questioning eternal security

[MMDAN]

It's conditional alright, conditional on Christ's obedience, not ours. I'd hate to usurp His righteousness and replace it with my own.

Romans 5:19 ASV
For as through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the one shall the many be made righteous.

Amen! Those who teach conditional salvation will typically end up confusing 'descriptive' passages of scripture with 'prescriptive' passages of scripture and the end result is what I call "type 2 works salvation" or salvation by works at the back door. Believers walk according to the Spirit BECAUSE they are in Christ Jesus and not in order to be in Christ Jesus and/or keep themselves saved. To not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit is a confirmation that one is in Christ Jesus.

Romans 8:8 - So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God. 9 But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His. 10 And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

 

[MMDAN]

Wouldn't the same hold true here?...

1 John 1:7 (KJV) But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

How could a Christian lose one's salvation if there is a continual cleansing?

Folks who teach conditional salvation will typically interpret this verse in such a way to create two separate camps of Christians. Those who continue to walk in the light and keep themselves cleansed/saved (type 2 works salvation) and those who fail to continue to walk in the light and lose their salvation.

In regard to 1 John 1:7, believers were (past tense) once/formerly darkness but are now light in the Lord and we are to walk as children of light. (Ephesians 5:8) *Walking in darkness is descriptive of children of the devil. Walking in the light is 'descriptive' of children of God.

Only those who are born of God/saved/believers are in the light.

Acts 26:18 - to open their eyes, in order to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who are sanctified by faith in Me.

2 Corinthians 6:14 - Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness?

1 Thessalonians 5:4 - But you, brethren, are not in darkness, so that this Day should overtake you as a thief.

1 John 1:6 - If we say that we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth. But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin.

In 1 John 2:9, we read - He who says he is in the light, and hates his brother, is in darkness until now. In vs. 11 - But he who hates his brother is in darkness and walks in darkness, and does not know where he is going, because the darkness has blinded his eyes.

*Compare with 1 John 3:10 - In this the children of God and the children of the devil are manifest: Whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, (compare with 1 John 1:6 - does not practice the truth) nor is he who does not love his brother.

*Notice that walks in darkness, hates his brother is 'descriptive' of children of the devil.

*It's imperative that we properly harmonize scripture with scripture before reaching our conclusion on doctrine.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I have never made the claim that no one before the Reformation believed in the Perseverance of the Saints. My statement was, “Earlier than the Reformation, we do not find in any extrabiblical literature so much as a hint of any doctrine of eternal security.” You have failed to provide even one verifiable quote to prove that my statement was untrue. I explained that I was using the term “eternal security” in a manner in which it is commonly used by Baptists, and I also explained in detail what I mean by “verifiable,” but I have seen no evidence that the truth is of any interest to you.

Well, may I ask you to explain what you believe is the difference between 'the Perseverance of the Saints' and 'Eternal Security'?
If by 'the Doctrine of Eternal Security' you mean that everyone who says "Lord, Lord" will enter the kingdom of heaven, then of course I agree with you that it is nonsense. But if I have understood you correctly, you believe that one can be in Christ one moment, out the next and maybe in again sometime afterwards; if you believe that those who are born from above can end up in hell, then I disagree profoundly.
I think you need to read Exodus 19:5-6 and 1 Peter 2:9-10 together. You will then perhaps understand the difference between the old and new covenants, and why the new covenant is 'better' (Heb. 8:6-13).

I will provide another text from before the 16th Century that upholds the Perseverance of the Saints before the end of today. It took me another ten minutes to find.

 

[37818]

God promised, in Jeremiah 31:34, . . . saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

 

[canadyjd]

Hebrews 6:9 states “we are convinced of better things concerning you, the things that accompany salvation”…

And continues to speak of continuing ministry and of a hope that is “steadfast and sure”.

Hebrews 6 is a repudiation of the idea a person can lose their salvation.

Peace to you

 

[Martin Marprelate]

You have failed to provide even one verifiable quote to prove that my statement was untrue.

'"You did not choose Me," Christ says, "But I chose you." (John 15:16). Such grace is beyond description. What were we, apart from Christ's choice of us, when we were empty of love? What were we but sinful and lost? We did not lead Him to choose us by believing in Him; for if Christ chose people who already believed, then we chose Him before He chose us. How then could He say, "You did not choose Me" unless His mercy came before our faith? Here is the faulty reasoning of those who say that God chose us before the creation of the world, not in order to make us good, but because He foreknew we would be good. This was not the view of Him who said, "You did not choose Me." We were not chosen because of our goodness, for we could not be good without being chosen. Grace is no longer grace if human goodness comes first.
Listen, you ungrateful person, listen! "You did not choose Me, but I chose you." Do not say, I am chosen because I first believed." If you first believed, you had already chosen Him. But listen: "You did not choose Me." And do not say, "Before I believed, I was already chosen on account of my good works." What good work can come before faith, when the apostle Paul says, "Whatever is not from faith is sin?" What then shall we say when we hear these words, "You did not choose Me"? WE shall say this: "We were evil, and we were chosenthat we might become good by the grace of Him who chose us." For salvation is not by grace if our goodness came first; but it is by grace - and therefore God's grace did not find us good but makes us good." [Augustine of Hippo, Commentary on John 15:16]

If God's grace towards sinners makes them good, then God will not abandon them. If sinners are not made good, then it is evident that God did not choose them. Q.E.D.
I am aware that Augustine says other stuff elsewhere, but frankly, that is what I expect from my reading of Church Fathers. Nor am I interested in defending his position. My sole reason for posting this is to show that, contrary to what you have stated numerous times, there are texts before the 15th Century which show that God's elect will endure.

 

[Van]

I think most people, not blinded by their presuppositions, read 2 Thessalonians 2:13 as saying individuals are chosen for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit (being set apart in Christ, i.e. given to or baptized into Christ). and in making that election God uses the individual's faith in the truth, if credited as righteousness, as the basis for His choice.

 

[JesusFan]

All of the recent (less than 40 years old) English language exegetical commentaries on the Greek text of Hebrews agree that the words “enlightened,” “have tasted the heavenly gift,” “have shared in the Holy Spirit,” “have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come” are speaking of true believers in Christ,

Grindheim, 2023; Kleinig, 2017; Cockerill. 2012; Allen, 2010; Johnson, 2006; Koester, 2001; Ellingworth, 1993; Lane, 1991; and Bruce, 1990.

Notice especially the name, Allen. This Allen is David L. Allen, the dyed-in-the-wool Baptist Biblical scholar whose commentary on Hebrews was published (2010) in the “New American Commentary” series—a dyed-in-the-wool Baptist commentary series whose General Editor is the dyed-in-the-wool Baptist E. Ray Clendenen and which is published by the dyed-in-the-wool Southern Baptist B&H Publishing Group, An imprint of Lifeway Christian Resources, an “entity” of the Southern Baptist Convention. Even the Baptist Biblical scholar David L. Allen, in spite of being a Baptist, bold writes,

"The history of interpretation of Hebrews 6 has often been marred by a failure to avoid manipulation and superimposing a preconceived theology on this text. This has been a problem especially with Calvinistic exegesis, which in more recent times some Calvinists admit. Mugridge said that Calvinists, in their attempts to alleviate the difficulties posed to their position by Heb 6:4-6, have supported interpretations that “often depend on ingenious but forced exegesis.” R. Peterson remarked, I frankly admit that some Calvinist treatments of the Hebrews warning passages leave much to be desired.” The theological schizophrenia of some Reformed treatments of Heb 6:4-6 leaves one scratching his head."

Jesus is God Incarnated, and he plainly stated that all those whom the father shall give Him he shall keep and raise back up at His second coming event. His word trumps this issue, and whatever the Holy Spirit stated in Hebrews, can NOT refer to a conditional have eternal life then lose it later!

 

[JesusFan]

I think most people, not blinded by their presuppositions, read 2 Thessalonians 2:13 as saying individuals are chosen for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit (being set apart in Christ, i.e. given to or baptized into Christ). and in making that election God uses the individual's faith in the truth, if credited as righteousness, as the basis for His choice.

Even that saving faith though is the gift of God towards his own elect and chosen in Christ Jesus

 

[JesusFan]

Well it took me about ten minutes to find that quote, and it came from a reputable Church historian whose books are used by several seminaries in Britain. I have therefore met your challenge, and I have no doubt that if I spent another half hour, I could find some more. However, ploughing through the works of ancient theologians, which tend increasingly to be tinged with Roman Catholicism the further on one goes, is not my idea of fun.
Quite simply, the idea that someone can be 'in Christ' and then out again, and maybe in again sometime later is ridiculous, as is the notion that someone can be born of God - you know, the One who says, "I the LORD do not change" - and then end up in hell.
Perhaps you will explain what exactly you mean by "the prevailing Baptist doctrines of eternal security." We live in different countries, so we may have different ideas of what those doctrines are.

All boils down to this, do we accept that God is really sovereign, or do we have to get added back into the salvation equation "human free will?"

 

[Craigbythesea]

My sole reason for posting this is to show that, contrary to what you have stated numerous times, there are texts My sole reason for posting this is to show that, contrary to what you have stated numerous times, there are texts before the 15th Century which show that God's elect will endure.

Of course they will endure! That is one of the basic tenets of election! I have never denied what Augustine so plainly wrote. Late in his life, his theology changed on some important issues—especially the identity of the man in Romans 7:14-25—but his teaching that God's elect will endure never changed! However, he never taught the eternal security of the believer, but ONLY the endurance of the elect! He freely acknowledged that the Bible teaches that some true believers can and do commit apostasy and consequently suffer damnation. See for example, Chapter 40 of Augustine’s On Rebuke and Grace.

 

[Craigbythesea]

All boils down to this, do we accept that God is really sovereign, or do we have to get added back into the salvation equation "human free will?"

You have, of course, a right to your opinion, but some of us base our opinions on the Bible rather than upon silly man-made theologies.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Of course they will endure! That is one of the basic tenets of election! I have never denied what Augustine so plainly wrote. Late in his life, his theology changed on some important issues—especially the identity of the man in Romans 7:14-25—but his teaching that God's elect will endure never changed! However, he never taught the eternal security of the believer, but ONLY the endurance of the elect! He freely acknowledged that the Bible teaches that some true believers can and do commit apostasy and consequently suffer damnation. See for example, Chapter 40 of Augustine’s On Rebuke and Grace.

I suggest you read through the quotation again. 'Listen, you ungrateful person, listen! "You did not choose Me, but I chose you." Do not say, I am chosen because I first believed." If you first believed, you had already chosen Him. But listen: "You did not choose Me." There is no one who truly repents and believes unless he is chosen by God. That is the whole point that Augustine is making. And it is in line with John 6:44.

You have, of course, a right to your opinion, but some of us base our opinions on the Bible rather than upon silly man-made theologies.

Is that why you base your arguments on church fathers rather than the Bible?

 

[JesusFan]

Of course they will endure! That is one of the basic tenets of election! I have never denied what Augustine so plainly wrote. Late in his life, his theology changed on some important issues—especially the identity of the man in Romans 7:14-25—but his teaching that God's elect will endure never changed! However, he never taught the eternal security of the believer, but ONLY the endurance of the elect! He freely acknowledged that the Bible teaches that some true believers can and do commit apostasy and consequently suffer damnation. See for example, Chapter 40 of Augustine’s On Rebuke and Grace.

Eternal security of the real Christian is totally unconditional, as we are security eternally by Trinity, as the Father gives to Jesus all those whom He died in stead and place of, and we are sealed forever by the Holy Spirit

 

[JesusFan]

You have, of course, a right to your opinion, but some of us base our opinions on the Bible rather than upon silly man-made theologies.

My theology based upon the bedrock of the Trinity themselves, all of Persons of Godhead involved in saving and securing us

 

[JesusFan]

He seems

I suggest you read through the quotation again. 'Listen, you ungrateful person, listen! "You did not choose Me, but I chose you." Do not say, I am chosen because I first believed." If you first believed, you had already chosen Him. But listen: "You did not choose Me." There is no one who truly repents and believes unless he is chosen by God. That is the whole point that Augustine is making. And it is in line with John 6:44.

Is that why you base your arguments on church fathers rather than the Bible?

to be conflicted on this issue, as playing word games, as either God is sovereign to save and keep us, or else final basis is our own human will

 

[Craigbythesea]

He seems

to be conflicted on this issue, as playing word games, as either God is sovereign to save and keep us, or else final basis is our own human will

Matt. 1:21. “She will bear a son, and you are to name him Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.”

When a saved man returns to his sins—what is he saved from?

2 Peter:22. It has happened to them according to the true proverb, The dog turns back to his own vomit, and the sow is washed only to wallow in the mire. (RSV)

 

[JesusFan]

Matt. 1:21. “She will bear a son, and you are to name him Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.”

When a saved man returns to his sins—what is he saved from?

2 Peter:22. It has happened to them according to the true proverb, The dog turns back to his own vomit, and the sow is washed only to wallow in the mire. (RSV)

Those are very same who John stated were among us, but were never really one of us, like a Judas among other apostles

 

[Russell Earl Kelly PHD]

Those who are truly born of God are partakers of the divine nature. They have been transformed from pigs and dogs into sheep. The change is more than just cosmetic, as in 2 Peter 2:20.

*These cleaned up on the outside dogs and pigs were never sheep.

Compare 2 Peter 1:4 - "partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption - Strongs #5356 that is in the world through lust with 2 Peter 2:20 - with they escaped the pollutions - Strongs #3356 (different Greek word) of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, yet they are again entangled therein, and overcome.

*Notice that 2 Peter 2:20 did not mention them being "partakers of the divine nature." Corruption is deeper than pollutions/defilements on the outside: it is decay on the inside.

Having the knowledge of Jesus Christ does not save a person if there is no heart submission to that knowledge. The latter end is worse than the beginning for these men because rejecting this knowledge will make them more accountable at the judgment. Judas Iscariot is a good example of someone who rejected the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ yet was never saved. (John 6:64-71; 13:10-11)

Revelation 3:5 - "He who overcomes I will never blot out his name from the book of life." The "overcomer" mentioned in this letter to Sardis is the Believer/Christian. Compare this with 1 John 5:4: "Everyone who is born of God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that has overcome the world--our faith. Certain people read Revelation 3:5 as if God’s pen is raised and ready to strike out the name of any Christian who does not overcome every possible struggle in life. They read into it like this: "If you don't overcome every struggle in life and win the victory based on the merits of your performance, then you’re going to lose your salvation! But that is NOT what the verse says. Jesus is giving a promise here to overcomers and not a warning.

You still have not shown me a verse from Scripture that unequivocally states that a really "saved" person really "lost their salvation."

Wow! You have just done what I have been doing for almost 60 years. You have found ways to explain away God's literal Word! I hve found it is much easier to literally interpret His inspired Word. I am divesting myself of this thread and opening one asking why most preachers and Bible teachers do not translate verbs from the Greek.

 

[Russell Earl Kelly PHD]

Those who are truly born of God are partakers of the divine nature. They have been transformed from pigs and dogs into sheep. The change is more than just cosmetic, as in 2 Peter 2:20.

*These cleaned up on the outside dogs and pigs were never sheep.

Compare 2 Peter 1:4 - "partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption - Strongs #5356 that is in the world through lust with 2 Peter 2:20 - with they escaped the pollutions - Strongs #3356 (different Greek word) of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, yet they are again entangled therein, and overcome.

*Notice that 2 Peter 2:20 did not mention them being "partakers of the divine nature." Corruption is deeper than pollutions/defilements on the outside: it is decay on the inside.

Having the knowledge of Jesus Christ does not save a person if there is no heart submission to that knowledge. The latter end is worse than the beginning for these men because rejecting this knowledge will make them more accountable at the judgment. Judas Iscariot is a good example of someone who rejected the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ yet was never saved. (John 6:64-71; 13:10-11)

Revelation 3:5 - "He who overcomes I will never blot out his name from the book of life." The "overcomer" mentioned in this letter to Sardis is the Believer/Christian. Compare this with 1 John 5:4: "Everyone who is born of God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that has overcome the world--our faith. Certain people read Revelation 3:5 as if God’s pen is raised and ready to strike out the name of any Christian who does not overcome every possible struggle in life. They read into it like this: "If you don't overcome every struggle in life and win the victory based on the merits of your performance, then you’re going to lose your salvation! But that is NOT what the verse says. Jesus is giving a promise here to overcomers and not a warning.

You still have not shown me a verse from Scripture that unequivocally states that a really "saved" person really "lost their salvation."

Wow! You have just done what I have been doing for almost 60 years. You have found ways to explain away God's literal Word! I have found it is much easier to literally interpret His inspired Word. I am divesting myself of this thread and opening one asking why most preachers and Bible teachers do not translate verbs from the Greek.