The Gospel Saves, if...

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tuor:
If you believe you are saved at the moment, yet at some point could prove yourself not to be a part of the elect, you believe that once you are saved, you are not necessarily always saved? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

My salvation is not dependent on my assurance. If I am trusting in my assurance, I am trusting in the wrong thing. This has no bearing on eternal security. Anyone saved is eternally secure whether they believe it or not, whether they are sure of salvation or not, because salvation depends on God, not on me.

I believe that once a person is saved, he is always saved. However, assurance of salvation may come and go. A person who is not saved might believe he is. I talk to these people all the time. They live in open sin, in adultery, drunkenness, drug abuse; they haven't been in church in 20 years; but they claim salvation and claim to be sure of it. I had one lady tell me in the midst of an adulterous relationship that she knew she was on her way to heaven and that God would punish for it but she was going to do it anyway. I said "What about 1 John 2:6 that the one who says they know him but do not obey him are liars (about knowing him)." She said, "Well maybe I am not saved then." The fact that she could go on living that way with no concern for it gave evidence that her assurance was a false one.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pastor Larry: Then why do you find it difficult?...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Simply put:

Point 1:

Larry claimed he has no doubt.

Larry also admitted he is fallible.

Therefore, there is, at least, the possibility that what he is certain about my not be in line with reality.

Larry is not indicating where in my statement my logic is erred. If anyone else notices any inconsistency in my statement, please advise where it is.

Point 2:

It does not seem to require the citation of Biblical passages to demonstrate the logical conclusion to Larry’s remark.


Point 3:

Larry's whole argument has no bearing upon my objection to his statement regarding doubt and infallibility. For example, what does Larry’s perception of my denial of the possibility that one could fall from right doctrine have to do with his statement that on the one hand he does not doubt yet, on the other hand, he is fallible?

What is in question is not whether someone can fall away from right doctrine but the logic of Larry’s statement.

Point 4:

Just for the record, I have addressed Biblical passages in the past; however, Larry has not shown exactly where in my explanation of the passages I have erred.

Larry continually shifts the focus, adding passages without answering my objections to verses already put forth, accusing instead of debating and merely making statements and citing passages with no explanation on how statement and passage both relate to each other.

Point 5:

There is no difficulty on my part to understand. The difficulty lies in Larry’s incomprehension of how someone can disagree with his position.

So far, in this discussion, Larry has stated that he does not doubt his salvation but that such certainty on his part is not infallible.

Unless Larry can move beyond accusations, shifting subjects, and arbitrary scripture citations to show how my conclusion to his assertion above is illogical, I'll reserve further response.

[ February 20, 2002: Message edited by: Nelson ]

 

Nelson,
It might be because I believe the same thing as Pastor Larry does on this issue, but his arguments seem to have been both Scriptural and logical. I feel your problem is that you are seeking a reconciliation where the Scripture gives none. The Bible most certainly speaks of things that have been written that we might "know" that we have eternal life. These evidences are of the type that Pastor Larry has listed. It may all be summed up by "walking in the Spirit" and not "after the flesh." Security is based on a present belief in Jesus Christ not a past action. I know I'm saved because right now I am believing in Christ to save me, and the fruits of my life demonstrate that that faith is genuine.

On the flip side, there are very clear passages in Scripture that teach that we are to exhort the brethren daily lest an evil heart of unbelief spring up in us. Or, as another passage teaches, give all diligence to add to your faith, virtue; and to virtue, knowledge . . .. We do these things to "make our calling and election sure." Or, we are made partakers of Christ IF we hold the beginning of our confidence steadfast unto the end.

Nowhere are the two themes seen more clearly than in Phillipians "Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God that worketh in you both to will and to do of His good pleasure." We are "working it out" because that is the evidence that God is working in us.

Anyway, there is that tension in Scripture. You can know that you have eternal life, but you better be striving to become more holy, because if you don't, you have no Scriptural basis to think you're saved. So, Scripture teaches exactly what Pastor Larry has been saying. Calvinism teaches the same thing. It says that we are secure, because the salvation of the elect was fixed from before the foundation of the world. But, Calvinism also teaches "Perseverance of the Saints." The saints must persevere or they prove they are not of the elect, for "it is God that worketh in us both to will and to do of His good pleasure."

 

Unbelievable!!!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nelson:
Simply put:

Point 1:

Larry claimed he has no doubt.

Larry also admitted he is fallible.

Therefore, there is, at least, the possibility that what he is certain about my not be in line with reality.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is not original with you. I already said this.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Point 2:

It does not seem to require the citation of Biblical passages to demonstrate the logical conclusion to Larry’s remark.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was referring to the biblical passages as proof for why I believe what I do and why my belief is apparently contrary to yours. Your problem is with Scripture, not with my statements.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Point 3:

Larry's whole argument has no bearing upon my objection to his statement regarding doubt and infallibility. For example, what does Larry’s perception of my denial of the possibility that one could fall from right doctrine have to do with his statement that on the one hand he does not doubt yet, on the other hand, he is fallible?

What is in question is not whether someone can fall away from right doctrine but the logic of Larry’s statement.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This seems absurd. I do not really even know what you are trying to say here. My point was this: If someone ceases to believe right doctrine, they give evidence they were never truly saved. They may continue to have "no doubts" about their salvation but their "no doubt" is not in line with reality. I don't know what you don't understand about that. You "have been reconciled ... if you continue firm in the faith" (Col 1:22-24). If you do not continue in the faith (right doctrine) then you have not been reconciled.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Point 4:

Just for the record, I have addressed Biblical passages in the past; however, Larry has not shown exactly where in my explanation of the passages I have erred.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have not seen you address any passages with regards to this. Just to show you, look back through this thread and see when the last time you cited Scripture in support of your position? It hasn't been since we started this discussion on assurance. I have shown time and time again where you have erred in your understanding of other passages.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Larry continually shifts the focus, adding passages without answering my objections to verses already put forth, accusing instead of debating and merely making statements and citing passages with no explanation on how statement and passage both relate to each other.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You apparently are not able to read with ease. I have answered your objections, shown where your logic is flawed, corrected your misunderstandings of my statements, and supported my belief with Scripture. What else do you want?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Point 5:

There is no difficulty on my part to understand. The difficulty lies in Larry’s incomprehension of how someone can disagree with his position.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No. My difficulty is why I say one thing and you read something entirely different.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>So far, in this discussion, Larry has stated that he does not doubt his salvation but that such certainty on his part is not infallible.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You got this right. So what?

Nelson, You need to stop this kind of post. I have been clear. If you have questions about what I have said, ask. Do not put words in my mouth and do not misrepresent what I am saying. I do not need you to tell me what I believe. You have attempted several times to twist what I have said to make yourself look more favorable. That is unacceptable in this forum. If you want to discuss ideas and debate, have the decency to use my arguments the way I would use them and then refute them. Do not set up straw men based on your own ideas of what you would like me to say and then destroy them. That will no longer be accepted.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nelson:So far, in this discussion, Larry has stated that he does not doubt his salvation but that such certainty on his part is not infallible.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pastor Larry:You got this right. So what? If you have questions about what I have said, ask. Do not put words in my mouth and do not misrepresent what I am saying. I do not need you to tell me what I believe.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

1. Since, it seems, when I have stated how I have understood Larry's point, he has either said I have understood correctly as far as it goes or has stated I am misrepresenting his view, yet, has not demonstrated how that view was misrepresented.

2. I have never in any post stated what Larry believes. I did challange Larry's statements, as I am challanging this one.

2. Larry has stated my comment above is represents a correct assessment of his view.

3. I would very much appreciate if there are others who would read my above statement, which Larry says correctly reflects his view. Please advise me what it means to you.

Please advise if it is equivalent to stating:

The fact that Larry is certain of his salvation is not certainty that he is.

or:

Larry, though sure that he is saved, may be mistaken having such certainty.

If I receive a few responses either on this board or by Email, I will respond to them, otherwise, I have exhausted my efforts and will make no further objections to Larry's statements on this particular subject.

(If I do answer Larry, please, someone remind me I said I would not)

[ February 20, 2002: Message edited by: Nelson ]

 

Nelson,

You have a very hard time reading. If you do not understand what I have said, then I cannot help you. I have been very clear. I have read and reread to try to figure out why you are having such a hard time. Let me summarize once again.

1. Assurance is not infallible for anyone. That does not mean it is not possible. One can be sure without having absolute assurance.

2. I have listed verses that give evidence for assurance and the reasons behind that assurance. Here again, you still do not want to deal with that. You want to quibble over words that you have misunderstood.

You have again misrepresented my words. Your second quote puts four statement from completely different contexts together and make them appear as one. If you would read the post those came out of, you would understand the point being made by those statements.

If you have absolute assurance, then you are God, for only God knows all things. Do you know that in 10 years you will not have apostatized and turned completely from the faith? You have no way of knowing that. Therefore, your assurance cannot be absolute. While you have tried to make a big deal out of this, it is not one.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pastor Larry:
Nelson,

You have a very hard time reading. If you do not understand what I have said, then I cannot help you. I have been very clear. I have read and reread to try to figure out why you are having such a hard time. Let me summarize once again.

1. Assurance is not infallible for anyone. That does not mean it is not possible. One can be sure without having absolute assurance.

2. I have listed verses that give evidence for assurance and the reasons behind that assurance. Here again, you still do not want to deal with that. You want to quibble over words that you have misunderstood.

You have again misrepresented my words. Your second quote puts four statement from completely different contexts together and make them appear as one. If you would read the post those came out of, you would understand the point being made by those statements.

If you have absolute assurance, then you are God, for only God knows all things. Do you know that in 10 years you will not have apostatized and turned completely from the faith? You have no way of knowing that. Therefore, your assurance cannot be absolute. While you have tried to make a big deal out of this, it is not one.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, I am having a hard time following you, because it DOES seem that you contradict yourself in earlier posts.
I do not have absolute assurance in the sense that an angel has arrived on my doorstep with a telegram from God or that He has spoken to me in an audible voice.
I DO have absolute assurance, subjective and objective, because of the character and promises of God, including in the inerrant Scriptures.
I have known Him for over 30 years. If ten years from now I theoretically were to fall into doctrinal error, it does not mean that I was never really saved. It means that I got confused and that my Father will correct me at some point of my error.

This reminds me of another thread on being disappointed in church leaders. Everyone except for one gave a succinct, doctrinally correct answer. But Danette answered the heart question that was really being asked.

Even strong Christians are going to often have very hard things happen to them. If a person's whole family is killed in a car wreck and that person finds it hard to pray or read the Bible or go to church for a long time, it does not necessarily show that he was never really saved. It shows that he is dealing with extreme grief and that other Christians need to come along side him in his grief, instead of just giving him theological statements and questioning his salvation.

Whether Calvinism or Arminianism is more correct, God is at work in the world drawing people to Him, not passively letting them be tricked or failing to complete what He has begun. He is my FATHER, not looking for ways to take back what He has given to me.

Karen

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tuor:
Karen,

What is absolute is that the elect will be preserved. If you believe you are preserved, then you believe you are of the elect. No where in scripture does it say that we know that we must be a part of the elect. Only God knows that information.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What a fatalistic and worried way you must be surely be going through life!!

Karen

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tuor:
Not at all. I just trust in God and know that His will must be done.

Trust and obey.

I just don't believe it is my place to make a final judgement on anyone's salvation, including my own. That is God's domain.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It is hard for me to tell if we ultimately agree or not. The very fact that you trust and obey indicates salvation. If you are not sure about your salvation, why are you not concerned? Hell is something to avoid.

Karen

 

Tudor to say that is to say that the sacrifice that Christ made was no good. God didn't know what he was doing. Gods children may fall from many things but I assure you those Jesus Christ purchased with his own blood can never fall from his grace. Upon this ROCK I build my church and the gates of hell... The Gates Of Hell... "THE GATES OF HELL" shall not prevail against... Brother Glen

[ February 21, 2002: Message edited by: tyndale1946 ]

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Karen: Well, I am having a hard time following you [i.e. Larry]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Karen seems to be the only one, thus far, who is willing to express an opinion regarding the clarity or ambiquity of Larry's posts.

Thanks, Karen.

However, I would like to know if the objection I presented was clear or not.

Is there anyone else who would assist by giving us there opinion on whose messages are difficult to understand?

Also, if there was a particular comment I made that seemed confusing, please quote it so I can either clarify my meaning or put my strait-jacket back on.

Please repond either on this board or to my Email address, whichever makes you feel more comfortable.

[ February 22, 2002: Message edited by: Nelson ]

 

Nelson,
Just for the record, I too posted my thoughts on Pastor Larry's comments (Feb. 20 6:44p). As I said there, I feel he has maintained the same tension as does Scripture: You may KNOW that you have eternal life, but you must persevere or you prove you're lost.

 

Sorry for my error Tuor... tell you what you can call me Brother Len... Till we post again... Brother Glen