Why do people hate the doctrine of Eternal Security?

[drfuss]

As I continue to study conditional and unconditional security, I have came upon imputed righteousness and imparted righteousness. I like the idea of imputed righteousness concerning unconditional eternal security. Obviously it is used to back up unconditional eternal security. Imparted righteousness seems like it helps us to be saved, but afte that we (with the help of the Holy Spirit) must make sure to remain in the faith.

drfuss: Your connection of imputed righteousness versus imparted righteousness with eternal security is uncertain to me. In the book "4 Views on Eternal Security", Dr. Stephan Ashby represents the Reformed Arminian View (conditional eternal security such as FreeWill Baptists). Dr. Ashby indicates that the sinner is justified "purely by God's imputation of Christ's fighteousness to the sinner through faith". He further goes on to say that this differs with many Wesleyan Arminians.

My point is that there are many who believe in conditional security that also believe in imputed righteousness. Imputed righteousness versus imparted righteousness should not be an issue concerning eternal security, unless you are considering Wesleyan Arminianism.

 

[Nicholas25]

Imputed righteousness helps back unconditional eternal security. As for the conditional arguement, when would someone leave their salvation? When would they no longer be the righteousness of God? When they left the faith? When they no longer put their faith in the work Christ did on the cross?

 

[drfuss]

Imputed righteousness helps back unconditional eternal security. As for the conditional arguement, when would someone leave their salvation? When would they no longer be the righteousness of God? When they left the faith? When they no longer put their faith in the work Christ did on the cross?

drfuss: I was quoting Dr. Ashby who is an assistant professor of philosophy and religious studies at Ball State University and holds graduate degrees from Grand Rapids Baptist Theological Seminary (which I assume is a FWB Seminary). Perhaps you should ask your pastor in your FWB church the above questions.

I think the answer to your above questions is that God removes the imputed righteousness from a Christian when he no longer puts his faith in the work Christ did on the cross. I have never attended a FWB Church or studied the issue on my own, so there may be a better answer.

 

[Me4Him]

I think the answer to your above questions is that God removes the imputed righteousness from a Christian when he no longer puts his faith in the work Christ did on the cross.

If God took away the life he gave to a person, then God would be what we call an "Abortionist", because God had "Aborted" that "life".

The law requires a "death" for sin, that's the "wages/fine" which Jesus paid, so how do you suppose the new sins you commit after being saved are going to be paid for, Jesus isn't coming back to die for any "new sins".

The only way a person can remain saved is to be "SEALED" against all new sins they might commit, which the "HOLY GHOST" does.

One sin, any sin, make you guilty of all, so it doesn't matter which law you break, or how many laws, you would be condemned with the first sin.

Paul continued to sin but God told him his "GRACE" would cover his sins, and that "GRACE" abounds much more than all the sins of the world, but the world won't accept it.

We're told to be "PERFECT", even as God is "perfect", but that is only possible by having the "RIGHTEOUSNESS OF JESUS" imputed to "US",

It's not "OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS" that make us "Perfect" but the "Righteousness of Jesus", so in order to break the righteousness we posses, that is cause us to lose salvation, you would have to "Convict Jesus" of a sin, because it's his righeousness, not ours.

We can walk away from God, but God will "NEVER" walk away from us, even if we get so far from God we forget we've "BEEN PURGED" from our old sins.

Walking away from God can result in the "Chastisement" of having our "body of sin" turned over to satan for "IT'S DESTRUCTION", but the soul will still be saved.

Which is what occurs to the "Five Virgins" and other people who enter the Trib, Satan kills the "FLESH" but not the souls of "believers".

 

[Allan]

Imputed righteousness helps back unconditional eternal security. As for the conditional arguement, when would someone leave their salvation? When would they no longer be the righteousness of God? When they left the faith? When they no longer put their faith in the work Christ did on the cross?

Here is one problem in the above line of thinking.

God did not save us and leave us the way we were before He saved us.
Before He saved us we were at emnity with Him, did not desire to know much be with Him. Point in fact if we got saved and left in this state it would be no wonder some if not many would leave, if they were not trying to 'pump' themselves up constantly to maintain their salvation.

However the fact of the matter is this: God has given us a New Nature in which "Old things are passed away (no more) all things have become new". God has given us not only a new status (saved) but also a new spirit that desires the things of God and hates those things that God hates. Yes, it is at odds with corrupt flesh but flesh does not rule the spirit who craves the love and pleasure of their Heavenly Father. God allowed us to accept or reject His great love proffered toward us but God also promised that He will keep us (1 Peter 1). He will work out HIS plan for our lives in Christ and He has changed us who came willingly to Him trusting in His love to keep us. Scripture says "He who is able to keep you" not "you who are able.. or.. who must keep yourselves" but HIM who is able to Keep you.

Jude 1:24 Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present [you] faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy,
Jud 1:25 To the only wise God our Saviour, [be] glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen.

Secondly, and this is the kicker. You ready.
I don't know if you are a father but I am. I love my children without reservation or conditions. There is nothing they can do in which I will disown them (forsake them) and nothing they could do to make me turn my back on them leaving them alone or without me (leave them).

If I, being a man and therefore not perfect, can love this much, how much more does our Heavenly Father who IS perfect love us. Did not Jesus state that "I will never leave you, NOR forsake you" Even if you could turn you back on God, God by virtue of His own promise can not leave you regardless. You are family by Blood, the Blood of Christ Jesus. This has not only placed us God's family but secured us so that our place is forever assured. This is why our salvation and life is called eternal in the now or present not future, but now.

Lastly even if someone could loose/reject their salvation scrpture states they can not be saved again, period. In order to do so they would have to crusify Christ again and thus put Him to an open shame. Why does it put Him to shame? Because that which He purchased and made His own by His blood, He could not keep and thus proved itself greater than He is.

 

[Zenas]

Well. I’ve been gone a couple of days and come back to find myself the target of all kinds of aspersions. Amy and DHK, you took umbrage at what I intended to be a superfluous comment concerning knowledge and faith. Concerning 1 John 5:13, Amy, it is clear that John wanted to reassure his readers that they could know they had eternal life. Yet John, more than any other apostle, seemed to understand the difference between knowledge and faith and he placed great emphasis in his first hand experiences. 1 John 1:1-3. Indeed he validates his authority by reminding his readers that he has seen with his eyes, heard with his ears and touched with his hands the Word of Life. Like John, I know what I have experienced with my five senses. The rest I have to take on faith and so do you if you would be willing to admit it. “Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.” Faith gets us a long way but it does not equate to knowledge. DHK, you don’t know any of those things you recited any more than I know Columbus discovered America in 1492. The evidence for the truths of the Bible is very strong, as is the evidence that Columbus discovered America, and I believe both propositions with all my heart. But I did not accompany Columbus on his voyage, nor did I see, hear and touch Jesus like John did. Therefore, I cannot know these things. I have to go on faith.

 

[Zenas]

Quite a heresy you are espousing there.

That’s painting with a really broad brush. In fact, the belief that our salvation is not secure but can be lost is held by the vast majority of Christians today including Anglicans, Methodists, Pentecostals, Church of Christ, Catholics, Orthodox and Lutherans. Moreover, the concept of eternal security was never articulated by any church until the time of Calvin.

 

[Zenas]

MB said this regarding 1 Corinthians 9:27:

1Co 9:27 But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway.

Notice that this verse does not say that Paul will be a castaway. It says he should be a castaway as we all should because no man is with out sin

“Should” is not used here to express obligation or duty, but rather as a helping verb to the verb “be”. It means “may” or “might”, implying a possibility. It is used exactly the same as the children’s bedtime prayer: “If I should die before I wake . . . .” So the verse could be read to say, “. . . I myself might be a castaway.”

MB said this regarding James 5:19-20:

Jas 5:19 Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him;
Jas 5:20 Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.


Inorder to be converted one must not have ever been saved. Once converted always converted. This verse speaks of sinners and those born of God do not sin. The sin that dwells in their flesh may sin but the Spirit of that man does not sin. The flesh is not going to be saved in it's present state. We will have new bodies when we meet Christ face to face. This flesh will die.

The flesh can sin but the spirit cannot? This sounds like Gnosticism. James says if any of you (Jewish Christians) do err from the truth (depart from the truth, you can’t err from the truth unless you have had the truth). He speaks of a Christian who has departed from the truth and is led back to truth by a fellow Christian. The fellow Christian will have saved a soul from death (saved a person from going to Hell). So the erring Christian was saved, then he was lost, and then he is saved again.

MB said this regarding Galations 5:4:

Gal 5:4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

The fact is we are not justified by the Law. We are justified by Grace through faith, and both are gifts from God. In fact the Law never saved anyone for if it had then the death of our Lord would have been unnecessary

But you have not mentioned the operative clause is this verse, “You have fallen from grace.” You can’t fall from grace unless you were once in a state of grace. The O.P. asked, "Why do people hate the doctrine of eternal security?" I might ask, "Why do advocates of eternal security hate scripture that disproves it?" This is post I have just responded to is a prime example of how people will twist scripture out of anything resembling its original meaning in order to avoid being confronted by it.

 

[Nicholas25]

What does 1 Timothy 1:18-20 mean to you? Timothy, my child, I am giving you this instruction in keeping with the prophecies previously made about you, so that by them you may strongly engage in battle, having faith and a good conscience. Some have rejected these and have suffered shipwreck of their faith. Hymenaeus and Alexander are among them, and I have delivered them to Satan, so that they may be taught not to blaspheme.
(Holman Christian Standard Bible)

1 Timothy 5:15? For some have already turned away to follow Satan.
(Holman Christian Standard Bible)

 

[Amy.G]

What does 1 Timothy 1:18-20 mean to you? Timothy, my child, I am giving you this instruction in keeping with the prophecies previously made about you, so that by them you may strongly engage in battle, having faith and a good conscience. Some have rejected these and have suffered shipwreck of their faith. Hymenaeus and Alexander are among them, and I have delivered them to Satan, so that they may be taught not to blaspheme.
(Holman Christian Standard Bible)

1 Timothy 5:15? For some have already turned away to follow Satan.
(Holman Christian Standard Bible)

Paul disciplined Hymenaeus and Alexander (don't know who he is) because of the false teaching that the resurrection had already occurred. The point of church discipline is to correct the sinner so that he will repent and can rejoin the fellowship of the church. It doesn't mean that he has lost his salvation. If Hymenaeus had lost his salvation, what is the point of Paul saying "so he can be taught not to blaspheme"?
The faith that can become "shipwrecked" is not the faith that saved us, but faith in God concerning other matters. The saints that believed the false teaching that the resurrection had already taken place were having a crisis of faith in that they felt rejected by God because they thought they had been left behind.
Faith can be shipwrecked without losing salvation. Because once God saves you, He seals you. He does not renege on His promises.

 

[Marcia]

What does 1 Timothy 1:18-20 mean to you? Timothy, my child, I am giving you this instruction in keeping with the prophecies previously made about you, so that by them you may strongly engage in battle, having faith and a good conscience. Some have rejected these and have suffered shipwreck of their faith. Hymenaeus and Alexander are among them, and I have delivered them to Satan, so that they may be taught not to blaspheme.
(Holman Christian Standard Bible)

1 Timothy 5:15? For some have already turned away to follow Satan.
(Holman Christian Standard Bible)

Turning one over to Satan was a phrase used to put someone out of the synagogue. In this case, it means putting them out of fellowship in the church because they are not repenting. This is a last resort to put them in a situation in which they will be buffeted by the world (Satan and the world work together), be convincted, and come to their senses. Paul advises this in 1 Cor (5 I believe) for the man sleeping with his father's wife.

As for 1 Tim 5, this goes along with other passages about people who seemed to profess Christ but then abandoned that. It could also mean those believers who drift away for a time. I've seen this quite often - believers who drift away and then come back, sometimes years later. This is not unusual; it has nothing to do with losing salvation. Even Jesus said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan," not meaning that Peter had turned into Satan, but Satan was working through Peter to tempt Jesus not to go to the cross. And it must be looked at in comparison with the scriptures that have been posted here and on the thread in Other Christian Denominations over and over that clearly teach salvation is secure.

 

[DHK]

DHK, you don’t know any of those things you recited any more than I know Columbus discovered America in 1492. The evidence for the truths of the Bible is very strong, as is the evidence that Columbus discovered America, and I believe both propositions with all my heart. But I did not accompany Columbus on his voyage, nor did I see, hear and touch Jesus like John did. Therefore, I cannot know these things. I have to go on faith.

To say what you are saying is to deny all of history, secular and otherwise.
Are you truly saying that the only things that you can know for sure are the things that you see, feel, hear, yourself--with your own senses; and even then can doubt because our senses are infallible. Where does history start and where does it end? And how much of if it can we know with any certainty that has happened?

Did Titus in 70 AD destroy the city of Jerusalem? If so how do you know?
Was there a historical Jesus? What would make you deny such a fact?
Are the things that he said and did verifiable?

Are the things Galileo did verifiable?
What about the Wright brothers?
How much of history can we trust?

You act like a complete skeptic.

The things I mention I can know of a certainty, because though I wasn't there, others were to testify of these facts for me. I cannot go back and call over 500 witnesses to the resurrection liars, now can? Did they all have the same delusion? same mental illness? What will you say to this?

Did your great, great, great grandfather exist? How do you know?
Have you ever seen Him

Do you have a brain?
How do you know? Have you ever seen it?

 

[Jim1999]

Columbus never ever set foot on American soil. He didn't discover America at all...Check your history books! He went to the Islands in the Caribbean.

Cheers,

Jim

PS. I wasn't there either.

 

[MB]

MB said this regarding 1 Corinthians 9:27:


“Should” is not used here to express obligation or duty, but rather as a helping verb to the verb “be”. It means “may” or “might”, implying a possibility. It is used exactly the same as the children’s bedtime prayer: “If I should die before I wake . . . .” So the verse could be read to say, “. . . I myself might be a castaway.”

I disagree. There is nothing of the sort here at all. There is no supposed scenario. The "should be" obviously is a statement of what we deserve but do not receive because we have been seal by the Holy Spirit.
We aren't saved by ourselves or anything we do but, because, of the work of the Holy Spirit. Our belief, our surrender, our every intent towards Salvation is completely the work of God. Eph 2:8-9 & Jn 6:29 Salvation being the work of God, why would God save you only to take it back? When He knew long before you failed that you would. To me this is like saying God is dumb and doesn’t know any better.

MB said this regarding James 5:19-20:

The flesh can sin but the spirit cannot? This sounds like Gnosticism. James says if any of you (Jewish Christians) do err from the truth (depart from the truth, you can’t err from the truth unless you have had the truth). He speaks of a Christian who has departed from the truth and is led back to truth by a fellow Christian. The fellow Christian will have saved a soul from death (saved a person from going to Hell). So the erring Christian was saved, then he was lost, and then he is saved again.

Anyone who sins err's from the truth saved or not and you do not have to be saved to err.
Gnosticism Really! Then I guess Paul was a Gnostic he said;
Rom 7:14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
Rom 7:15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
Rom 7:16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
Rom 7:17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
God's word devideds the spirit from the soul.

No one knows who wrote Hebrews but they said;
Heb 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

When saved our Spirit is at rest and Jesus Christ lives out the rest of our lives. That is if you have surrendered your life to Him. If you haven't surrendered to Him I can understand why you believe the way you do.

Maybe I should explain surrender or submission to God. We give up the rebellion. We turn over the control of our selves. Once given up we do not spiritually start the rebellion all over again.This would not be a genuine surrender. The flesh is carnal for the most part it can't help but sin, it's in the nature of the flesh. Our spirits have been given a new nature and it does not sin. It has agreed with the Law. If we could loose our Salvation there would not be one soul ever saved because everyman sins. In the moment we are commiting sin we are living in it and we are doing it full aware of the consequinces.
What about those who just walk away. Walking away is still rebellion our flesh sometimes can do that but our spirit cannot.

MB said this regarding Galations 5:4:
But you have not mentioned the operative clause is this verse, “You have fallen from grace.” You can’t fall from grace unless you were once in a state of grace. The O.P. asked, "Why do people hate the doctrine of eternal security?" I might ask, "Why do advocates of eternal security hate scripture that disproves it?" This is post I have just responded to is a prime example of how people will twist scripture out of anything resembling its original meaning in order to avoid being confronted by it.

The verse is speaking to those who live by the Law. Christ has no effect for them because they are trying to live by the Law This is why they are fallen they rejected Christ and tried to be justified by the Law.
Gal 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
It seems to me that your problem here is that you want to live by the Law.
Try reading the whole passage instead of one verse at a time. Any body can make any book say what ever they want one sentence at a time taken out of context.
MB

 

[Zenas]

To say what you are saying is to deny all of history, secular and otherwise.
Are you truly saying that the only things that you can know for sure are the things that you see, feel, hear, yourself--with your own senses; and even then can doubt because our senses are infallible. Where does history start and where does it end? And how much of if it can we know with any certainty that has happened?

Did Titus in 70 AD destroy the city of Jerusalem? If so how do you know?
Was there a historical Jesus? What would make you deny such a fact?
Are the things that he said and did verifiable?

Are the things Galileo did verifiable?
What about the Wright brothers?
How much of history can we trust?

You act like a complete skeptic.

The things I mention I can know of a certainty, because though I wasn't there, others were to testify of these facts for me. I cannot go back and call over 500 witnesses to the resurrection liars, now can? Did they all have the same delusion? same mental illness? What will you say to this?

Did your great, great, great grandfather exist? How do you know?
Have you ever seen Him

Do you have a brain?
How do you know? Have you ever seen it?

DHK, you're making a mountain out of a mole hill. Of course I believe all these things are true. But I also know many things we are taught as truth are not. We have to weigh the evidence and embrace those things that seem right and reject those things that don't measure up. The result is that things I regard as truth are very different from what someone else might regard as truth. As for you, I am completely confident that most things in the spiritual realm you proclaim to "know" would be denounced as completely false by someone like Richard Dawkins. What you "know" as true, he "knows" is false. So who really "knows?" Again I submit that in the spiritual realm, where we can't see, hear or feel anything, we can't really know anything. All we have is faith. And that is enough.

 

[Jim1999]

Richard Dawkins can't even speak the King's English let alone be accepted as an authority. Ever heard him speak?

We have the Bible as our authority, At least it has been verified in history, let alone the church.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[Zenas]

MB said:

I disagree. There is nothing of the sort here at all. There is no supposed scenario. The "should be" obviously is a statement of what we deserve but do not receive because we have been seal by the Holy Spirit.
We aren't saved by ourselves or anything we do but, because, of the work of the Holy Spirit. Our belief, our surrender, our every intent towards Salvation is completely the work of God. Eph 2:8-9 & Jn 6:29 Salvation being the work of God, why would God save you only to take it back? When He knew long before you failed that you would. To me this is like saying God is dumb and doesn’t know any better.

Few people will agree with you on your interpretation here unless they are of the KJV only school of Bible study. The NASB renders 1 Corinthians 9:27 thusly: "But I discipline my body and make it my slave, so that, after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified." The NIV and the HCSB render this verse similarly.

Then, concerning James 5:19-20, MB said:

When saved our Spirit is at rest and Jesus Christ lives out the rest of our lives. That is if you have surrendered your life to Him. If you haven't surrendered to Him I can understand why you believe the way you do.

Maybe I should explain surrender or submission to God. We give up the rebellion. We turn over the control of our selves. Once given up we do not spiritually start the rebellion all over again.This would not be a genuine surrender. The flesh is carnal for the most part it can't help but sin, it's in the nature of the flesh. Our spirits have been given a new nature and it does not sin. It has agreed with the Law. If we could loose our Salvation there would not be one soul ever saved because everyman sins. In the moment we are commiting sin we are living in it and we are doing it full aware of the consequinces.
What about those who just walk away. Walking away is still rebellion our flesh sometimes can do that but our spirit cannot.

There is nothing here to rebut my interpretation of this passage. Yes, I have surrendered myself to Christ, yet I probably sin daily. And it's none of this dichotomy of my body sins but my spirit does not. It is sin for which I must seek forgiveness. Like I said, I claim the promises of 1 John 1:9. That is not just a feel good verse. Without it, we would all probably be going to hell.

But this is somewhat off the subject, just as you are. James 5:19-20 portrays a man who is saved, then is lost, and then is brought back to a state of grace by a fellow Christian. James plainly says that a saved person can become lost. He doesn't even do it in a dogmatic way, he says it just like we all know it is true.

Finally, concerning Galations 5:4, MB said:

The verse is speaking to those who live by the Law. Christ has no effect for them because they are trying to live by the Law This is why they are fallen they rejected Christ and tried to be justified by the Law.
Gal 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
It seems to me that your problem here is that you want to live by the Law.
Try reading the whole passage instead of one verse at a time. Any body can make any book say what ever they want one sentence at a time taken out of context.

MB, I have read Galations probably 100 times and I know full well that Paul was warning Jewish Christians that they could not be saved by obeying the law. Nevertheless, you can't fall from grace unless you once had attained a state of grace. Those Galations had been saved at one time. Otherwise they could not have fallen from grace. You can't fall from a position unless you have occupied that position.

 

[Zenas]

Richard Dawkins can't even speak the King's English let alone be accepted as an authority. Ever heard him speak?

We have the Bible as our authority, At least it has been verified in history, let alone the church.

Cheers,

Jim

I haven't heard him speak but I've read some of his stuff and he writes pretty well. I think he is dead wrong and unless he repents he will spend eternity in hell. Nevertheless he thinks he is right.

 

[Navymans]

Jonah is my favourite book of the Bible. When I want to know something, I usually find it there.....or I can make it fit!

Jonah was told where to go and what to preach. He rebelled and said NO to God. God let him go his own way, but God did not leave him alone. He had Jonah tossed overboard only to find his way back to doing God's pleasure. Isn't the Christian life a lot like that? We do not lose our salvation, but we lose the joy of our salvation. When we return to obedience, even if by God's strong arm, we once again enjoy all the pleasures of redemption.

Cheers,

Jim

Good post, also does the holy spirit not seal the soul at the time of salvation? We still have the sin nature cause our hearts and mind and flesh can still sin but our soul is sealed and it can not sin anymore.

 

[psalms109:31]

heavenly things

Men lie to themselves to believe a lie.

We are not saved by grace alone, but by grace through faith.

God has given us faith through His word, but you do nothing with His word you are dead, because faith without deed is dead.

If man did nothing we would all die.

The truth of the matter is as always Jesus teaches us by earthly things, but you do not believe how you going to believe if He speak to you in heavenly.

It is not all God it is man and God working together as one, by the Spirit not of man and thier work, but the Spirit of God's word working through us.

Without His word we are nothing and can do nothing.

So I praise God for His word, for with man word I can do nothing. We should worship God in Spirit and in truth and live, to bad we still die by the word of man.