|
|
|
Post by Messenger Micah on Jan 16, 2006 8:59:16 GMT -5
Do you think people like Finney and Spurgeon or Wesley and Whitfield who were at opposite sides of the fence on some doctrinal issues did not have the fruit of the spirit or trust in the blood of Jesus and His Lordship?
I am not sure but I think you mentioned earlier that people use doctrine to fit their experience. You are doing the same thing. You have to know the Bible does teach entire santification (1 Thessalonians 5:23-24-just one example of many), and God is not a liar and He means what He says. Why do base what you believe of the Bible on your experience?
If a person's experience is unscriptural then their experience is not right. You don't make the Bible fit your experience you make your experience line up with the Bible.
I have prayed for sick people to be healed and sometimes they were not. This does not mean I do not believe this is not biblical or that no one else has ever experienced this.
It sounds like you are basing your views on your experience and not on the bible. It sounds like you oppose the doctrine of sinless perfection based on your own experience instead of what the Bible teaches is available.
|
|
|
Post by Armen on Jan 16, 2006 16:07:38 GMT -5
Many of you are still believing that you can be saved and lost but you haven't appproached what I said. Here's a question for you though...if Peter had dropped dead after he denied the Lord with cursing and swearing before he had a chance to repent, would he have been in heaven or hell?
Be careful with the entire sanctification thing...it is NOT possible to be faultless but it IS possible to be blameless. There's a difference.
Armen
|
|
|
Post by Steve Noel on Jan 16, 2006 16:35:50 GMT -5
Rev K,
God bless. I hope to see you in a few weeks. I would definitely agree that in the application of our beliefs concerning eternal security there's not much difference. God Bless.
Steve
|
|
|
Post by Avery on Jan 16, 2006 17:32:57 GMT -5
Hi Micah...
I agree with you on the experiecne thing....
that is my point exactly....
The bible does teach entire sanctification... but it teaches it with the resurrection.... this is the hope of every believer...
but it does not teach ity here on earth as some individuals experience would say it does...
I believe Finney and Wesley underwent a powerful work of grace in their lives... but I think in trying to explain it... they used their experience rather than the teachings of the scripture...
I don't think it should ever be preached unless you yourself have achieved it... and as far as i know... no one who has ever claimed it to be true has themselves experienced it short of the resurrection....
unless you have... or maybe someone else on this message board..., and in that case... I will recant... but I think that few will have the gumption to admit it, and no one will be able to maintain it, that is unless they have already put on the imperishable...
|
|
|
Post by Messenger Micah on Jan 16, 2006 18:22:18 GMT -5
Armen,
Peter would have ended up in hell. About faultless and blameless: Jude 24: Now unto Him that is able to keep you from falling and present you FAULTLESS before the presence of His glory with exceeding joy...
Avery,
It does teach it is for now.
"And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless UNTO the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. Faithful is He that calleth you who also WILL DO IT". 1 Thessalonians 5:23-24
To be preserved blameless unto means before He comes back which puts it before the resurrection.
|
|
|
Post by Avery on Jan 16, 2006 18:32:00 GMT -5
I am not to blame for the sin that dwells in me, unless it reigns.. therefore I am blameless...though sin dwells in me, it does not reign in me... it is bound and gagged by the word of God, and the light he continuously shines on me... and the grace that works in me...This is true...
but I am not withou fault.... the life I live in the body I live by faith in the son of God... I put no confidence in the flesh...
Faultless and blameless are two different things...
God sanctifies me continuously in my inmost parts and continuously recovers me from sin to righteousness, but this is not my power but the power that works in me... by the power of Christ...
One question...
Who here that preaches sinless perfection(faultlessness), has achieved it!
If you have, you are subject to the words out of your own mouth to be judged by...
but if you haven't you shouldn't preach what the bible doesn't teach outside of the hope of the believer...the resurrection!!!
Obedience is inward, not outward... and unless every thought and deed you have is no longer subject to failure.. you aren't there yet... thoughmany make a good outward showing... even I could make a good outward claim, but I am honest enough, especially in prayer, and the presence of God to know I haven't arrived... so I press on, and forget what is behind by the power of Christ....and the blood that cleanses me...
|
|
|
Post by Avery on Jan 16, 2006 18:35:47 GMT -5
BTW... faultlessness is found in obedience to Christ... who was faultless, and spotless without blemish or wrinkle....
and it is His name that is imparted to us... like a husband gives his wife his name..and there realtionship is purified in the eyes of God... marriage.. a covenant relationship...
same with christ, and His body...
our faultlessness is not our own, but by faith, imparted from the son of God...
blamelessness is another issue... this is what the bible teaches...
|
|
|
Post by avery on Jan 16, 2006 18:40:08 GMT -5
to prove this point further....
how many sins does it take to be at fault... according to the scripture, one sin, and the whole weight of the law falls on you...
unless you are free from the law of sin... which only comes by death.... you are still married to it...
but if the law died in Christ for you, you are remarried to Christ, who imparts to you his blamelessness.. unless you try to achieve this on your own, but then again... you have already sinned so you bear the whole weight of the law on you again...
The only way a christian could ever be faultless is In Christ... outside of Him... it is impossible...
|
|
|
Post by Messenger Micah on Jan 16, 2006 21:04:30 GMT -5
Avery,
I respect you as a brother but I gave two scriptures (actually only one was to you the other was to Armen but I am glad you responded anyway) and you are giving me a lot of your own interpretation.
God is not a liar He means what He says and what He commands us to do His grace is sufficient to obey.
God says He will keep us faultless but you say we can't be faultless. God says He will sanctify us wholly but you say it cannot happen.
|
|