questioning eternal security

[Dave G]

Thus far, y'all have not commented on my main argument that the present participles of believe are being ignored.

They often are ignored.

But then I never really looked at the Greek in order to understand those passages...I simply read God's word over and over, and it began to sink in that He's talking about those people in the present, continual sense.

In First John 5:13 only those who continuously believe have the assurance of salvation.

I agree.
But consider this:

It's evidential, not conditional.... and indicative of the difference between those who the Lord has wrought a miraculous work in via the Holy Spirit, and those who He hasn't.
For example, Paul mentioned having perils among false brethren ( 2 Corinthians 11:26 ), so we know that not everyone who professes Christ is actually saved.
That is why the Lord Jesus also told us that Satan has sown "tares" among the "wheat", and why not everyone who calls Jesus "Lord" will inherit the kingdom of Heaven.

To me, it's very sobering to realize that God has His elect whom He gave to Jesus and who will never be lost, sometimes sitting right next to ( and partaking of the same bread and wine ) those He never knew and are not saved.

He explains this very real fact in Matthew 13 and Mark 4.

 

[37818]

Thus far, y'all have not commented on my main argument that the present participles of believe are being ignored.

How do you understand that the present participles for the believer to prevent God from keeping them?

There are those who are not yet being genuinely saved.

 

[37818]

Professimg believers who do not actually know God do not yet possess the promised eternal life that cannot be lost.
John 17:3; John 14:6; 1 John 3:23; 1 John 5:9-13.

 

[JesusFan]

Sooo......we have to be perfect? We cannot NOT hear, follow, or believe?

What about when my father died suddenly and I had a 5 to 10 second flicker of a doubt. The thought ran through my mind - "What if none of this that we believe is real - I'll never see my father again? I had stood there by his hospital bed and watched him draw his last breath.

It was just a flicker and the truth came back and I do not doubt at all. So did I lose my salvation?

So we can undo the sealing of the Holy Spirit, as He is God within us, has granted us now eternal life, but we can kick Him out of us, and undo all of His justification, indwelling, sealing etc?

 

[canadyjd]

By fully translating the verbs in John 10:27, it literally reads: "My sheep are continuously hearing my voice and I am continuously knowing them and they are continuously following me and I am continuously giving them eternal life." These are all present tense verbs; they are not aorist "one-time professions of faith as you interpret them! The conditions are continuously hearing and continuously following.

Hebrews 6:4-6 literally teaches that one cannot be saved again once a person has been saved and rejected salvation. That is why there can only be one true baptism. I ask you to explain Matthew 5:29, 30 and John 15:6.

According to John 6:40, it is the will of God to save those who continuously believe. This is true to 54 other "believe" participles, especially Romans 4:5.

You are making the assumption that because the verb is active (are continuously believing…) that to stop continuously believing requires that person to lose their salvation.

That is not what Jesus said. That is an assumption.

Jesus goes on to say all those given to Him will come to Him and He will lose none of them.

He DID NOT say all those given to Him will come to Him and He will not lose any of them as long as they continuously believe.

Perhaps you could parse those verbs for us.

Peace to you

 

[JesusFan]

Those holding to partial security always hold with"what of I choose to take myself out of hand of God?", yet never read them saying once lost can never be saved again, nor how ther

You are making the assumption that because the verb is active (are continuously believing…) that to stop continuously believing requires that person to lose their salvation.

That is not what Jesus said. That is an assumption.

Jesus goes on to say all those given to Him will come to Him and He will lose none of them.

He DID NOT say all those given to Him will come to Him and He will not lose any of them as long as they continuously believe.

Perhaps you could parse those verbs for us.

Peace to you

There is no if believe, its since they now believe

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Sooo......we have to be perfect? We cannot NOT hear, follow, or believe?

What about when my father died suddenly and I had a 5 to 10 second flicker of a doubt. The thought ran through my mind - "What if none of this that we believe is real - I'll never see my father again? I had stood there by his hospital bed and watched him draw his last breath.

It was just a flicker and the truth came back and I do not doubt at all. So did I lose my salvation?

Sooo......we have to be perfect? We cannot NOT hear, follow, or believe?

What about when my father died suddenly and I had a 5 to 10 second flicker of a doubt. The thought ran through my mind - "What if none of this that we believe is real - I'll never see my father again? I had stood there by his hospital bed and watched him draw his last breath.

It was just a flicker and the truth came back and I do not doubt at all. So did I lose my salvation?

No….no sister, you did not. You did experience I imagine deep trauma, deep sorrow & loss, but the Creator of the Universe is merciful, loving and forgiving and I know that first hand. So you never lost your salvation, you were just being human, but thanks for pointing it out. It clarifies.

 

[Russell Earl Kelly PHD]

This seems to be very close to the reformed view that true saints must persevere. Thus you have all the warnings against apostacy and all the calls to endeavor to live a holy life. And you have the warning that continuing in any known sin can result in damnation.

The Reformed view replaces free will with predestination. The Eternal Security view replaces free will after one is saved. Both are wrong. Why won't you explain the present participle in John 3:16. I clearly teaches that continuous believing is required for salvation.

 

[Russell Earl Kelly PHD]

This seems to be very close to the reformed view that true saints must persevere. Thus you have all the warnings against apostacy and all the calls to endeavor to live a holy life. And you have the warning that continuing in any known sin can result in damnation.

The Reformed view replaces free will with predestination. The Eternal Security view replaces free will after one is uncondtionally saved. Both are wrong. Why won't you explain the present participle in John 3:16. I clearly teaches that continuous believing is required for salvation.

 

[Russell Earl Kelly PHD]

Hi Russel, thanks for the excellent study question. Does the fact that those saved "continuously believe" mean we must "continually believe" in order to remain saved?

I say NO.

In Post #7, you address John 10:27, which has "hear" and "follow" in the present tense. I agree, those born anew sometime in their past are said to in the present still hear and follow, thus they continue their adherence to their faith in God.

Next, in post #8, you address John 3:16, which as "believes" or "is believing" as the condition of those who will not perish but have everlasting life.
Again, I agree, that is the characteristic of those who have become His sheep, born anew children of God.

Which brings us to post #9, and Jesus praying for those who believe because of His disciples word. I believe the idea extends past the present, and to everyone, such as me, who will believe in the future when viewed from the time of His prayer. Thus, the idea is at the time of being given to Christ, they will be, in that present time, believing, not had believed, or will believe.

Next you mention John 6:40 which as those who "behold the Son and believes (present tense) into Him will have everlasting life and will be raised on the last day. So once again we have some who is believing at the time of salvation and then continues be believe as solid doctrine.

Continuing with post 10, you address 1 John 5:13 which says those who are believing may know they have everlasting life. Here again we have the characteristic of those born anew of continuous belief or faith. In 1 John 5:1 we have those who are believing that Jesus is the Christ have been and are continuing to be born of God. We can, I believe reverse the logic ans conclude those born anew will continuous believe or have faith.

Next, post #11, you address Hebrews 6:4-6 with the apparent assumption those in view were born anew. I hold a different view. So setting that aside, let us continue with the characteristic of continuous belief or faith.

Finally you mention Romans 4:5 which says those who believe (present tense) on Him who justified, their faith is credited as righteousness. So again, when a person is believing, God takes action and subsequently, they continue to believe or have faith.

No one should dispute that analysis. However, if when a person is born anew, their faith is protected by the power of God, it would be impossible to anyone born anew to lose or destroy that faith.

Which brings me to my rebuttal (excepting Hebrews 6:4-6) of the contention that a born anew believer can somehow lose or destroy the faith they had when God credited it as righteousness. See 1 Peter 1:3-5. I believe when we are born anew, God protects our faith such that we will receive our inheritance, our salvation, our everlasting life.

Except for your last two statements, you sound like an Arminian. Which texts teach that removes free will and "protects" faith? The doctrtine teaches that one can deny Christ, never worship Him again and remain saved. I taught it for almost 60 years. You keep calling the presnet participles present tense when the participles mean much more. Look at John 6:37 again. "Come" is "continuously coming. In verses 35 and 40 "believeth" is "continuously believing." Again, John 6:40 teaches that it is God's will to save those who "keep on believing."

 

[Russell Earl Kelly PHD]

Explain Matthew 5:29-30. Christ is not speaking to the lost because they were destined to hell whether or not they plucked they eye out or cut their arm off. He is telling those who have been saved that, if they continue in habitual sin, they will go to hell. Plucking one's eye out or cutting one's arm off does not make one saved.

 

[MMDAN]

You ignore the verb tenses of John 10:27. "My sheep are continually hearing my voice and I am continuously hearing them and they are continuously following me and I am continuously giving them eternal life." As long as Christ's sheep continuously listen to Him and continuously follow Him, He will continue to know them and give them eternal life! Salvation is conditional on continuous believing as 55 believe participles teach.

In John 10:27-28, we read - My sheep hear My voice, (not some of them hear His voice and some of them don't hear His voice) and I know them, (not some of them He knows and some of them He doesn't know) and they follow Me. (not some of them follow Him and some of them don't follow Him) And I give them eternal life, (not some of them He gives eternal life and some of them He doesn't give eternal life) and they shall never perish; (not some of them will never perish and some of them will perish) neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. (not some of them will never be snatched out of His hand and some of them will be snatched out of His hand)

In CONTRAST with those do not believe and are not His sheep. (John 10:25-26)

 

[DaveXR650]

The Reformed view replaces free will with predestination. The Eternal Security view replaces free will after one is uncondtionally saved. Both are wrong. Why won't you explain the present participle in John 3:16. I clearly teaches that continuous believing is required for salvation.

I admit that the "Reformed view" covers a wide range. I am referring to the Puritan era Westminster Confession of Faith view, which I think is a fair representation of it. I'm not familiar with the present participle argument but I am saying that the Reformed view is that true saints do, and must persevere. This is opposed to the idea of "once saved always saved" as it is often taught, where after a person is saved, no matter what they do, even if they turn completely away, does not matter.

I have been reading some of the available literature on early free will Baptists and Arminius himself. I agree with you in that it is absurd to think that a person can consciously and permanently choose to leave the faith and yet still remain saved. I am also saying that is not the Reformed position. If I understand it right, I think the positions are similar with the difference being that the Reformed would say that the warnings against falling away and persisting in willful sin are part of the means in which a true saint is kept from doing so, and warned against those dangers. While it seems to me that the Free Will Baptists would be saying just to take the warnings as they are presented, don't do theology, and don't fall away.

If that is the case I respect that opinion. We are not asked to figure out why warnings are given, but to heed them. What led me to look at Puritan and Reformed writings was the concern I had that many of us were abusing our promises of eternal security and not taking seriously the calls to live a holy life. Reformed, Calvinistic writings were what I came across first that were helpful but I see now that Thomas Grantham, Arminius, Baxter or Wesley were saying much the same thing. Thanks for your posts. I noticed you don't post a lot but you should post more.

 

[Russell Earl Kelly PHD]

In John 10:27-28, we read - My sheep hear My voice, (not some of them hear His voice and some of them don't hear His voice) and I know them, (not some of them He knows and some of them He doesn't know) and they follow Me. (not some of them follow Him and some of them don't follow Him) And I give them eternal life, (not some of them He gives eternal life and some of them He doesn't give eternal life) and they shall never perish; (not some of them will never perish and some of them will perish) neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. (not some of them will never be snatched out of His hand and some of them will be snatched out of His hand)

In CONTRAST with those do not believe and are not His sheep. (John 10:25-26)

As long they His sheep keep on hearing His voice and keep on following Him, He keeps on knowing them and giving them eternal life. Those sheep are safe in His hand. Why are you avoiding the present tense participles?

 

[Russell Earl Kelly PHD]

The following are 15 of the 55 “believe” participles. When “believe” is fully translated, only those who “continuously” believe ---

will become “sons of God” (Jn 1:12),

will “have everlasting life” (Jn 3:15, 16, 36; 5:24),

will “not be condemned” (Jn 3:18),

will be saved by the will of God (Jn 6:40),

will receive “remission” of sins (Acts 10:43),

will be “justified” (Acts 13:39),

will receive salvation (Rom 1:16),

will be “righteous by faith” (Rom 3:22),

will have their “faith” “counted for righteousness” (Rom 4:5),

will receive “imputed” righteousness (Rom 4:24),

will receive the “promise” of faith (Gal 3:22),

will be “saved” (Heb 10:39),

will be “born again” (1 Jn 5:1),

can “know they are saved” (1 Jn 5:13)

--- all have Greek present participles of “believe” which mean continuous action.

 

[Russell Earl Kelly PHD]

I admit that the "Reformed view" covers a wide range. I am referring to the Puritan era Westminster Confession of Faith view, which I think is a fair representation of it. I'm not familiar with the present participle argument but I am saying that the Reformed view is that true saints do, and must persevere. This is opposed to the idea of "once saved always saved" as it is often taught, where after a person is saved, no matter what they do, even if they turn completely away, does not matter.

I have been reading some of the available literature on early free will Baptists and Arminius himself. I agree with you in that it is absurd to think that a person can consciously and permanently choose to leave the faith and yet still remain saved. I am also saying that is not the Reformed position. If I understand it right, I think the positions are similar with the difference being that the Reformed would say that the warnings against falling away and persisting in willful sin are part of the means in which a true saint is kept from doing so, and warned against those dangers. While it seems to me that the Free Will Baptists would be saying just to take the warnings as they are presented, don't do theology, and don't fall away.

If that is the case I respect that opinion. We are not asked to figure out why warnings are given, but to heed them. What led me to look at Puritan and Reformed writings was the concern I had that many of us were abusing our promises of eternal security and not taking seriously the calls to live a holy life. Reformed, Calvinistic writings were what I came across first that were helpful but I see now that Thomas Grantham, Arminius, Baxter or Wesley were saying much the same thing. Thanks for your posts. I noticed you don't post a lot but you should post more.

I feel betrayed by the very theology I once fanatically loved. Present participles are on every page of the New Testament but are covered up and treated like past-tense one-time professions of faith.

 

[Silverhair]

In John 10:27-28, we read - My sheep hear My voice, (not some of them hear His voice and some of them don't hear His voice) and I know them, (not some of them He knows and some of them He doesn't know) and they follow Me. (not some of them follow Him and some of them don't follow Him) And I give them eternal life, (not some of them He gives eternal life and some of them He doesn't give eternal life) and they shall never perish; (not some of them will never perish and some of them will perish) neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. (not some of them will never be snatched out of His hand and some of them will be snatched out of His hand)

In CONTRAST with those do not believe and are not His sheep. (John 10:25-26)

What is the point you are trying to make? The text shows us that some listened and would not believe and some listened and believed. The present tense shows that in both cases it was something they continued to do. Those that continued to rejected Him were lost those that continued to follow/trust in Him were saved.

But nothing in those verses says that those in either group could not change their mind regarding who Christ was. The sheep could stop believing and the lost could become sheep through faith.

 

[DaveXR650]

I feel betrayed by the very theology I once fanatically loved. Present participles are on every page of the New Testament but are covered up and treated like past-tense one-time professions of faith.

What I would point out is that the theology that betrayed you is a branch of hybrid Baptist theology called "easy believism" which is free will as far as getting saved but then hyper-Calvinist as far as staying saved. If taught wrong it can do a lot of damage. It is a type of antinomianism that Baxter, Wesley, and the Reformers were always warning against.

A Calvinist will say that if God calls you and regenerates you initially and is solely responsible for you getting saved of course you will stay saved and you will continuously believe because the whole process is driven by God. But an Arminian or I assume a Free Will Baptist, who puts a high value on the free will, or at least the non-refusal of the free will the question is logically then why can't I use my free will and leave the faith?

Even with the hybrid Baptist theology mentioned above you need to understand that the reasoning is that although there is some degree of free will involved in initial salvation, the idea of regeneration or being born again means that a new principle of life in given to a believer and it is now unthinkable that they would totally and finally leave the faith. That this can morph into "easy believism" is not new. Read Romans Chapter 6.

Yet even here be careful. I think it was Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones who said that if you preach the gospel of grace truthfully and faithfully you will be accused of antinomianism at some point. All I'm trying to say is that you have a point in that we are to continue in belief but that is not unique to Free Will Baptists and I wouldn't camp too much on the tenses in some verses, as if you have discovered a controversy that never really existed.

 

[canadyjd]

As long they His sheep keep on hearing His voice and keep on following Him, He keeps on knowing them and giving them eternal life. Those sheep are safe in His hand. Why are you avoiding the present tense participles?

Unlike your beliefs, some do not have to add words to the text to make it fit what they believe.

Peace to you

 

[Silverhair]

Unlike your beliefs, some do not have to add words to the text to make it fit what they believe.

Peace to you

He is not adding words he is just pointing out what the Greek text tenses show. Faith is not a one time thing but rather a continuing faith.