-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Eternal security and unpardonable sin
- Thread starter Dr. Timo
- Start date
Dr. Timo said:
drfuss: Of course, the above is not correct about the theology of the majority of the ES believers, Classic Arminians or the Wesleyan Arminians. However, I agree that there are strays from all three groups that tend to put more emphasis on works than they should.
Yes, I believe just like Dr. Stanley. Salvation begins and ends with God. We only respond to Him. You don't have eternal life unless it's eternal to begin with.:thumbsup: :jesus: I wasn't talking about other ES believers I was talking about you and non ES believers. Without the grace standard what else is there?Only two ways people try to get to God. His way and mans. It's obvious which of those works. He's not an Indian giver or a partial forgiver. A disbelieve in ES is a slam against the Cross of Christ and nothing less!!!:1_grouphug:
Dr. Timo said:
drfuss: Please note the saying at the bottom of all my posts.
But you are talking about other ES believers who agree with Non-ES believers that you must believe in Christ when you die to get to heaven. You can't get away from talking about other ES believers unless they agree with you on this issue, which they don't.
I think your version of ES belief is the only evangelical belief that does not believe one must be trusting Christ when he dies, to go to heaven. Of course, there are the Universalists.
thegospelgeek said:
Let's see If I can help you understand. :laugh:
The Law requires a "death for sin", no exceptions,
In the Garden Jesus prayed, "If it's possible, let this cup pass from me",
Jesus was saying (for our benefit) change the law, find another way for me to pay the wages of sin "WITHOUT DYING".
Jesus was making the point, "Repenting" will not remit sin, "Forgiveness" can't not remit sin, only with the "Shedding of blood" ( a death) will God's law allow sin be remitted.
Jesus died for the sins of the "whole world", past, present, future sins,
so any future sin committed after you're saved has "ALREADY" been paid.
This effectively "SEALS" the person for "Eternal Salvation", since Jesus isn't dying again for any more sins.
Catholics teach that if you have a sin you go to purgatory until someone prays/pays for your sin,
That is a "remission of sin" without any shed blood, no one dying, so who needs Jesus under this doctrine???
The point is, you (us) committing a sin and then repenting of that sin, asking forgiveness for that sin, "WILL NOT" remit that sin because there is "NO SHED BLOOD".
The "Remission of sin" can "ONLY" come through the "SHED BLOOD" (death) of Jesus,
That's the "LAW", and there are "NO EXCEPTION", not even when "JESUS" is asking, the point Jesus made.
Heb 9:22 and without shedding of blood is no remission. (of sin)
The "Flesh" will continue to sin as long as it lives, but God saves "Souls", not flesh, best learn to separate them, as they will at "death".
I know lots more that believe like me. That's because they understand the power of Christ, and that He is able to end what He started. That's the power of the forgiveness of the Cross. Which like I said, you are slamming by saying your belief is stronger than His Cross.
:smilewinkgrin: :jesus:
:smilewinkgrin: :jesus:
drfuss said:
Love; The most misunderstood word in the dictionary. Most believe infactuation is love, but sadly it is only a temporary desire. Love isn't fallen in to or out of. Love is an act of the will. Anyone can love another simply by being willing to do so. Love isn't a feeling. Love is an act of compassion. Love is an eternal commitment. Love is absolute devotion. Love isn't selfish or dominatingthegospelgeek said:
If a man doesn't Love God. He never love God to begin with. Once love enters the picture it is not repented of. How can a man Love God for what God has done and then stop loving Him? It can't be done.
MB
Trotter
<img src =/6412.jpg>
How can a man, any mortal man, undo what only God can do? No one has yet to answer me that.
Can a Christian ever "stop believing" in Christ? They can say they do, but they can't. I can say I'm not married and act like it, but my wife would set me straight about it. What I say and what I do does not change that fact.
In the same way we are the bride of Christ. We can say we are not married, and even act like it, but that does not change the fact of the matter. Jesus said that no one could pluck us out of Hid Father's hand... and that includes ourselves.
God does the saving in spite of ourselves. If salvation depended on us no one would get to heaven. Trying to make out like God saves but it is up to us to stay that way is tantamount to saying God has no power to keep what He has sealed to himself, that He has butterfingers. Jesus may have holes in His hands but He lets no one fall through.
Can I not love God?
God is bigger than the box we try to put Him in, and more powerful than the limitations we try to impose on Him.
Can a Christian ever "stop believing" in Christ? They can say they do, but they can't. I can say I'm not married and act like it, but my wife would set me straight about it. What I say and what I do does not change that fact.
In the same way we are the bride of Christ. We can say we are not married, and even act like it, but that does not change the fact of the matter. Jesus said that no one could pluck us out of Hid Father's hand... and that includes ourselves.
God does the saving in spite of ourselves. If salvation depended on us no one would get to heaven. Trying to make out like God saves but it is up to us to stay that way is tantamount to saying God has no power to keep what He has sealed to himself, that He has butterfingers. Jesus may have holes in His hands but He lets no one fall through.
Can I not love God?
- Yes.
- Yes, I have even cursed Him with clenched fists.
- No, it made me a disobedient and hateful child.
- No, He drew me to Himself and restored my relationship with Him.
- No, I am His and have been since the day I accepted Christ's offer of Salvation.
God is bigger than the box we try to put Him in, and more powerful than the limitations we try to impose on Him.
Drfuss: Me4Him, I did not respond to your posts because I did not see where your posts were applicable to my part of the discussion on this thread. My discussion was responding to the OP which questioned why issues such as ES keep coming up in churches and Bible study; which implied that there are Christians in ES churches that do not believe in ES.
Being a Christian that has attended an ES church for over 16 years and does not subscribe to ES, I thought I could shed some light on why Non-ES Christians have no problem attending ES churches. Your posts did not address this issue.
The difference between my Non-ES view and the ES church I attend is a matter of different definitions and terminology. We both believe a person must be trusting Christ when he dies to be saved. The difference is how we describe a “Christian” who stops believing in Christ. My ES church says he was not a Christian in the first place or he would not have stopped believing. I believe he was a Christian that stopped believing and as an unbeliever when he dies, has forfeited his salvation.
Charles Stanley believes a True Christian can stop trusting Christ (as I do), but he believes he will still be saved even though he dies as an unbeliever (I don‘t).
So we are discussing three different beliefs.
1. The normal SBC ES belief that a True Christian will endure to the end, i.e. he wasn’t a True Christian if he stopped believing. However, he must be a believer when he dies to get to heaven.
2. My Non-ES belief that a True Christian can stop believing and will forfeit his salvation if he is an unbeliever when he dies. He must be a believer when he dies to get to heaven.
3. Stanley’s belief that a True Christian can stop believing, but will still be saved even if he dies as an unbeliever. He does not have to be a believer when he dies to get to heaven.
All three beliefs are based on interpretation of the same scriptures.
Consider the following.
Beliefs #1 @ #2 agree that a person must be a believer when he dies to get to heaven, which is a basic, essential Christian belief. The only difference between #1 @ #2 is how the person who stops believing is described, i.e. different definitions and terminology,
Beliefs #1 @ #3 use the same definitions and terminology, but actually have very different beliefs, i.e. if a person must be a believer when he dies to go to heaven. This is a major difference between these two beliefs.
As a Non-ES believer, I have no problem attending a church that believes in the normal SBC ES because I believe the same in the beliefs that count. I just use different terminology and definitions. On the other hand, it would be more difficult to attend a church that holds to Belief #3, since that belief violates a basic Christian doctrine (IMO), i.e. people who are not believers when they die can go to heaven.
I hope this helps in explaining my previous posts.
Being a Christian that has attended an ES church for over 16 years and does not subscribe to ES, I thought I could shed some light on why Non-ES Christians have no problem attending ES churches. Your posts did not address this issue.
The difference between my Non-ES view and the ES church I attend is a matter of different definitions and terminology. We both believe a person must be trusting Christ when he dies to be saved. The difference is how we describe a “Christian” who stops believing in Christ. My ES church says he was not a Christian in the first place or he would not have stopped believing. I believe he was a Christian that stopped believing and as an unbeliever when he dies, has forfeited his salvation.
Charles Stanley believes a True Christian can stop trusting Christ (as I do), but he believes he will still be saved even though he dies as an unbeliever (I don‘t).
So we are discussing three different beliefs.
1. The normal SBC ES belief that a True Christian will endure to the end, i.e. he wasn’t a True Christian if he stopped believing. However, he must be a believer when he dies to get to heaven.
2. My Non-ES belief that a True Christian can stop believing and will forfeit his salvation if he is an unbeliever when he dies. He must be a believer when he dies to get to heaven.
3. Stanley’s belief that a True Christian can stop believing, but will still be saved even if he dies as an unbeliever. He does not have to be a believer when he dies to get to heaven.
All three beliefs are based on interpretation of the same scriptures.
Consider the following.
Beliefs #1 @ #2 agree that a person must be a believer when he dies to get to heaven, which is a basic, essential Christian belief. The only difference between #1 @ #2 is how the person who stops believing is described, i.e. different definitions and terminology,
Beliefs #1 @ #3 use the same definitions and terminology, but actually have very different beliefs, i.e. if a person must be a believer when he dies to go to heaven. This is a major difference between these two beliefs.
As a Non-ES believer, I have no problem attending a church that believes in the normal SBC ES because I believe the same in the beliefs that count. I just use different terminology and definitions. On the other hand, it would be more difficult to attend a church that holds to Belief #3, since that belief violates a basic Christian doctrine (IMO), i.e. people who are not believers when they die can go to heaven.
I hope this helps in explaining my previous posts.
drfuss said:
Many people disagree with "Court" decisions simply because they don't understand the "principles of law", and the Bible is a "book of Laws".
1Ti 1:7 Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.
The "LAW" requires a "Death" to pay the wages (fine) for any "sin/Violation",
Repenting/asking forgiveness won't fulfil (pay the fine) what the law requires.
Jesus fulfilled the law for the sins of the "whole world", beginning to end,
To Lose salvation, you would have to commit a sin for which Jesus did not pay the wages.
The law was fulfilled, not only for your sins prior to your being saved but also for all sins committed after you were saved,
Since this law of "death for sin" doesn't apply to the saved, it might as well not exist, you're not under (guilty) the law of death for sin,
and where there is "NO LAW", sin "IS NOT" imputed.
God's "GRACE" doesn't hold us accountable to the law,
Jesus was held accountable "for us" and the "wages" (fine) for our violation/sin was paid "IN FULL" by him.
The Bible doesn't mince words, when it says "Eternal", it's means "Eternal".
Joh 10:28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish,
"Works" have no influence, either leading to salvation nor leading away from salvation.
Me4Him said:
drfuss: I still don't understand the purpose of your post. Bacically, I agree with everything in your post for those who continue to believe. However, only Catholic church theology includes commiting sins or lack of works to affect one's salvation. I am not Catholic. So let's eliminate Catholic beliefs.
Concerning losing one's salvation, only the Wesleyan Arminians believe a Christian can lose his salvation; and that has nothing to do with committing sins or lack of works. Wesleyan Arminians believe that one can lose his salvation by, over a period of time, refusing to confess, repent and be remorseful for known sins. Your post implies that Non-ES Christians believe sins and works have something to do with retaining your salvation, which is not true. BTW, I am not a Wesleyan Arminian.
This is not to say that some Arminians and ES Christians do not slip into the trap of putting too much emphasis on works and sins after salvation. I have not found the theological belief of any major denomination that believes that sins and works after salvation, affects a Christian's continued salvation. Of course, there are always small groups out there that believe anything.
I consider myself a Classic Arminian that believes a Christian can forfeit his salvation by deciding to stop believing, See my previous post.
Either you're In Christ or you're not. Romans 8:1 tells what happens to those who are In Christ. How fast you turn a believer into a non-believer. Then he forfeits his salvation. What do think this is a softball game? You under estimate the cross of Jesus Christ and the power of God's grace. :thumbsup: :jesus: