Perseverence of the Saints

Hey, we agree again! :laugh: :thumbs:

 

the veil is being lifted... :laugh:

 

You seem to be implying that faith is putting belief to action. Why would someone who believes not have faith? Doesn't make sense.

 

Did you read my analogy? There are plenty of people who perish in fires due to that very reason. Why? Fear, possibly. Other factors include self reliance, denial and hardening to the truth. None of that necessarily means they don't believe the facts, but the facts (that which are "believed") are put second to other influences.

 

Edit for Repost.

 

And just when I was typing a response.

What does it mean to believe for awhile? Some translations say temporary.

What do you say "fall away" means? Some translations say stumble.

 

The problem isn't what "believe for a while" means but what "fall away" means. You are the one with the problem here. In order to believe one must be regenerated ACCORDING TO CALVINISM. These people here obviously believed, hence they HAD TO have been, according to Calvinism, regenerated. And if they
believe, AND THEY DID, they according to Calvinism they were regenerated and regenerated people who believe are saved, ACCORDING to Calvinism. So they how can they be temporary believers? They can't, according to CALVINISM because to call them "temporary believers" is to deny they were regenerated and believed the gospel, yet to believe the gospel Calvinism teaches you have to be regenerated first. As you can see the problems for CALVINISM are voluminous here.

"For a while believe and...fall away" simply represents a person who falls away from the faith.

When a person believes on the Lord Jesus Christ they are saved. Remember, what keeps them saved...The INTEGRITY of Christ, not whether they maintain THEIR FAITH.

These are believers who have not maintained their FAITH and fall away from their faith but are with certainty saved because it isn't the maintenance of their faith that KEEPS them saved but the integrity of Christ.

Because Calvinism has taught you, erroneously, that believers can only be described as fruitful, you are in a fix here because here a person believes but falls away, yet you KNOW that if someone is a believer they cannot lose their salvation so you are left with trying to explain away how this person isn't really a believer, though he is clearly described as one that has believed.

Again,"For a while believe and...fall away" simply represents a person who falls away from the faith. To fall away from your faith does not mean to lose your salvation because that isn't possible since it is Christ that keeps you saved and not yourself.

 

How does one "fall away from their faith"? I have heard that before, but it has never made sense to me. Are you saying that one can stop believing? Is that how you interpret "believe for awhile"?

I never said that we maintain our own faith. Far from it. I have always said that God preserves us. Our faith comes from Him. He keeps us saved. We do not keep ourselves saved.

 

But simple faith alone does not save. Faith must be accompanied by a born again experience which results in a life-long relationship with Jesus Christ. AQs James said:

Jam 2:19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
Jam 2:20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

 

Of course we have to be born again. I have never said otherwise.

 

Actually what the text shows is that they professed belief. Jesus' words are meant to show that profession of faith without continuing in the faith is indeed no faith at all. And His words were meant to warn even His own disciples against a false profession of faith, to show that even those whom He had chosen(for discipleship, but not for salvation) could be thought of as His own yet not manifest saving faith(ie. Judas).
This parable poses no problem for Calvinism, since only the truly regenerate are preserved by the God who has elected them and given them to His Son for eternal keeping. John 6 and 17.

Again, you're barking up the wrong tree. If they truly believed, then they would have continued in their belief and would have manifest the works of someone who believes. IOW, their faith would have become evident by the fruit they bore. The fact remains that they did not truly believe. Their profession proved to be false, therefore they are unregenerate and even subject to further condemnation.

And that is the nonLordship position's biggest error. To give credence to a profession that show itself to be false. God saves people for a purpose and that is to give His Son a people who will glorify Him now and for all eternity. To propose that God saves some who fall away from their faith goes against the whole point of redemption.
And you should know better.
In Phil. 2:12-13, Paul exhorts the believers to "continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you to will and to act according to His good purpose."
You fail to account for how God preserves His people in the faith. It is by His own working in them that He accomplishes His purposes.
People are not saved just so they don't go to hell. They are saved to glorify God and to make His name great for all eternity.
"Unfruitful believers" do not exist in the teaching of the Bible.
It is a category dreamed up by dispensationalists and non-calvinists to accomodate their low view of sin and redemption.

No, Alex, that's what the Bible teaches. It leaves no option for the believer. Bear fruit with fear and trembling. Don't presume on God's grace, lest you like the unbelieving Israelites be cut-off.
1 John 2:19-20 warns that there will be those who profess(referrred to as antichrists) yet John tells his flock, if the antichrists had remained then they would belong, the fact that they left proves that they never belonged.
And again in 2 John 8-9, he warns them:
"watch out that you do not lose what you have worked for, but that you may be fully rewarded." Obviously not a reference to salvific works, but of fruitful works of righteousness expected of the believer. He continues: "Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of Christ does not have God; whoever continues in the teaching has both the Father and the Son."

So your statement below, is at direct odds with the clear teaching of the apostle John.

Those who do not continue in the teaching do not have the Son.
They have nothing except more condemnation for their false profession.

I loathe this unBiblical teaching that gives false assurance to many, brings confusion into the people of God and perverts His Word.

I suggest you study Jesus' own words in John 2:23-24 and again in 8:31 and following.

Notice the criteria Jesus gives for recognizing true belief?
Holding to His teaching.
Continuing in the faith.
Your statements again are at odds with the clear teaching of the Word of Jesus Christ.

Jesus gives no credence to their profession of belief. He shows them to be what they really are, unbelievers, who are sons of Satan, not the sons of God that they claimed to be.

People who profess belief and yet do not continue in that faith are deceived. Their desperately wicked hearts deceive them into believing that they believe even though they manifest no fruit or works of faith. And we would all do well to heed James words.
James 2:14:
"What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such a faith save him?

Repent from your position, Alex.
It serves you no good purpose.

 

While I do not share Alex's opinion of the passages in question, he view is not one that is lightly dismissed. Some take it beyond the extent which Alex explains (as far as I understand him), to that of losing ones salvation. Alex has said this is not his contention, but that there are believers who will not be profitable. I can agree and disagree with him here. I agree that there are and will be some believers who are not profitable or bearing fruit but only for a time. My contention is that as a believer who is slothful and in sin (thus unfruitful and not walking in the Spirit) God will do one of two things with that believer -
1. discipline them through chastening and or
2. allow their death.

While I agree with you in the main, but you have a problem stating all one disciple but was saved during Christs earthly ministry.

I can show you that none of the disciples were saved while with Christ (in the NT sense) until after the resurrection of Christ because they did not understand why and what Christ must do but were in unbelief. They did not beleive the gospel because there was none yet.
1. Because Christ had not yet died and rose again. This is the gospel message. His death is our justification and we are spiritually buried with Him into His death.
2. Because scripture states they did not believe but were in unbelief until Christ revealed Himself to them after the resurrection.
3. The Holy Spirit was not yet given, who places them into the body of Christ and seals them in Christ their salvation.
and many others as well.
However, this would equate to Alex's view as those in faith before, then fell away, (but then my contention comes into play) they are renewed again to faith. However with the disciples they were renewed to a full understanding of things and thus a place of real faith in the Gospel of the Risen Christ.

None of them believed He rose from the dead. Mark 16:14 They went back to their old lives. And they fled in the midst of persecution. All of these things they never did again after the resurrection and revealing of Himself to them, and expounding of the word as to who He was and was to do.

It does, but in the sense Alex sets it forth in accordance with his rendering of the passage. There are better passages that contend his point and mine in a lesser way.
That not all believers will automatically and always bear fruit, and live godly, and righteous lives. Otherwise, you have a serious biblical problem explaining why we can grieve the Holy Ghost, and why the Apostles and Christ continuously exhort, and plead for believers to continue in faith both in word and deed. If it was so simple as be saved and your now righteous, holy, and full of faith then why so much exhortation, warning, and pleading. Why so many warnings for us believers TO continue and NOT fall away into slothfulness and fruitlessness?
Answer: because we can grieve the Spirit of God through sin and unrighteousness - literally being carnal and not spiritual (1 Cor 3:1-3, 14,15). And if we are walking in the flesh then we are NOT walking in the Spirit whereby the fruit of the Spirit is cultivated and manifested.

I agree with your above, with clarifications. They CAN come to a place in their life where they are not fruitful, and not continuing as a believer aught. Will they maintain that aspect? No, because God loves us and will chasten us, but that does not discard the fact it can and does happen. But God can also kill that believer who stays in sin after the Lords chastening. REmember also Paul and the CHurch of Corinth. The guy who was sleeping with his step mother. He was removed from the fellowship of believers (there were not even permitted to eat with him) and Paul stated he gives him over to Satan for the destruction of the body that the spirit may be saved in the Day of the Lord. (1 Cor 5). There are many examples of this temporary aspect. But I agree that the believer will come back from their sin and into a right relationship with God or God will take them out for His glory and names sake.

Agreed here as well IF ALEX meant to say their faith being equated with their salvation. But he did not. Scirpture is replete with warnings of not continuing. Why are there warnings, exhortations, et.. if there was no chance of a 'temporarily' setting it aside. (by this I mean our consistancy in the walk). To assume this does not or could not happen is blindness of the scirptures.

Yes, God does. But at the same time we can and do grieve the Holy the Spirit of promise. How if God is working in them to both do and will to act? Is God making them greive His Spirit? No. So God is not making them but giving them the desire and ability to fulfill His purpose for them, but THEY still must choose to obey.

You verse is a good one in what I was speaking of in the above. Why the warning if all believers will continue without fail and do nothing but bear fruit. Because that is not the case and why Paul states work out our salvation - with fear and trembling -. WHy should a child of God - fear and tremble - if we are garrenteed to walk in faith and fruitfullness??

He also did not say they had NO fruit. No one has stated this. He was saying (and I disagree) they can come to a point of faithlessness (no spiritual works) thus bearing NO MORE spiritual fruit.
The emobled however is written for one of 2 reasons:
1. Your misunderstanding of their view - Therefore take it back because it is a gross exageration of misrepresentation.
2. Willfully misrepresenting them - therefore repent and take it back.

It is about the same as me saying Calvinistic doctrines were dreamed up by Post and A-millinniumist to accomadate their low view of a literal rendering of scripture.

We both know that is non-sense so don't try to attribute it to others either by making such reprehensible claims of having a low view of sin and redemption. That is either a misinformed accusation or an out-right and blantant lie.

Actaully, as stated previously, it is a warning to continue. Just like Pauls exhortation not to grow weary in doing what is right. Why say that if it isn't possible to grow weary and no longer do it (at least for at time - in my view)

Exactly, but this is not about a temporary time but a life (style).
Notice he qualifies who 'they' (antichrists are in a few verse down), as those who deny Christ. They left because they deny Christ is who He said He was and what He did. Alex is not talking (to my knowledge) these people stop believing in Christ but that they fall out of living a life of faith. I might be wrong and Alex can correct me but that is not what I understood him as saying.

Another aspect is this:
As a church when one is in sin and does not repent after being confronted by one, we are to take two or three, and if they STILL will not repent, we are to bring them before the church. And if they STILL will not repent, we are to remove them from fellowship. Are we to do it permenantly, and never let them back? No. But until they publically repent we are to have no fellowship with them. Once we remove them due to 'sin', in seeing they will not repent so to come back, we can know they were never of us. But if they do repent we know they were of us. But while in sin, just how fruitful was their christian life, and how full of faith was it?

 

Second part:

That depends on definition of 'continue in that faith' is.
What do you mean by that?

No question there, but that is not what Alex was contending.
It can also be said "what good is it to debate if people will not listen to what you actaully say but instead go with what 'they think' you meant."

One can only repent if one is in sin. Maybe you could shep some light on the sin he has commited?

 

Amy, I will do two things here. Provide a brief answer and then deal with the entire parable in Luke.

First Peter describes one falling away in 2 Peter 3:17

Peter is obviously and contextually speaking to believers and makes it clear they can be lead away with the error OF THE WICKED. And the consequence is to fall from their stedfastness (the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ).

Secondly, the parable. Luke 8

First what must be determined is what is being believed. What does the context show is being communicated. Verse 1 and verses 11 &12 reveal the setting and context of the parable.

(Glad tidings = euaggelizō)
So in this evangelizing setting a parable is given and verse 11 & 12 make clear what is being communicated and believed in the parable, The Gospel, referred to as "the Word of God". The reason we know it is the Gospel is specifically verse 12, "lest they should believe and be saved".

What is in question is the remainder of the parable regarding who is saved and who isn't. So we will examine the critical portion.

1. The text treats only one of the four as those not believing and being saved. That is in verse 12, "lest they should believe and be saved".

2. The second consideration and what is being disputed are those that "receive the word with joy but have no root and believe and fall away". What is it they are believing? The context CANNOT suddenly changed. Clearly the GOSPEL is what is being communicated in the parable. Verse 12 makes it clear the "The Word of God" is a general term used to describe the Gospel since it is clear in verse 12 what is being communicated, if it is believed one will be saved.

In spite of this some ask, so what does "receive with joy" mean? Look at the verse, it means believe. It defines it for you in the verse, "they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe". It makes it clear that they BELIEVED. What happens when one believes? They are saved. Look at verse 12 again, "lest they should believe and be saved".

There is not suddenly a new and different definition of believe. Believe is being treated for just what it is, believing the gospel. They received it with joy (believed) and through temptation fell away from their faith.

But notice critically, "these have no root". That clearly means they certainly germinated and sprung to life. They indeed came to life and as you will see, like the next believer described, they had a stunted growth. This just occurred sooner than those that did not have fruit to perfection.

Falling away does NOT MAKE a person unsaved. FALLING AWAY describes a person's thoughts and actions toward Christ, NOT CHRIST'S thoughts and actions toward them. They departed to serve temptation just as Peter describes believers falling to serve error.

3. Then there are those that bring no fruit to perfection. They are choked by the cares and riches of this world. This describes a person who has some growth but not enough for mature fruit. The previous person had growth to the point of seeking stability and rootedness but did not and fell away. This one finds rootedness but fails to produce mature fruit. This is another description of stunted growth. And this particularly type of believer isn't being argued much so I won't park here.

4. The final believer is being presented as the desirable believer. The mature one producing fruit with patience because they "kept the Word".

 

In the parable of the sower, I see two groups of people. The same seed was sown in both groups.

Group one: verses 12, 13 and 14 (Luke 8), the seed never took root.

Group two: verse 15, the seed took root.

In group one, the soil was bad (the heart). The seed could not take root in this group's hearts.

In group two, the heart was prepared and the seed took root and thrived.

In verse 15, the seed survived. In the other verses, the seed did not survive.
Verse 12: the seed was snatched away.
Verse 13: the seed did not take root (plants can't live without roots)
Verse 14: the seed was choked out/killed.
Verse 15: the seed survived because of the good soil/heart it was planted in.

This is how I interpret the parable of the sower.


Group one was not saved.

Group two was saved.



How can you say that people are saved if the word of God has never taken root in their hearts?

 

Lest we forget:

The NLT puts it this way:

Since the above verse is specific to salvation, the question must be asked:
Can one believe in vain or better have an empty belief regarding salvation.

1 Cor 15 goes hand in hand with the portion of the parable being expounded upon here.

Belief does not always equate with salvation. There were many Jews who scripture states believed in Jesus but eventually left him.

 

Actually Amy, verse 14 does not say in any manner choked 'out' or that it is referencing death.
The word in the Greek is
sympnigō - and it means :

Don't be confused by the word 'utterly' which means simply they are fully choking but not dead due to choking.

This one can be argued biblically of the believer who who becomes entangled by the cares of this world and is not single minded. Does this mean however that they will not come out. I don't believe so. I see these passages refering to the kinds of lives that are seen with regard to the gospel message over all.
1. Those who get the word taken from them because they do nothing with it. (Indifferent to it).

2. Those who believed but their belief was a vain one because it could not last.

3. Is a believer who is entangled in the cares of this world and thus their spiritual life is feeble, weak, wearied due to constant fighting, struggling, and no room to grow with everything else in their lives. So though there is fruit it is not the mature fruit of a mature true, who is strong, pruned, and well spaced from the weeds that will kill it. Thus able to grow, mature and bear forth mature fruit.

4. Is of course the ideal believers life.

 

But the context of the parable clearly presents believing equal to believing the gospel and being saved.

Those that "receive the word with joy but have no root and believe and fall away". What is it they are believing? The context CANNOT suddenly changed. Clearly the GOSPEL is what is being communicated in the parable. Verse 12 makes it clear the "The Word of God" is a general term used to describe the Gospel since it is clear in verse 12 what is being communicated, if it is believed one will be saved.

In spite of this some ask, so what does "receive with joy" mean? Look at the verse, it means believe. It defines it for you in the verse, "they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe". It makes it clear that they BELIEVED. What happens when one believes? They are saved. Look at verse 12 again, "lest they should believe and be saved".

The passage in 1 Corinthians is dealing with "believing for no reason" or in vain. Paul uses this same description in talking about preaching the gospel while denying the resurrection.

Here is what he says and it is contextually defined:

In other words, if the resurrection is denied (that is the context here) then both preaching the gospel and believing it are in vain, or for nothing if the resurrection didn't really happen. But it did so it is not in vain. He is simply making a point to those that were denying the resurrection.

 

Taking root is analogous to stability, not birth. The plant came to life. Many plants come to life. Some fall because they don't take root but they still come to life.

The key is the earlier verse that show those who AREN'T saved, the ones that had the seed stolen that never came to life, least they believe and be saved.

 

Well that is your position regarding them being saved.
I do not dispute they believed, what I dispute is the type of belief your are equating it with is all.

I have not said it did.

I have not contended otherwise.

What it makes clear is they believed for a while. You do realize this means that after that 'while' where they did believe the gospel, they NO LONGER believed the GOSPEL message. Thus the believed for 'a while' and then fell away. Not that they believed for a while but did nothing more with it. It is the phrase 'believed for a while' that is important here because of the implication of what they no longer believed after that and thus their falling away - which implies desertion, shunning, departure from.

Q. What happens when one no longer believes the gospel of salvation that saves?
Answer: ??
Q. Can one be saved and not believe the Gospel?
Answer: ??

You are right that this parable is about the Gospel and this is precisely what they no longer believe in/about. Not just that they believed but just as importantly that they believed no longer.

True, I got it mixed up with Kenos, the word for 'vain' in the resurrection portion.

However, the main thrust of the sentence still stands. You are saved IF YOU KEEP... Therefore, what do you presume happens to one (according to this) who does not keep that faith in gospel whereby they were saved.

Notice also, that it has all the elements of parable passage we are discussing. So it's relevence is specific.

Do you see that it still maintains what I was getting at. If you no longer believe (keep in memory) the gospel it establishes you were never saved, thus saved is stated with an "IF" you keep/believe what was preached. "IF" not you are not saved.

Therefore it is the difference between a mental accent (head knowledge) of the truth which changes easily if the argument is convincing enough, and a heart of conviction about the truth, which will not budge regardless of the argument. Only one of the two will save you.