Does “eternal life” equal “eternal security?”

Bested by a woman on the first response

Craigbythesea: //1. How were the “eternal life” passages in the Bible interpreted prior to the reformation?//

As Eternal Security of the Believer passages;
just like in the New Tesament.

Craigbythesea: 2. How have the “eternal life” passages been interpreted since the reformation by the large majority of Bible scholars, pastors, and Christian lay people ... ?//

As Eternal Security of the Believer passages;
just like in the New Tesament. </font>[/QUOTE]PLEASE limit your replies to the two questions asked in the opening post.

 

PLEASE limit your replies to the two questions asked in the opening post.

 

PLEASE limit your replies to the two questions asked in the opening post. And please don't post personal attacks on Christian message boards

 

</font>[/QUOTE]PLEASE limit your replies to the two questions asked in the opening post.

 

Does “eternal life” equal “eternal security?” We do not find the doctrine of eternal security being taught by anyone for the first 1,500 years of the Church, but we do find the doctrine of conditional security being taught by many during this time. Since the Protestant Reformation, the large majority of Bible scholars, pastors, and Christian lay people have continued to reject the doctrine of eternal security as a false doctrine and to hold to the doctrine of conditional security.

The question for this thread is two fold,

1. How were the “eternal life” passages in the Bible interpreted prior to the reformation?

2. How have the “eternal life” passages been interpreted since the reformation by the large majority of Bible scholars, pastors, and Christian lay people who have continued to reject the doctrine of eternal security as a false doctrine and to hold to the doctrine of conditional security?

Please limit your replies to these two questions.

If you are KJO, please do NOT post in this thread.

 

The rude and obnoxious posts in this thread are an excellent example of the depths of sin that Baptists who believe that they are eternally secure, no matter how wickedly they treat other Christians, are willing to plunge themselves into. And these rude and obnoxious posts are, therefore, an illustration of the perniciousness of the doctrine of eternal security.

Now are there any Baptists who would like to politely contribute to our knowledge of the interpretation of the New Testament by answering the questions asked, or are there not?

 

Now are there any Baptists who would like to politely contribute to our knowledge of the interpretation of the New Testament by answering the questions asked in the opening post, or are there not?