Positions on Assurance

[IfbReformer]

Originally posted by Pete Richert:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> So Gunther - based on passages like Ephesians chapter 1(because there are many others as well) isn't our salvation(including glorifaction and presense with Christ) settled in heaven the moment we believe?

Gunther can answer for himself but I want to take a quick stab at this one. I agree with what you said, the glorifacation and presense with Christ are settled in heaven the moment we believe, guareenteed first off by the depost of the Holy Spirit. I think Schreiner would agree with that. But that doesn't take away from the fact that some of that salvation is still future, including glorification and presense with Christ that you grouped with salvation. "He who began a good work in you will complete it . . . (Philippians 1:6)" tells us three things. It is a certainty that it will happen, God is doing it, and it is still in the process of happening. In 1 Peter 1:3-7 our inheritance is labeled imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, but it is also future, being made ready to be revealed on the last day. But in the same breath we know we will reach it because we "are being protected by the power of God". Pretty good protection last time I checked.

Adoption is also future for "...we ourselves, who have the first fruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly while we wait for adoption, the redemption of our bodies." But then again, the aspect of salvation is sealed by God, indeed, the very next verse says, "for in this hope we were saved" past tense. Oh sorry, Romans 8:23-24.

I am indeed saved from hell, as that is no longer an option for my destination. But I am not yet saved completly from my sin as I continue to do so. And that is my number one hope for my eschotological future, to be completely free from sin so I can love God as I was meant to.

Now that I read this post, I don't think any of these are good examples of future salvation. Let me find some better ones. </font>[/QUOTE]Pete,

I really think the problem with "Means of Salvation" position as well as the "Lordship" position is very similar.

The problem is "double talk" you try and have it both ways but in the end you cannot.

For instance MacArthur says:

"Salvation is both free and costly"
(“The Gospel According to Jesus”, John MacArthur page 147)

Salvation cannot be free and cost something. It is either free or it costs something.

"If we wish to represent the New Testament correctly, we cannot say that eternal life is exclusively a present or future gift. It is both present and future. We already possess eternal life by believing in Jesus as the Christ, yet we will not inherit eternal life nor aquire the inheritance of eternal life until the last day."
-Schreiner
("The Race Set Before Us", page 67)

We either have eternal life or we don't. Schreiner makes eternal life into some slippery substance that no one can be sure he grasps. When we say we have eternal life, it means right now I have pardon from my sins. I could die tommorow or or 60 years from now and I will have pardon from my sins. When I say I have eternal life(even though glorifaction comes later) it is guarenteed that it will come.

Schreiner distorts the obvious fact that our glorifacation is in the future and trys to make salvation into a process rather than an event as Ephesians 1 clearly states.

The interesting thing about MacArthur and Schreiner also - is that they are constantly throughout their books trying to assure their readers that they are not teaching works based salvation.

That says something - because they know they are so close to works salvation and no what their words sound like - that why they keep stopping to assure their readers that they are not when in fact they are so close....

If it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck...

IFBReformer

 

[Pete Richert]

The problem is "double talk" you try and have it both ways but in the end you cannot.

I accept that. I admit that I see a tension in scipture, an already and not yet to our salvation. It is not the first place such tension exists in the scripture. Pauls tells us we are holy, so be holy. Paul tells us Holy Spirit gives gifts to who he chooses, but later says, seek after the greater gifts. And my favorite tension in scipture, Jesus is FULLY GOD and FULLY human. I am very happy to have THAT both ways and I CAN.

The interesting thing about MacArthur and Schreiner also - is that they are constantly throughout their books trying to assure their readers that they are not teaching works based salvation.

That says something - because they know they are so close to works salvation and no what their words sound like - that why they keep stopping to assure their readers that
they are not when in fact they are so close....

First off, let's not forget that both these men are calvinists. They do not believe any of the good works of which God prepared before hand for us has anything to do with our merit or striving after them. And second of all, all of these works are nothing more the practicial applications of actually trusting in Jesus, namely, having faith. Obedience is simply true faith going public. If I belive (trust, have faith in, pisteo if you will) what Jesus says is true, I will follow it. Everytime I don't I betray that I don't really believe Him.

But finnally, I admit, it IS close to works-salvation, in a sense. Or it sounds a lot like it and makes us all very uncomferable. But let's not tose it out simply because it doesn't fit with our overephesised Reformed position. These men are simply dealing with every aspect of scripture, even the parts that don't easily fit into a classic Reformed understanding.

Anyway, I wouldn't group MacArthur and Schreiner together on this anyway, as MacArthur is not a means guy. I happen to side with him on the nessicity of repentence. It is not a work, it is simply that if I haven't repented, what DO I trust Jesus for? If I don't realize I need to be saved, how can I say I trust Jesus to save me. "I trust Jesus to save me, of what I am not sure, because I have not done anything wrong!" That is nonsense.

 

[Gunther]

Originally posted by IfbReformer:
1. Schreiner equates "treasures in heaven" and "reward" with eternal salvation. He says throughout his book that they are synonomous.

2. The faultiness of this position is shown by passages like the one we are discussing now.

3. If it true as Schreiner proposes that treasures in heaven and rewards are synonmous with eternal life than what "loss" will he "suffer" but yet still be saved.

1. Maybe they are.

2. This doctrine is not built upon one passage and does not collapse with one passage.

3. It is certainly possible that there are in fact degrees of the ability to enjoy eternal life. Your personal life as a believer may contribute to your enjoyment of eternal life. That is not to say that all people will not be amazed beyond imagination.

Anyway, the "loss" is what could have been.

This is actually the same as when I held your view. It isn't that something is taken away, but because the potential is there, and you could have taken it, and didn't, you lost out of that.

For example, your name is entered into a drawing for a new car. Your name is chosen. All you have to do, is pick it up. You wait. You stall. You never show up. They give it to someone else. I could say you lost that car even though you never had it. You see what I mean?

 

[Gunther]

Originally posted by IfbReformer:
1. The two most destructive elements of the "Means of Salvation" position from my own studies of scripture is the fluidness(like a process not settled) with which they represent salvation...

2. ...and making the "prize", "treasures in heaven" and rewards equal to eternal life.

1. This is a point that I think you are missing here.

Salvation is a point in time event that will definitely continue until the end. No one is denying that once a person is justified, that he is forever saved, born again, redeemed, etc. What we are saying is that salvation includes more than initial justification. That is just the beginning. Salvation also includes being conformed to Christs image, growing in knowledge, growing in victory over sin, growing in worship, etc. Salvation also includes a time in the future whereby Christ will judge true believers as victorious over sin and absolutely righteous. It is this final aspect that most of the N.T. either looks toward or speaks about.

Notice what Paul says in the following text:

Romans 2:5c-10

5c God,
6 who WILL RENDER TO EACH PERSON ACCORDING TO HIS DEEDS:
7 to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life;
8 but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation.
9 There will be tribulation and distress for every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek,
10 but glory and honor and peace to everyone who does good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.

Pay close attention to verse 7. God will REWARD with eternal life certain people. Who are these people? Those those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality.

Either that is works salvation, or it is saying that those people who are saved will incorporate into their lives such things and by doing so, will be rewarded with eternal life.

This does not in any way deny faith alone in Christ alone. It does say that those who truly believe will do such things. That is in NO WAY works. You see why it can be easily confused though.

2. I think this passage answers your second objection also.

 

[Gunther]

bump

 

[IfbReformer]

Originally posted by Gunther:
Notice what Paul says in the following text:

Romans 2:5c-10

5c God,
6 who WILL RENDER TO EACH PERSON ACCORDING TO HIS DEEDS:
7 to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life;
8 but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation.

Pay close attention to verse 7. God will REWARD with eternal life certain people. Who are these people? Those those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality.

Either that is works salvation, or it is saying that those people who are saved will incorporate into their lives such things and by doing so, will be rewarded with eternal life.

This does not in any way deny faith alone in Christ alone. It does say that those who truly believe will do such things. That is in NO WAY works. You see why it can be easily confused though.

2. I think this passage answers your second objection also.

Gunther,

Sorry I did not get back to you sooner, I have been very busy at work and home.

First of in Romans 2, "rendered" is not the same as reward and in fact the NIV translates it correctly that way:

"6God "will give to each person according to what he has done." 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. 8But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger."
Romans 2:6-7(NIV)

Also I agree that at face value verse 6 seems to suggest a works based salvation. But since we have the rest of the New Testament to contradict that interpretation we must take a second look at it.

Lets look at Romans chapter 4:

"4Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation. 5However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness. 6David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:"
Romans 4:4-5(NIV)

At face value this passage would seem to tell me to sit on my duff and trust God and don't do anything. If I work at all then I am not trusting God for my salvation. But you and I both know that is not what it is saying. It is telling us that we should not be trusting in our works for our salvation.

Verse 4 tells us that if we are working for our salvation, really if they have anything to do with our salvation, then it is not really a gift of God, but an obligation. That is my big beef with both the Means of Salvation theory and the Lordship Salvation theory - you make works part of the Salvation process. You are careful like MacArther to say that works do not "merit" our salvation but with all you language you are saying works maintain or prove our salvation.

You said it yourself -"Salvation also includes being conformed to Christs image, growing in knowledge, growing in victory over sin, growing in worship, etc..".

You know what the real argument is in all this "Means of Salvation", "Lordship Salvation" and "Free Grace Salvation" is?

What is our motive for practical sanctifaction? What is our motive for holy living and doing God's will in our meager 70+ years on this planet?

Lordship says - it proves you are truly saved.

Means says - its part of the salvation process.

Free Grace says - we do it to experiance the joy of our salvation, for the blessing of God here on earth and for final future rewards(not eternal life).

The Lordship and Means theories both use fear as a motive, it I am not good enough then maybe I am not Christian - or that sort of thinking.

Free Grace says love is our motive, for we are no longer under condemnation and the only work or good deed God requires of us for eternal life is what Jesus said to the crowd in John chapter 6:

"28Then they asked him, "What must we do to do the works God requires?"
29Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.""
John 6:28-29(NIV)


IFBReformer

 

[IfbReformer]

Originally posted by Gunther:
Anyway, the "loss" is what could have been.

This is actually the same as when I held your view. It isn't that something is taken away, but because the potential is there, and you could have taken it, and didn't, you lost out of that.

Gunther,

That salvation includes more than justifacation I would agree you. That true salvation produces fruit we would also agree.
But is this fruit always visible? and is the change always continuing, always going forward?

In other words do we always grow to the same point? And can we stop growing?


Lets look again at
I Corinthians 3:11-15(NIV)
"11For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12If any man builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, 13his work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each man's work. 14If what he has built survives, he will receive his reward. 15If it is burned up, he will suffer loss; he himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through the flames."

You said that you believe there could be "degrees of the ability to enjoy eternal life". This concept is found no where in the New Testament. The concept of rewards however is found all throughout the New Testament.

Verse 11 says our foundation is Christ - no man can lay a foundation other than Christ. Is this saying other people don't have other foundations? No, but they are not built on the rock. It is saying that no true Christian can have any other foundation that Christ.

But a true Christian can build with "gold, silver, costly stones" - representing those works which are done through faith.(on this much we agree)

But is also says "14If what he has built survives, he will receive his reward." - if it "survives" - this is the key. You say the "reward" in this verse is synonomous with eternal life.

But you forget that this man's foundation is Christ - and Paul points out that if his work is "burned up" he will "suffer loss" - this loss can only refer to the "reward" mentioned in the previous verse. You say the "loss" is a quality of eternal life - but this does not fit with the context here.

Consider again the phrase "burned up" - there will be nothing left. It does not say that "some of his work works are burned up". If none of his work "survives"(vs 14) then he will "suffer loss"(vs.15) this clearly refers to the "reward" in verse 14. But he will still be saved.

So in this passage we see works that are tried and reward and loss and salvation. There is no way any reading of this passage could make the "reward" in verse 14 equal to the "he himself will be saved" in verse 15.

IFBReformer

 

[IfbReformer]

Originally posted by Pete Richert:

...But finnally, I admit, it IS close to works-salvation, in a sense. Or it sounds a lot like it and makes us all very uncomferable. But let's not tose it out simply because it doesn't fit with our overephesised Reformed position. These men are simply dealing with every aspect of scripture, even the parts that don't easily fit into a classic Reformed understanding.

Anyway, I wouldn't group MacArthur and Schreiner together on this anyway, as MacArthur is not a means guy. I happen to side with him on the nessicity of repentence. It is not a work, it is simply that if I haven't repented, what DO I trust Jesus for? If I don't realize I need to be saved, how can I say I trust Jesus to save me. "I trust Jesus to save me, of what I am not sure, because I have not done anything wrong!" That is nonsense.

Pete,

I agree that their are certain tentions in scripture. But when it comes to salvation there must be a certainty. After all, this is the most important thing we can know in our life - am I saved and I am going to heaven? No other doctrine or question matters more than this.

While I admire the zealousness of some men like MacArthur and Schreiner in wanting people to lead holy and productive Christian lives - I believe they are using the wrong motive for Christian living.

Our motive is not fear, it is love. We serve Christ because we love him, not because we are afraid we are not really saved or that we need to keep running or we will loose(or never really had) our salvation.

As I said to Gunther, we live Godly lives to experiance the joy of our salvation, and ultimately rewards in heaven. That is the difference between the systems - it is the motive for holy living and a productive Christian life.

Will all true Christians produce fruit? absolutely!

Will it always be in the same amount and very visible?
No not the same amount and no not always visible.

Sometimes when men like Schreiner and MacArthur try and leave "tentions" in scripture they just create "tentions" in the minds of believers instead.

IFBReformer

 

[IfbReformer]

Hey Pete and Gunther,

I wanted to address another issue in this. No matter how you explain some statements just can never be right.

Let me give you an example.

If I said "so really Jesus was not God in the flesh". Alarm bells would go off in your head - it would'nt matter how I tried to explain the validity of that statement - it could never be right.

It seems to me that Scheiner goe through all kinds of explanations to try and prove his conclusions - but if the conclusion is wrong, it does not matter all the other things you say.

For instance lets look at one statement of his:

"Persevering in godly behavior and sound teaching are necessary to obtain salvation…"
("The Race Set Before Us", page 51)

Whatever the context, that is wrong statement!

You can't explain it, it is just simply wrong.

In its context Schreiner is trying to expound upon the meaning of I Timothy 4:11-16. But once again, Paul is speaking of the saving potential of the Gospel, not the saving potential of godly behavior and sound teaching.

Schreiner is simply wrong, and it should have knocked him out his chair to see his own hand writing such a statement.

IFBReformer

 

[Pete Richert]

agree that their are certain tentions in scripture. But when it comes to salvation there must be a certainty. After all, this is the most important thing we can know in our life - am I saved and I am going to heaven? No other doctrine or question matters more than this.

While I admire the zealousness of some men like MacArthur and Schreiner in wanting people to lead holy and productive Christian lives - I believe they are using the wrong motive for Christian living.

Our motive is not fear, it is love. We serve Christ because we love him, not because we are afraid we are not really saved or that we need to keep running or we will loose(or never really had) our
salvation.

As I said to Gunther, we live Godly lives to experiance the joy of our salvation, and ultimately rewards in heaven. That is the difference between the systems - it is the motive for holy living and a
productive Christian life.

Will all true Christians produce fruit? absolutely!

Will it always be in the same amount and very visible?
No not the same amount and no not always visible.

Sometimes when men like Schreiner and MacArthur try and leave "tentions" in scripture they just create "tentions" in the minds of believers instead.

I think Jesus being fully man and fully God is pretty important to know as well but I'll let that one pass.

I'm not advocating that people need worry about their salvation. All who trust in Jesus Christ are saved. Everyone should examine themselves to see if they do indeed trust Jesus, or so says the apostle Peter.

Because truly trusting Jesus is actualized in obedience (Lordship) or obedience is part of the means by which you are finnaly saved (means) says nothing of motive. I could just as well turn around and say, your motive is to have rewards. To this you would reply, "no, we serve out of love." Just because rewards will be given does not make invalid the claim that we serve out of love.

I do not advocate that we are obedienent in order to be saved. I believe obedience in being saved, namely it is ACTUALLY trusting in Jesus Christ. If Jesus says, "I will care for all your needs" and then you go steal, then you simply don't believe what Jesus says is true. How can I believe Jesus will care for my eternal soul when I don't believe he will care for my earthy one?

People will still steal, and lie, and otherwise be disobedient, and they are still saved. It takes the faith of a mustard seed to save. But still, trusting faith is real, and it is displayed by do what God says, trusting that what He says is true.

So to sum up, obedience is not out of fear, it is simply actually trusting.

I agree with you completly that we will not all show fruit to the same degrees, or that it will always be visisble. But I disagree on what a fruit is in the first place. If someone believes in Jesus Christ, they will continue to believe in Jesus Christ. It is impossible to continue to believe in Jesus Christ without concrete experiences where that believe is acted out.

I do not doubt my salvation for a second. Whosoever believes and I do . . .

 

[IfbReformer]

Pete and Gunther,

Sorry to be blasting you with a bunch of thoughts - but they are rolling in.

Something else occured to me why I have such disagreements with the Lordship as well as Means positions:

They seem to rip the value out of Positional Sanctifaction.

I know we all know the difference between Positional and Practical Sanctifacation but for our viewing audience I will give those definitions:

Positional Sanctifaction occurs at the same time Justifacation does at the point of conversion. We are credited with the righteousness of Christ because we could never be righteous enough to inherit eternal life.

Practical Sanctifacation occurs(to verying degrees) throughout our life. Just because we are positionally sanctified does not mean we are practically sanctifed. We still sin, we still stumble. The Bible encourages us to overcome our sin nature through the power of God. But we will never truly overcome it until God gives us our glorified bodies.

We are no longer slaves to our sin nature, yet sometimes we return to obey it as Paul says:

Romans 7:18(NIV)
"I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out."

Our Positional Sanctifaction can be found in these and many other passages in the New Testament:

Romans 4:5(NIV)
"However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness".


Roman 3:21-23(NIV)
"21But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. 22This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, 23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,"

1 Corinthians 1:30(NIV)
"It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God–that is, our righteousness, holiness and redemption."

It is "because of him" that I am "in Christ Jesus". He is my "righteousness, holiness and redemption".

If the righteousness of Christ is credited to my account - what more can I add to it to "obtain salvation" as Schreiner says.

There is a reason for Practical Sanctifacation, bit it has nothing to do with the reason I need Positional Sanctifacation - which to enter eternal life.


IFBReformer

 

[Gunther]

IFBReformer, the bold portions are quotes from you.

“First of in Romans 2, "rendered" is not the same as reward and in fact the NIV translates it correctly that way…”

Correct. However, since it is a gift, and it will come at the judgment, and because of what is being given, I can still say it is a reward.

Also I agree that at face value verse 6 seems to suggest a works based salvation. But since we have the rest of the New Testament to contradict that interpretation we must take a second look at it.

I agree that it is not work based salvation. However, each passage carries with it the same amount of force. In other words, this passage is just as true and worth paying attention to as Eph. 2:8-9. People are always using their own horrible hermenuetic - i.e., I don't want to know so let's look everywhere else and see if I can lessen the force of what is being said - to justify their theology.

This passage specifically says that eternal life will be given at the judgment. That statement cannot mean anything else. Now, we do have other passages telling us that those who believe also possess it. So, there is an already/not yet tension in regards to eternal life.

At face value this passage would seem to tell me to sit on my duff and trust God and don't do anything. If I work at all then I am not trusting God for my salvation. But you and I both know that is not what it is saying. It is telling us that we should not be trusting in our works for our salvation.

Paul says that we do not work for our justification. We all agree with that.

Let me also point out that I (and Schreiner) believe that the Christian life is lived BY FAITH. The real question is what is the nature of that faith, not the object. I agree wholeheartedly with you that we do not trust in our works for salvation. Do you see anywhere where Dr. Tommy said that? I don't. If I ever saw that, I would immediately put the book down and burn it.

That is my big beef with both the Means of Salvation theory and the Lordship Salvation theory - you make works part of the Salvation process.

It would be better to say that we make it part of the nature of saving faith. That is not the same as saying it is part of salvation.

Even James asks in chapter 2, "Can that faith save him?". Then he proceeds to explain the kind of faith that does save a person.

You are careful like MacArther to say that works do not "merit" our salvation but with all you language you are saying works maintain or prove our salvation.

This would actually be part of a different discussion, but suffice it to say that Peter tells us to examine our salvation with our works/attitudes/doctrine.

There are things you "have to do" to be saved.

You must believe in Christ.
You must believe he is God and not some pretender.
You must believe that he is who he says he is.
You must believe he was virgin born.
You must believe he was sinless.

You see where I am going? None of the above is works. They do define faith and the object of saving faith though.

I am leaving work, but will reply later on the rest.

 

[IfbReformer]

Originally posted by Pete Richert:
...Because truly trusting Jesus is actualized in obedience (Lordship) or obedience is part of the means by which you are finally saved (means) says nothing of motive…

... If someone believes in Jesus Christ, they will continue to believe in Jesus Christ.

Pete,

I agree that trusting in Christ is as you say "actialized in obedience". But what kind of obedience?

Is it only "actialized" by people who attend church faithfully?

Is it only "actialized" by people who quit smoking after they are saved or get rid of other
bad habbits they had before they were saved?

Is it only "actialized" by people who attend give faithfully to their churches?

Is it only "actialized" by people who are obedient 100% of the time?

Maybe that a little to strigent..

How about we say it is only "actialized" by people who are obedient at least 80% percent of the time? Come on, thats reasonable, after all God is giving us eternal life we could at least do that right?

Could it possibly be "actialized" by people who are obedient 50% of the time?

How about people who are obedient 10% of the time? No that is much to little. That person definitely could not be saved - right?

You see this again is the problem with the Lordship and Means views - it leaves these questions in the mind a believer -

How righteous must I be to obtain eternal life?

How much sin will cost me my salvation?

Like we have said previously, we agree that all true believers will produce fruit. All true believers will be obedient to Christ. But where the question comes in is how much and how visible?

I don't know if I mentioned this earlier but just few years ago I would have almost been a Lordship proponent. I used to make lists of things in my mind and if someone failed something on that list or did something on the "True Christians can't do" list than they were not truly saved.

For example, I used to say that people who professed faith and Christ and were not faithful in their church attendance could not truly be saved.

and the list went on...

One day the Lord confronted me with a passage I had read many times but he drove it home for me -

2 Timothy 2:19
"Nevertheless, God's solid foundation stands firm, sealed with this inscription: "The Lord knows those who are his" and, "Everyone who confesses the name of the Lord must turn away from wickedness."

You see I used to concentrate only on latter part of that verse like you "Everyone who confesses the name of the Lord must turn away from wickedness.". I had my little laundry list of things people had to turn away from.

It was not just that the Lord knew who were his, I did to, and I was sure of it. But then I was confronted with that phrase, "The Lord knows those who are his". And it hit me, I am not the Lord and I do know what is in a persons heart.

It was then that I realized the real possiblity that there were people who seemed to be faithful, sitting in the pew each Sunday who were on their way to hell(because they were trusting in Christ AND their works). And it was also just as likely that their was someone sitting on their couch, and while they had not realized their true potential for Christ yet, they were completely trusting in him for their salvation and they were saved and on their way to heaven.

Having said that, I do not believe the remedy for superficial Christianity is start telling professing believers they are not saved. I believe the remedey is consistent church discipline.

If you are not faithful, you will not be given the privaledge to serve in the church. If you are living in sin or are found in sin and refuse to repent of that sin, then you are to be excommunicated.

The Lord will discipline that believer who is unrepentant about his sin. Sometimes he even takes a believer home, as he did with the Corinthians who were abusing the Lord's Supper.

And on one last quick note...

"... If someone believes in Jesus Christ, they will continue to believe in Jesus Christ."

I agree with this statement of yours fully. This is were I disagree with the Free Grace Camp at Dallas. In fact, I believe the majority of the the time, the perseverance spoken of in the New Testament is a perseverance in trusting and believing in Christ for our Salvation(as opposed to a continued perseverance in righteous living).

We may get mad at God and say rash things, but we can never truly in our heart stop believing and trusting in Christ for our Salvation if we are truly saved.

IFBReformer

 

[IfbReformer]

Gunther,

Your Statement:
"I agree that it is not work based salvation. However, each passage carries with it the same amount of force. In other words, this passage is just as true and worth paying attention to as Eph. 2:8-9. People are always using their own horrible hermenuetic - i.e., I don't want to know so let's look everywhere else and see if I can lessen the force of what is being said - to justify their theology.

This passage specifically says that eternal life will be given at the judgment. That statement cannot mean anything else. Now, we do have other passages telling us that those who believe also possess it. So, there is an already/not yet tension in regards to eternal life."

You say that "each passage carries with it the same amount of force" and those who don't interpret the scriptures the way you do have a "I don't want to know so let's look everywhere else and see if I can lessen the force of what is being said".

Lets see if you would apply your "each passage carries with it the same amount of force" belief consistantly to these situations:

Luke 18:18-19
"18A certain ruler asked him, "Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?"
19"Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good--except God alone."

Joh 5:30 "I can of Myself do nothing. As I hear, I judge; and My judgment
is righteous, because I do not seek My own will but the will of the
Father who sent Me.

Joh 8:42 Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love me,
for I proceeded and came forth from God; I came not of my own accord,
but he sent me.

These and many other passages are used by those who would try to deny the deity of Christ. You can find these all over the internet. Should the "full force" of these passages apply? Or do we interpret them in light of clearer statements of the deity of Christ.

Here is another one:

Luke 14:26
"If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters–yes, even his own life–he cannot be my disciple."

Should we give Luke 14:26 its "full force" or interpret in light of other clearer passages?

Just something to think.

IFBReformer

 

[Gunther]

I will address it tomorrow.

It would be nice if someone else would join this thread also.

Between slavery and the south dying without honor, we can't get anyone to cooperate.

 

[Pete Richert]

IBF,

This is my longest post in BB history. I hope you will read it all. I would never write something this long and expect someone to read it but since only you, Gunther, and I have particpated in this thread (for which I am very thankful) I hope you will bear with me. Gunther, you won't miss anything by skipping it since you and IBF are taking this discussion along a different line.

You got me all wrong here. I don't sit around judging other peoples salvation, I don't recall questioning a single person. It has nothing to do with making laundary lists of sins in which you are not saved, if I did that I would never pass my own list. Nor do I presume to know who is saved and who is not, God only knows. I give most people the benefit of the doubt.

You say you agree with me about obedience? You say,

I agree that trusting in Christ is as you say "actialized in obedience". But what kind of obedience?

At the end here I am going to have to ask this question back at you. If you agree with me then what kind of obedience are you expecting? But first I want to look at your examples.

I just noticed that I spelled "Actualized" wrong in my post and now the spelling has been copied via qoute for a few posts

Is it only "actialized" by people who attend church faithfully?

In a sense . . . Yes. To trust in God is to Love Him. To trust Him is to seek out that very thing your Trust, to learn about Him, worship Him, share in His supper that reminds of His deed, and to believe the Bible when it is commanded to meet together.

Now before you start asking "how many weeks in a row", I am saying that is missing the point. I don't attend Church every time the doors are open. I missed yesterday because I have been having trouble sleeping at night (with my wife out of town), so I took a sleeping pill (first time in my life) and my eyes didn't open until 12:44, 1 minute before our church gets out! So that night I was planning on going (which I usually don't because it is hard with our 18th month old who is now out of town) and instead I got a call from a friend who I haven't seen in a while who wanted me to go to borders. I went to borders. I don't mind missing church because I don't get saved by racking up points, I knew it was more important for me to see my friend. You might be saved if you went once a month . . . You might be saved if . . . I am not advocating then we can tell if someone is saved or not by any manner of attendance. I am just saying it is a one litmus test (one among many) about how much a believer wishes to learn and worship God, and how much a believer wishes to learn and worship God is a good indicator of how much He trusts in God. I knew a guy who NEVER went to church. He gave me some line about thinking the apostles saying we should meet because they knew we would need support (but he didn't need any of course). Well you might be suprised to find that I didn't even write him off. He might be saved. But judging from his actions in life (not the church thing, I didn't know about that), and then finding out about the church thing, I told him about Jesus. Yea, I thought it wouldn't hurt to share the gospel as I am not sure he is saved. I share the gospel with my own family who have been saved for decades because it doesn't hurt to hear it again, so it is no offence to this guy if he was a true believer.

I believe wishing to meet together to learn about God and worship him demonstates that we actually have trusted our life to Him.

Is it only "actialized" by people who quit smoking after they are saved or get rid of other
bad habbits they had before they were saved?

I don't believe smoking in itself is a sin. Just a bad idea. Diddo on too much McDonands, not wearing your seatbelt in the backseat, or twoo much Pepsi.

Is it only "actialized" by people who attend give faithfully to their churches?

Yes. Before I start this one, I want you to know that I don't believe the tithe as a strict 10% is carried over into the New Covenant Believers. I believe Christians our commanded to help the needy and poor, look after the widow and orphain, or generally support the advance of the gospel in the world. I believe the NT church is the best place to pool the resources, and that those who look after your spiritual health are worthy of sharing in your material belongings (in other words, pastors should be paid if possible). I believe that if you see someone on the street who needs help you can give, you should give it. If family members or friends, or others are in need, you should help (especially other believers). I think for most Christians in America, to only give 10% is to be rather stingy in this country where the poverty level is a fortune for those in Africa.

Do we always need to give, to be saved. No. No. No. We are saved by trusting in Christ. But wouldn't it be strange if you were saved of all your sins but won't give $5 for someone to eat. Wouldn't it be strange if you truly believed the gospel of Jesus Christ, but weren't interested in paying money to others so they could spread the gospel so others could believe in the gospel and be saved. Do you truly believe it if you don't care if others do??? When I hear someone say, "I believe in God and Jesus but it is okay if he doesn't", I really question exactly what he believes because IT IS NOT OKAY! that this third person doesn't.

We are not saved by giving. Giving is actualized obedience to truly trusting. Would you believe for a single picosecond (1/1000 of a nanosecond) that I loved my mom if I kept telling her I loved her but left her outside in the snow and wouldn't let her in my house. Does this mean I love her because I brought her inside. No!!! I brought her inside because I love her. It is actualized loving . . . if you will.

To finish off, I haven't given to the church for a few months. I don't have the money. A couple of finacial setbacks and now I need to find money I don't have. This doesn't bother me (too much, it does when I see those truly in need) because God is not asking me to give 10% to prove anything, he is asking me to give what I can to help real people in real situations.

James 2 gives this exact situation, telling your brother to be well but not giving anything to his need, then your religion is worthless.

Jesus gives the exact parable, telling people if they didn't help those in Need, they didn't know Jesus. He didn't say you are saved by helping those in need. You are saved by knowing Jesus. He said that those who know Jesus would help people in need. That is what it means to KNOW JESUS!

Is it only "actialized" by people who are obedient 100% of the time . . . . . How about people who are obedient 10% of the time? No that is much to little. That person definitely could not be saved - right?

My answer here is 0.0000000001% or smaller. It takes the faith of a mustard seed. It takes just the smallest true belief in resting your salvation to the Lord. We all sin and probably sin more then we think. Spurgeon believed we never left our knees in prayer without sin!

You are confusing the issue. I am not arguing how much faith we need. I am not Paul (yet . . .just kidding), I am not Jeremiah (though I want to be). And even these two at time lacked and sinned agaist God. I am just saying that those moments they did exercise faith, it was actualized in obedience. And all of their obedience is no credit to them, it was the outworking of true trust in their God. I am saying there is no reason to seperate obedience from trust. The times I sin (and oh I do), I show my lack of faith in God. Yet still saved I am, because I do trust in Him, and my life demonstates more obedience the more I grow in trust.

You see this again is the problem with the Lordship and Means views - it leaves these questions in the mind a believer -

How righteous must I be to obtain eternal life?

How much sin will cost me my salvation?

I will answer your second two questions first. How righteous? None of your own, that is for sure! You will need to trust in Jesus Christ to save you from your sins. Whatever righteousness that flows from is whatever it is, and we agree that it doesn't save you. How much sin . . . my salvation? There is no sin that can cost you your salvation. You are not saved by not sinning, but by trusting. All of your sin is accounted for. The times you trust in Jesus you will not sin, and it only takes a mustard seed of that faith to save. Jesus said, "Those who love me will keep my commands." You might say, we love Jesus all the time, and we can not keep those commands. I say, we don't love Jesus all the time. We betrey that we don't when we don't keep his commands. That is why we are still being saved. That is why it is a process that will only be finished on the "day of the Lord"! I expect more for my own salvation, when I WILL love Jesus every second of every day, and you better believe I will be being obedient. Does this mean I am not saved. No, salvation does not require perfect love, or love 100% of the time. Indeed, it is love of a mustard seed (well, not exactly Biblical but I'm trying).

Like we have said previously, we agree that all true believers will produce fruit. All true believers will be obedient to Christ. But where the question comes in is how much and how visible?

Well good we agree I feel like you haven't answered you own assertion. You say all true believers will produce fruit. I agree. You says how much and how visible, I say at least something!!!! How visible, WHO CARES!!!! But it certainly will be visible when my brother sees someone in need. He is demonstating a lack of love for God by not helping his brother. It doesn't mean he is not saved, it just means he needs to be saved more!!! (call it glorified if you wish). He needs to trust in God more.

I believe all believers will produce fruit because as obedience is "actualized trusting", all "who trust" (ie all who believe) are beling obedient by definition. I believe that believers will produce more and more fruit, simply because I believe that is what the Bible teaches, not because of great will power, ect, but because it is God's plan and Him working in you!

Okay, now that I am finished with my longest post in BB history, I have to ask back at you, if

I agree that trusting in Christ is as you say "actialized in obedience". But what kind of obedience?

is not the kind of obedience listed above, then what kind of obedience is it?

Pete

P.S.

you wrote

And it was also just as likely that their was someone sitting on their couch, and while they had not realized their true potential for Christ yet, they were completely trusting in him for their salvation and they were saved and on their way to heaven.

which is rather funny because I spent ALL DAY on Saturday sitting on the couch watching College Football. About 8 straight hours at least.

 

[Gunther]

Originally posted by Pete Richert:
which is rather funny because I spent ALL DAY on Saturday sitting on the couch watching College Football. About 8 straight hours at least.

Pete, did you see Florida State put the same hurt on North Carolina as the North put on the South?

 

[IfbReformer]

Originally posted by Gunther:
I will address it tomorrow.

It would be nice if someone else would join this thread also.

Between slavery and the south dying without honor, we can't get anyone to cooperate.

I agree - this slavery thing has really gotten out of hand - ha ha.

I was going to chime in on it and add a comment but I don't know if I will have time.

IFBReformer

 

[IfbReformer]

Pete,

Your Statement:
"This is my longest post in BB history. I hope you will read it all."

My Response:
I read it all. I have greater respect for longer post than most in these boards. I find it hard to say what I want to say in 10 sentences or less like some people want.

Your Statement:
"You got me all wrong here. I don't sit around judging other peoples salvation, I don't recall questioning a single person. It has nothing to do with making laundary lists of sins in which you are not saved, if I did that I would never pass my own list. Nor do I presume to know who is saved and who is not, God only knows. I give most people the benefit of the doubt."

My Response:
I think you and I are closer on this issue than we think. It is like to people looking up at some clouds and one guy sees different shapes than the others - but they both see the same clouds!

While you are not taking the Lordship or Means views to question everyone's salvation around you, I have met many who do.

Your Statement:
"My answer here is 0.0000000001% or smaller. It takes the faith of a mustard seed. It takes just the smallest true belief in resting your salvation to the Lord...
You are confusing the issue. I am not arguing how much faith we need. I am not Paul (yet . . .just kidding), I am not Jeremiah (though I want to be). And even these two at time lacked and sinned agaist God. I am just saying that those moments they did exercise faith, it was actualized in obedience."

My Response:
I agree that the answer is "0.0000000001% or smaller". But once again, statements made by MacArthur and Ryrie do not tend to lead us to this conclusion. They believe obedience is must
be the pattern of a believers life, and sin
is only momentary lapses in a true believers life.

They believe that the fruit will always be visible and a visible transformed life is always evident.

I do not believe the transformation is always as visible from believer to believer - many people have emotional thunderous conversions - others do not. Yes all will produce fruit and obey, but for some it is as you say "0.0000000001%" and for others it is more like 75% and 80%.

How can you chive your "0.0000000001%" answer with Schreiners quote:

"Persevering in godly behavior and sound teaching are necessary to obtain salvation…"
("The Race Set Before Us", page 51)

If someone is obedient "0.0000000001%" of the time and is disobedient the other 99% is that "Persevering in godly behavior"?

To me perseverance "Persevering in godly behavior" means that godly behavior is the norm and ungodly behavior is the exception. This means the person who is obedient "0.0000000001%" of the time and disobedient 99% of the time is not "Persevering in godly behavior" and then according to Schreiner is not saved.

You see I see two calls to perserverance in scripture. One is to perseverance in belief, a true believer can never stop trusting in Christ for his salvation.

The other is a call to perseverance in righteous living(practical sanctifaction). The difference is I believe Positional Sanctifaction is for salvation(and thus eternal life) and practical sanctifaction is for reward(motivated by our love for Christ).

Your Statement:
You say all true believers will produce fruit. I agree. You says how much and how visible, I say at least something!!!! How visible, WHO CARES!!!!

My Response:
You say it "WHO CARES" as to how visible the fruit is. But that does not seem to be the attitude of MacArther and Schreiner. They seem to making the opposite point. They say there must be some visible fruit.

Your Statement:
"I believe that believers will produce more and more fruit, simply because I believe that is what the Bible teaches, not because of great will power, ect, but because it is God's plan and Him working in you!"

My Response:
Here is where we have some disagreement. You say
"I believe that believers will produce more and more fruit" - I do not believe this is always the case. I think that they will produce more sometimes, and less others, I think they might produce very little and then stop all together.
I think it is possible for a believer to die in a state of sin and backsliddenness.

Well I look forward to your responses. I really think you are not as close to Schreiners view as you would like to think.

IFBReformer

 

[Pete Richert]

I don't exactly know what Schreiner's view as I have never read his book, "the race set before us." I did read "Paul the Apostle of God's glory in Christ" which is his theology on Paul, and he had a chapter on perserverce, but it didn't all sink in. So I'm not sure whether I agree with Schreiner or not. I get more of the "means" view from Scott Hafemann and I certainly don't understand him nor am I sure I agree yet, but I respect him and know he doesn't teach works salvation.

How can you chive your "0.0000000001%" answer with Schreiners quote:

"Persevering in godly behavior and sound teaching are necessary to obtain salvation…"
("The Race Set Before Us", page 51)

If someone is obedient "0.0000000001%" of the time and is disobedient the other 99% is that "Persevering in godly behavior"?

When I think about persevering, I am not thinking 100% obedience as stated above, but continuing to believe. Believers come back, because they perserve in believing that Christ is Lord. What percentage of the time is not important, only that they will continue. Of course, you could start playing mathimatical analysis and say for every time period I state you could increase it to infinity, but hopefully I am the only one with a math degree here.

Let me offer a quick scenario. You have a guy who walks down the alter and receives Christ, and then never for the rest of his life trust in Jesus to save Him from his sins. It is possible, I suppose, that he is saved and spending time in one huge backslidden state. But I believe generally this is not the case for those who truly believed the first time, they will continue to believe, and then still continue again, even if their faith is week and the are apt to sin, or even attempt to reject God, but then again they will still come back. They won't be able to escape belief if they wanted.

So to answer, if you could somehow squeze my above percentage into every single day (maybe it takes three days), but still that point 1 always comes back again and again and the man continues to believe, then he is perservering. And since I believe all belief is actualized in obedience then by definition he is perserving in obedience as well, even for just so short a time.

Let me offer another quote from a book from an Author you will recognize

"If you love me you will keep my commands"

What should be said. Do we need to keep his commands 50% of the time to love Jesus? What about 80%? What about 10%? I take this statement the same way I would take Schreiner. It is a pretty solid prouncement, Jesus doesn't leave much room for error on the command obedence with reference to love. So I believe when I don't keep his commands I am NOT loving him. But I am not saved by loving him perfectly, that is part of my salvation itself, and I long for more and more.

You see I see two calls to perserverance in scripture. One is to perseverance in belief, a true believer can never stop trusting in Christ for his salvation.

The other is a call to perseverance in righteous living(practical sanctifaction). The difference is I believe Positional Sanctifaction is for salvation(and thus eternal life) and practical sanctifaction is for reward(motivated by our love for Christ).

I don't exactly see two calls anymore, nor do I seperate sanctificaiton into positional and practical as you do. But as I said a few pages ago, I definitly see a tension in scripture over the "you are holy, so be holy". Part of this is as I have already discussed, for me the call to perserve in belief and to perserve in Godly behavior is one and the same.

They say there must be some visible fruit.

Well . . . I agree with them in a sense, namely that as all the examples I gave above, much belief is forced to be visible obedience. Whenever you see a brother in need, whenever you are wronged in front of others, whenever your attitute betrays you, etc. I guess there position is if someone never truly trusts in any one situations that can be seen, does he ever trust at all? A strict mathematical answer of course is Yes, and I am not sure they would nessasirily disagree with the example pushed to the extreme. But would I whitness to the person, Oh yes, I certainly would. For all practical purposes if someone failed to show any belief in EVERY visible situation then I would doubt they belief in private. Indeed, I would have NO REASON AT ALL TO EVEN THINK THEY WERE A CHRISTIAN UNLESS THEY TOLD ME. Bill Clinton claims to be a Christian, claims to have accepted Christ at a Billy Graham crusade. He Bill Clinton saved? I actually give him more hope then most people, but the fact remains most people would still whitness to him given the chance because most Christians don't think he is saved because he has never given ANY visible evidence of it. My wife is one of them.

"I believe that believers will produce more and more fruit" - I do not believe this is always the case. I think that they will produce more sometimes, and less others, I think they might produce very little and then stop all together.
I think it is possible for a believer to die in a state of sin and backsliddenness.

Which order should I take this? Okay, last first, I believe a believer can die in a state of sin and backsliddenness as well. Indeed, I would not call it "a state of sin", to Roman Catholic for my tastes. If such a thing existed everyone would be in it everyday because everyone sins every day, betraying they do not perfectly trust God. But even so, I understand you point, a long extended period of time where the sinner is rather ungodly. I also believe, if time could be extended for this man on earth for infinity, he would eventually pick up belief once more, and it would be impossible for a true believer to continue life for infinity not believing again.

As for believers producing more and more fruit. That was the line I wrote with the most hesitency, since it is the line I believed the least and have not seen whitness in real life in all situations. But I believe it is a clear statement in the Bible, that "he who begun a good work in you will complete it until the Day of Christ Jesus" Philippians 1:?8?. Unless you take this good work to be the actual gift given to Paul as Hawthorne does in the WBC, it means (as all other commentators believe) that the salvation in you that was begun will be completed. It is a process as God is "working" in you. Or even so, just as we are being transformed into the image of Christ, are we ever being transformed the wrong way. So this statement is my trying to take the Bible as face value and not my life experience. I could possibly be convinced that my exegesis is wrong.

I think that they will produce more sometimes, and less others, I think they might produce very little and then stop all together.

We are somewhat faced at a cross roads here because we are playing examples, pushed to extremes. Can a believer stop producing fruit altogether? Well for how long? Forever? From the moment he belives as a 12 year old until he dies as a 80 year old. First off, I believe that everytime someone continues again to believe, that in itself is a fruit, and is actualized in whatever obedience is there at the moment, but let's put even that aside. Can someone "believe" when they are 12 and then never believe again before they die at 80, so my period of unbelief is 68 years. If we take our respective models and simply extend the period of unbelief then the answer is yes, they can still be saved. Would I believe it, NOT FOR A SECOND! No hard feelings toward the guy, I would hope he is saved as I want all people to be saved, both for the glory of Christ as well as for the person. But for all practical purposes, I would treat him as if he was not saved.

So I leave you with two questions. The first is my question from the last post, if the obedience that is actualized in faith is not the obedience listed above, then what is it? And number two, how long can a believer not produce any fruit (whether visisble or invisible)?

You know it just occured to me that we probably think of fruit differently. You may see it as something greater, something actually helpful to others or what not (I am not saying you do, just taking a guess). You began by saying you didn't doubt the salvation of any one in the pews because you wouldn't test their fruit. Nearly 100% of the time I see fruit right there in the pew itself, so whether I tested on their fruit or their simply confession would be one and the same thing. Part of our disagreement may be rooted in our definition here.