• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

What doctrines are essential to the new birth?

Status
Not open for further replies.

37818

Well-Known Member
i dont know - pray and ask the LORD,
Two Biblical facts. One's name is said to be blotted out because of sin, Exodus 32:33, Psalms 69:27-28. Or not to be blotted out, Revelation 3:5, 1 John 5:1-5. 1 John 5:9-13.
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Two Biblical facts. One's name is said to be blotted out because of sin, Exodus 32:33, Psalms 69:27-28. Or not to be blotted out, Revelation 3:5, 1 John 5:1-5. 1 John 5:9-13.
One book is for the living, so would be physical death, while another book is the lamb's Book of life, where those in there are eternally secured!
 

George Antonios

Well-Known Member
I'm sure we're all familiar with it. Statements like "Belief in Eternal Security is necessary to be saved, because otherwise you have a faulty view of true justification". What are your thoughts on this?

I believe in eternal security but only in the church age.
Now, the quoted statement, though potentially sound, is not true because it stems from an ignorance of how salvation works.
Getting saved is spoken of as a spiritual birth in the Bible. If a man has at some point in his life approached God as a guilty sinner and in his heart trusted nothing but the righteousness of Jesus Christ to justify him AT THAT MOMENT, then he was born again. The fact that he later got his doctrine messed up cannot disannul his earlier spiritual birth.
The problem is guys who never, AT ANY MOMENT, ever trusted only the righteousness of Christ to justify them. Those guys would be lost.
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I believe in eternal security but only in the church age.
Now, the statement above, though potentially sound, is not true because it stems from an ignorance of how salvation works.
Getting saved is spoken of as a spiritual birth in the Bible. If a man has at some point in his life approached God as a guilty sinner and in his heart trusted nothing but the righteousness of Jesus Christ to justify him AT THAT MOMENT, then he was born again.
The fact that he later got his doctrine messed up cannot disannul his earlier spiritual birth.
The problem is guys who never, AT ANY MOMENT, ever trusted only the righteousness of Christ to justify them. Those guys would be lost.
So no OT believer was eternally secured?
 

Noah Hirsch

Active Member
I'm sure we're all familiar with it. Statements like "Belief in Eternal Security is necessary to be saved, because otherwise you have a faulty view of true justification". What are your thoughts on this?

In my opinion, when most people repent, and call out to God for salvation, they aren't necessarily thinking at the time about eternal security. In my own experience, at the time of my salvation, I repented and called out to God out of a contrite heart, asking for His forgiveness and salvation. Neither the doctrine of eternal security, nor the thought that at some point I might stray from God, ever crossed my mind during my calling out to God. I'm assuming this is the same for most.

Someone in my church had mentioned, that he does not believe folks that do not believe in eternal security are truly born again. (For example, Mennonites).

What are your thoughts? Is not believing in eternal security the same as believing in a faith+works salvation?

Personally, I believe the Mennonite friends I have are no less born again than I am. I think people will be surprised in heaven, at who "made it", and who didn't. "I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion".

I think one can be saved without believing in eternal security. I think the doctrine of eternal security and the definite endurance of the saints can be a help not to fall into trusting in works, but I do not think it is necessary to believe it in order to not trust in works or one’s own righteousness. I think when one runs into heresy is that if they say that the blood of Christ is not sufficient to cover the sins of those who fall away for a time. Peter fell away for a time, but he did not loose his salvation. The truly saved can neither totally nor finally fall away. Peter neither totally nor finally fell away. He just fell away for a time, but it is not a requisite to salvation to believe this doctrine of the definite endurance of the saved, that once one is saved they can neither totally nor finally fall away, and consequently cannot loose their salvation.
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I think one can be saved without believing in eternal security. I think the doctrine of eternal security and the definite endurance of the saints can be a help not to fall into trusting in works, but I do not think it is necessary to believe it in order to not trust in works or one’s own righteousness. I think when one runs into heresy is that if they say that the blood of Christ is not sufficient to cover the sins of those who fall away for a time. Peter fell away for a time, but he did not loose his salvation. The truly saved can neither totally nor finally fall away. Peter neither totally nor finally fell away. He just fell away for a time, but it is not a requisite to salvation to believe this doctrine of the definite endurance of the saved, that once one is saved they can neither totally nor finally fall away, and consequently cannot loose their salvation.
Those who deny eternal security can indeed be saved, just have a misunderstood of just what happened to us once saved by grace of goid!
 

George Antonios

Well-Known Member
Salvation has always been after the fall on same basis

It has? Adam was saved by faith in Jesus Christ? Noah? Phineas? The Jews under the law?
Did the apostles know that salvation was through faith in the resurrection of Jesus Christ in the gospels?
Do you have verses to answer the above in the positive? Because the apostles sure were confused when Christ spoke of his death, let alone his resurrection.
No one denies that ultimately, it's the grace of God that saves a man, and the blood of Christ which allows his soul out of prison, but to declare that men under the law were saved by grace through faith in the resurrection of Jesus Christ ("looking forward to the cross") is a whole different story.
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
It has? Adam was saved by faith in Jesus Christ? Noah? Phineas? The Jews under the law?
Did the apostles know that salvation was through faith in the resurrection of Jesus Christ in the gospels?
Do you have verses to answer the above in the positive? Because the apostles sure were confused when Christ spoke of his death, let alone his resurrection.
No one denies that ultimately, it's the grace of God that saves a man, and the blood of Christ which allows his soul out of prison, but to declare that men under the law were saved by grace through faith in the resurrection of Jesus Christ ("looking forward to the cross") is a whole different story.
They had the Gospel preached to them even under the OT, as in Hebrews, correct?
 

George Antonios

Well-Known Member
Gen 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

A) Where in the verse did God address Adam?
B) Where in the verse did the word "Messiah" appear?
C) Granting the above two, where in the verse does God say that the Messiah would bring redemption?
D) Where in the verse does God mention "his people"?

Don't insert your own 20/20 rear-view into the words.
 

Benyamin

New Member
Interesting replies, everyone. Thanks for your input so far.
I would add, I do believe that eternal security has Old Testament roots, in the form of God's relation to Israel. When God wanted to destroy Israel at Sinai for their rebellion and start over with Moses, Moses interceded for them and asked God not to destroy them because of the covenants sake.

I believe OT souls were saved in the same way as we are today. In short, believing God.
"Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him as righteousness".
Of course, they didn't fully understand the sacrificial atonement of the future Messiah. But the important thing is, they believed God, and righteousness was imputed to them.
This is the root of the gospel, I believe. 1 John 5:10 says "He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son."

I think it could be said of us Christians the exact thing which was said of Abraham. By believing in Christ, thus believing the "record that God gave of his Son", we are Believing God, and receiving imputed righteousness.
 

George Antonios

Well-Known Member
Of course, they didn't fully understand the sacrificial atonement of the future Messiah. But the important thing is, they believed God, and righteousness was imputed to them.

God imputed righteousness unto Phinehas under the law for a work:
Psa 106:30 Then stood up Phinehas, and executed judgment: and so the plague was stayed.
Psa 106:31 And that was counted unto him for righteousness unto all generations for evermore.

That's what the words of God say.

Paul explicitly told us that the law is not of faith (Gal.3:12) and then quoted Moses in Leviticus 18:5, twice, The man that doeth them shall live in them (Gal.3:12, Rom.10:5).
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Gen 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

A) Where in the verse did God address Adam?
B) Where in the verse did the word "Messiah" appear?
C) Granting the above two, where in the verse does God say that the Messiah would bring redemption?
D) Where in the verse does God mention "his people"?

Don't insert your own 20/20 rear-view into the words.
That is where the Gospel was first introduced
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top