An Interesting Post Against Eternal Security

[Craigbythesea]

Originally posted by PastorGreg:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Craigbythesea:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> So, you're saying maybe some of the Philippians later on lost their salvation, but it was o.k. for Paul to lie to them and tell them that they wouldn't?

I suppose it is only to be expected that those who misconstrue the words of the beloved Apostle Paul would also misconstrue my words. After all, when a man has no data to refute the arguments of his opponent, the only recourses that he has are to admit that he is wrong or to misconstrue his opponent’s data. Personally, I have no desire to win a debate, even by telling the truth; my desire is simply to tell the truth and I am thankful that the owner of this message board allows me to do that.

</font>[/QUOTE]In other words, you can't answer the question. Either way, it shoots your unbiblical doctrine all to pieces. </font>[/QUOTE]The absurdity of absurdities . My two year-year-old grandson is more cognitive in his thinking, but of course my son is his father

. Therefore, I went across the street to put this matter before Nicolas (another two year old )

He told me that I would be foolish to answer a question based on a misunderstanding of what I wrote, but to start at the top, and write as though I was writing to him. Sounds like good advice! (Nicolas is a smart kid).

Therefore:

• The Philippian Christians were very good Christians that loved Jesus.
• Paul saw that the Philippian Christians were very good Christians that loved Jesus.
• What Paul saw caused him to have confidences that the Philippian Christians would endure to the end.
• Paul loved the Philippian Christians.
• Paul wanted to encourage the Philippian Christians.
• Paul told the Philippian Christians that he was confident that He who began a good work in them would perfect it until the day of Jesus Christ.
• Paul’s words here express firstly confidence in the faithfulness of God, and secondly confidence the Philippian Christians.
• Paul did not lie because he really was confident in both God and the Philippian Christians.
• I did not say anything about some of the Philippian Christians loosing their salvation.
• I did imply, however, that Paul, in expressing to the Philippian Christians his confidence in them, was telling the truth and not a lie
• Expressing confidence IN someone is NOT the same as making a promise To them.
• Even Paul warned the Corinthian Christians that were confident that they stood to take heed that they do not fall.
• Paul was a good Christian.
• Paul did not lie.
• Paul told the truth.
• Paul honestly expressed his confidence IN the Philippian Christians TO the Philippian Christians to encourage them.
• Paul was not a fortune teller.
• Paul did not know for sure the fate of the Philippian Christians.
• Paul did not say that he did.
• Paul encouraged the Philippian Christians much as a football coach encourages his team.
• Christians need to learn Biblical hermeneutics so they can tell the difference between an expression of CONFIDENCE IN one particular first century church from a PROMISE TO all Christians.
• Everyone should pray before they read the Bible, while they are reading the Bible, and after they read the Bible.

Greg,

Would like to have Nicolas’ e-mail address?

 

[Craigbythesea]

Just as salvation is not conditioned by any sort of works by man, the security of the believer is not maintained by the works of man either.

James,

What does this axiom have to do with our discussion? No one here is arguing that the security of the believer is maintained by the works of man.

 

[James_Newman]

Originally posted by Craigbythesea:
James Newman wrote,

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Mangle this one too

John 6
37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.
39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.
40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up

James,

What does this passage have to do with our discussion? Do you think that you see in these verses some support for the doctrine of eternal security? </font>[/QUOTE]At what point in your Christian walk are you 'given to Christ'? Is it when you die, finally completing the long hard journey to the free gift that awaits you? How then could Christ say to his disciples:

Mark 9:41
For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink in my name, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward.

I didn't think you were a Calvinist.

 

[PastorGreg]

Craig, if you could resort from ridicule and personal attacks (which the moderators are supposed to deal with) this could be an intelligent discussion. Your ridiculing another person is a typical strategy when one's argument is either illogical or unbiblical, as yours is, so it is understandable that you would resort to such tactics. Since all of the New Testament epistles were written to specific people, Craig, does that mean we can claim none of the promises in them?

You still have not answered the question. If one can lose his salvation (which is a blesphemous position attacking the character of God) what right did Paul have to have the confidence that God's work would continue in them? Either he knew their salvation was eternally secure, or he was confident of something of which he should not have been confident. Get off the football coach stuff. This wasn't a rah-rah speech - He was writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

 

[StraightAndNarrow]

Does God ever make a promise then not keep it?

John 6
35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.
[/QB]

If you look at Strongs Concordance the words "cometh" and "believth" in this verse have the following properties:

5740 Tense - Present See 5774
Voice - Middle or Passive Deponent See 5790
Mood - Participle See 5796
Count - 544

5723 Tense - Present See 5774
Voice - Active See 5784
Mood - Participle See 5796
Count - 2549

5774 Tense - Present

The present tense represents a simple statement of fact
or reality viewed as occurring in actual time. In most cases
this corresponds directly with the English present tense.

Some phrases which might be rendered as past tense in English will often occur in the present tense in Greek. These are termed "historical presents," and such occurrences dramatize the event described as if the reader were there watching the event occur. Some English translations render such historical presents in the English past tense, while others permit the tense to remain in the present.

5796 Mood - Participle

The Greek participle corresponds for the most part to the English participle, reflecting "-ing" or "-ed" being suffixed to the basic verb form. The participle can be used either like a verb or a noun, as in English, and thus is often termed
a "verbal noun."


In other words, these words describe an event that is continuing to happen rather than one which occured at sometime in the past. A more correct translation would be:

35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that continues to come to me shall never hunger; and he that continues to believe on me shall never thirst.

The same interpretation holds for John 3:16 which actually says:

Jhn 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever continues to believe in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

 

[James_Newman]

Brother, I'd be real careful preaching that gospel.

Proverbs 30
5 Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.
6 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.

Revelation 22:18
For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

 

[Craigbythesea]

Since all of the New Testament epistles were written to specific people, Craig, does that mean we can claim none of the promises in them?

If God promised your dog a dog biscuit, would you claim that promise for yourself? Personally, I don't care for the taste of dog biscuits, at least not the flavors that I have tried. I'll have to ask Nicolas if he knows of any good-tasting dog biscuits.

All of the promises in the Bible need to be studied firstly to find out if they are really promises. Secondly they need to be studied to find out to whom the promise was made. “Claiming” a promise that was not made to us is presumption, not faith, and is a sure road to disappointment.

You still have not answered the question

I have answered your question, and I have answered it as simply as I know how.

If one can lose his salvation (which is a blesphemous position attacking the character of God)

You have this backwards. God is not a mere human with mere human values. God is God! God is infinitely holy, and in Him there is NO sin. Holiness and sin can NOT cohabitate. If a believer reverts to a sinful lifestyle, he can NOT cohabitate with God.

what right did Paul have to have the confidence that God's work would continue in them? Either he knew their salvation was eternally secure, or he was confident of something of which he should not have been confident. Get off the football coach stuff. This wasn't a rah-rah speech - He was writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

Paul did not write that he was absolutely, 100% confident that the Philippian Christians would endure to the end. Compare a stronger expression of confidence in Gal. 5:10:

I have confidence in you through the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise minded: but he that troubleth you shall bear his judgment, whosoever he be.

I am confident that my grandson will do well in school, but at the same time I know that he could die of a cerebral aneurism before the clock strikes midnight.

But Greg, this confidence Paul wrote of in his epistle to the Philippians applies only to the persons about which the words were spoken, and unless you were one of the Philippians Christians about which these words were spoken, these words do not apply to you. When I write that I am confident that my grandson will do well in school, that statement does not apply to every two year old alive today. It applies to only one child, my grandson who is exceptionally bright, healthy (as for as I know), and very well adjusted. But things can change, confidence is not a guarantee, it is not a prophecy, it is an attitude of the mind based on ones perception.

 

[Lacy Evans]

Originally posted by Craigbythesea:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Just as salvation is not conditioned by any sort of works by man, the security of the believer is not maintained by the works of man either.

James,

What does this axiom have to do with our discussion? No one here is arguing that the security of the believer is maintained by the works of man.

</font>[/QUOTE]If you believe that Craig, then what in the world is "conditional security" conditioned upon. You said:

"Holiness and sin can NOT cohabitate. If a believer reverts to a sinful lifestyle, he can NOT cohabitate with God."

I really don't understand. It appears that you are simply backloading the gospel so as to say that a man must maintain some kind of holiness to maintain his "save-ed-ness".

Whether frontloaded (Ala Catholicism) or backloaded it's like a snickers. No matter which way you slice it, it comes up nuts.

Lacy

 

[James_Newman]

Maybe we are not seeing the truth of God's love. Maybe He has to CONTINUE in love to save you, so at some point, He stops loving you, and He stops being a sacrifice for you, and His mercy faileth, and you start sinning again... Is that the condition by which we might be saved?

 

[Craigbythesea]

I really don't understand. It appears that you are simply backloading the gospel so as to say that a man must maintain some kind of holiness to maintain his "save-ed-ness".

My dear brother in Christ,

Your post suggests that you are confusing the symptoms with the disease. No amount of holiness can save anyone, and no amount of holiness can keep a saved person saved. It is God’s grace and our faith which saves us, and it God’s grace and our faith which keeps us saved. However, when a man’s faith in Christ is willfully forfeited by that man, there is a return to a sinful lifestyle and God cannot cohabitate with such a man. The absolute holiness of God makes it impossible.

 

[Craigbythesea]

Maybe we are not seeing the truth of God's love. Maybe He has to CONTINUE in love to save you, so at some point, He stops loving you, and He stops being a sacrifice for you, and His mercy faileth, and you start sinning again... Is that the condition by which we might be saved?

Brother James,

Let's make at least a pretense of rationality. The Biblical, historical doctrine of conditional security never calls for the continuance of anything on the part of God, but only on the part of man. God can NOT fail us, but we can fail Him. And the wages of sin is death, for the Jew and for the Greek, for the Christian and the reprobate.

 

[gb93433]

Originally posted by Craigbythesea:

Your post suggests that you are confusing the symptoms with the disease. No amount of holiness can save anyone, and no amount of holiness can keep a saved person saved. It is God’s grace and our faith which saves us, and it God’s grace and our faith which keeps us saved. However, when a man’s faith in Christ is willfully forfeited by that man, there is a return to a sinful lifestyle and God cannot cohabitate with such a man. The absolute holiness of God makes it impossible.

How would you synthesize that with John 10:27-30?

 

[gb93433]

Originally posted by PastorGreg:
Of course you can lose your salvation. Phil. 1:6, "Being confident of this very thing that he who began a good work in you will perform it as long as you keep yourself saved."

That verse is not a promise but part of a prayer. So it must be interpreted in light of a prayer.

 

[gb93433]

Originally posted by Craigbythesea:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> How can a man who claimed to know God ever say He doesn't exist?

I do not see the relevance of this question, but the answer is obvious—he could decide that he made a mistake. That is, he could decide that what he thought was God was not God at all. I do not believe, however, that we find anyone in the Bible becoming an apostate and falling from grace from this particular cause.

</font>[/QUOTE]Let me put it anotheer way. If I claimed I knew you, how can I say you no longer exist? If someone knows God he is saved. The lost person does not know God. A saved person does know God at least to some degree. But a person who ealrier claimed to know God and then now says He doesn't exist never really knew God.


Take a look at 1 John 5:11-13 and 1 Peter 1:4 in the Greek especially the word for "reserved." It is a perfect participle.

In 1 John 5:13 look at the hina clause. If I remember right you have studied Hebrew and understand that most of the NT writers come from that culture. So what I am getting at is the idea of know with a Hebrew mindset. It is having the most intimate knowledge. It is the idea of really knowing.

 

[James_Newman]

Originally posted by Craigbythesea:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Maybe we are not seeing the truth of God's love. Maybe He has to CONTINUE in love to save you, so at some point, He stops loving you, and He stops being a sacrifice for you, and His mercy faileth, and you start sinning again... Is that the condition by which we might be saved?

Brother James,

Let's make at least a pretense of rationality. The Biblical, historical doctrine of conditional security never calls for the continuance of anything on the part of God, but only on the part of man. God can NOT fail us, but we can fail Him. And the wages of sin is death, for the Jew and for the Greek, for the Christian and the reprobate.

</font>[/QUOTE]How can we fail God, if no amount of holiness can keep us saved?

 

[Craigbythesea]

Originally posted by gb93433:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Craigbythesea:

Your post suggests that you are confusing the symptoms with the disease. No amount of holiness can save anyone, and no amount of holiness can keep a saved person saved. It is God’s grace and our faith which saves us, and it God’s grace and our faith which keeps us saved. However, when a man’s faith in Christ is willfully forfeited by that man, there is a return to a sinful lifestyle and God cannot cohabitate with such a man. The absolute holiness of God makes it impossible.

How would you synthesize that with John 10:27-30? </font>[/QUOTE]John 10:27. "My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me;
28. and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand.
29. "My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand.
30. "I and the Father are one." (NASB, 1995)

27. Ta probata ta ema tes fones mou akouousin, kago ginosko auta kai akolouthousin moi.
28. Kago didomi autois zoen aionion, kai ou me apolontai eis ton aiona, kai ouch harpasei tis auta ek tes cheiros mou.
29. Ho Pater mou ho dedoken moi panton meizon estin, kai oudeis dunatai harpazein ek tes cheiros tou Patros.
30. Ego kai ho Pater hen esmen."

The present indicative is used six times in these four verse; the aorist indicative is used only once (the verb translated perish). For anyone to use this passage of scripture to support the doctrine of eternal security is absurd. The Greek text simply does not allow for that.

 

[Craigbythesea]

Let me put it anotheer way. If I claimed I knew you, how can I say you no longer exist?

How many times am I going to be asked to address this question? You may believe that you know me, but upon learning more about me, you may learn that in fact I am a fictional character. The man that you believe that you know on this message board may in reality be a 17 year-old-girl with freckles and a pony tail. Just because you presently believe in Craigbythesea does not mean that such a character actually exists. You could very well become disillusioned in the character displayed and come to the conclusion that he is a fictional character.

Even though God is NOT a fictional character on a message board, like very many other people you may at some point in your life become so disillusioned about God as to cease to believe in him.

Years ago when I was pastoring an inner-city church, a certain man joined our congregation. As a trusting relationship was built between he and I, he began to share with me that he had been a devout Christian, but one afternoon, upon returning home from a three day business trip, he returned to the address where his house had been when he left. But alas, his house had been reduced to ashes while he was away. When he asked his neighbors where his family was staying, he was told that his entire family had died in the fire.

This man’s faith was shattered and he came to doubt that the God that he had thought he knew so well even existed. Fortunately, through a loving church, this man’s faith in God was gradually restored. But if we had not been there for him, who knows what his fate would have been?

 

[Craigbythesea]

If someone knows God he is saved. The lost person does not know God. A saved person does know God at least to some degree. But a person who ealrier claimed to know God and then now says He doesn't exist never really knew God.

The true story that I related above shows the fallacy of this argument.

Take a look at 1 John 5:11-13

10. The one who believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself; the one who does not believe God has made Him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has given concerning His Son.
11. And the testimony is this, that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son.
12. He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life.
13. These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life.

What could be more clear, “He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life.” A Christian who has forsaken Christ “does not have the life.”

and 1 Peter 1:4 in the Greek especially the word for "reserved." It is a perfect participle.

1 Peter 1:3. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,
4. to obtain an inheritance which is imperishable and undefiled and will not fade away, reserved in heaven for you,
5. who are protected by the power of God through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.

Notice verse 5, “protected {Greek = a present participle in the passive voice} by the power of God through faith. Again, NO aorist tenses! The action is ongoing.

 

[Craigbythesea]

Take a look at . . . 1 Peter 1:4 in the Greek especially the word for "reserved." It is a perfect participle.

In reference to the word "reserved" in 1 Peter 1:4, I will simply comment that the mere fact that a room was reserved for someone does not mean that the one for whom it is reserved will ever show up and use the room.

In 1 John 5:13 look at the hina clause. If I remember right you have studied Hebrew and understand that most of the NT writers come from that culture. So what I am getting at is the idea of know with a Hebrew mindset. It is having the most intimate knowledge. It is the idea of really knowing.

13. These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life.

13. Tauta egrapsa humin hina eidete hoti zoenechete aionion, tois pisteuousin eis to onoma tou Huioutou Theou.

eidete
Word Origin: a root word
TDNT: 5:116, *
Part of Speech: Verb
Usage in the KJV:
know 282, cannot tell 3756 8, know how 7, wist 6, misc 19, see 314, behold 16, look 5, perceive 5, vr see 3, vr know 1
Total: 666

Definition:
1. to see
A. to perceive with the eyes
B. to perceive by any of the senses
C. to perceive, notice, discern, discover
D. to see
a. i.e. to turn the eyes, the mind, the attention to anything
b. to pay attention, observe
c. to see about something
d. i.e. to ascertain what must be done about it
e. to inspect, examine
f. to look at, behold
E. to experience any state or condition
F. to see i.e. have an interview with, to visit

2. to know
A. to know of anything
B. to know, i.e. get knowledge of, understand, perceive
a. of any fact
b. the force and meaning of something which has definite meaning
c. to know how, to be skilled in
C. to have regard for one, cherish, pay attention to (1Th. 5:12) For Synonyms see entry 5825
Courtesy of Bob Jones University

[ October 09, 2004, 04:16 AM: Message edited by: Craigbythesea ]

 

[gb93433]

Originally posted by Craigbythesea:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Take a look at . . . 1 Peter 1:4 in the Greek especially the word for "reserved." It is a perfect participle.

In reference to the word "reserved" in 1 Peter 1:4, I will simply comment that the mere fact that a room was reserved for someone does not mean that the one for whom it is reserved will ever show up and use the room.
</font>[/QUOTE]But look at who the passage and book is addressed to.

The idea of the perfect participle is that the time is antecedent to the time of the leading verb with the emphasis upon the existing result. The state that has resulted from that past action will be contemporaneous with the leading verb. In this case the time goes from the past and continues into the present with the emphasis upon the existing result. So they are saved from past tense until now resulting in a place reserved in heaven from past until now. The idea being it is secured forever awaiting our salavation.

I have a very close friend who spent about 26 years in Ehtiopia as a missionary. Much of it was under communist rule. I asked him recently if the theology of losing your salvation was ever an issue while he was there. He told me it was never an issue; it is an American theology.