|
|
|
|
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Salvation and Eternal Security - One Stop Thread - 5/22/2008 4:33:48 PM
|
|
|
DenimDiva
Posts: 6313
Joined: 9/28/2007
From: CA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: FreeGrace
quote:
ORIGINAL: DenimDiva
If there is nothing you can do to loose your Salvation, then why has the Bible so clearly laid out how we are to live our lives?
First, let's ask a different question: IF we can lose our salvation by what we do subsequent to our salvation, what does that say about how we are saved, ultimately? I think the answer is that we must "save ourselves" by what we do. Is that what the Bible says? Absolutely not! We are saved by grace, through faith, and not by works, lest anyone should boast.
quote:
Now, I'm not saying that if you sin you're off to hell. What I'm wondering about is a person who is willfully leading a sinful life continuously.
What exactly are you wondering about, with such a person? Thanks.
Are you saying that if someone makes a decision to follow Christ when they are 10 years old and then as an adult they decide to abandon their relationship with Christ that they are still saved?
ETA:
I never said we are saved by our works. I don't believe that for a minute. However, that doesn't negate our responsibility to live our lives as Christ wants us too.
< Message edited by DenimDiva -- 5/22/2008 4:40:30 PM >
_____________________________
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation and Eternal Security - One Stop Thread - 5/22/2008 5:44:30 PM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 7210
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DenimDiva
quote:
ORIGINAL: FreeGrace
quote:
ORIGINAL: DenimDiva
If there is nothing you can do to loose your Salvation, then why has the Bible so clearly laid out how we are to live our lives?
First, let's ask a different question: IF we can lose our salvation by what we do subsequent to our salvation, what does that say about how we are saved, ultimately? I think the answer is that we must "save ourselves" by what we do. Is that what the Bible says? Absolutely not! We are saved by grace, through faith, and not by works, lest anyone should boast.
quote:
Now, I'm not saying that if you sin you're off to hell. What I'm wondering about is a person who is willfully leading a sinful life continuously.
What exactly are you wondering about, with such a person? Thanks.
Are you saying that if someone makes a decision to follow Christ when they are 10 years old and then as an adult they decide to abandon their relationship with Christ that they are still saved?
Since Jesus equated believing with being saved, per Luke 8:12, and in the very next verse tells us that the second soil believed for a while, that means that when a person believes in Christ as Savior, they are saved. There is no support in Scripture that God takes away our regeneration, forgiveness (since all sins were put on Christ), or eternal life.
quote:
I never said we are saved by our works. I don't believe that for a minute. However, that doesn't negate our responsibility to live our lives as Christ wants us too.
You are right; eternal security doesn't negate our responsibility to live our lives as Christ wants us to. But even when a believer rebels and doesn't do so, doesn't result in not being saved. When God saves someone, based on their faith, that isn't taken away.
< Message edited by FreeGrace -- 5/23/2008 6:53:15 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation and Eternal Security - One Stop Thread - 5/23/2008 3:04:48 AM
|
|
|
kelman
Posts: 3709
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Tychicus
Whereas the simple version of Eternal Security is counter-intuitive because it sounds "wrong", the Perseverance version is counter-intuitive because it sounds complicated. I'm not sure how perseverance is complicated. It's simply that God will preserve a child of His from ultimately and finally falling into the conditions that would jeopardize his eternal salvation.
quote:
In either case it is not held by any religion except for a segment of Protestant Evangelicalism and there is no evidence it was held by Jews or anyone else of the first century. For myself, I'm not too concerned about what other religions believe. As for OT Jews, there's evidence they believed the fact of their circumcision and/or the keeping of the Law would ensure their place in heaven. Christ is saying just this in John 5:39 "You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life..."
quote:
I am not sure here if you are admitting that there are no "clearly worded passages" on the topic, but why don't you give your best one, whether it is "clearly worded" or "not so clearly worded" -- just the most clear one you can come up with, hopefully more than just one or two verses. I am really curious as to what you will come up with, and would very much appreciate a thoughtful answer. I just meant that there is no clear statements about certain theological doctrines, i.e., the Trinity, Jesus is God, infant baptism, etc. Jesus never actually said the words: "I am God". The same for Perserverance. We don't find it said: "believers can never lose their salvation". We frequently must compare any number of passages to arrive at truth. Okay, a few passages which I think are pretty clear concerning Perseverance.
Acts 13:48 "And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed." The eight or so uses of "ordain" demonstrate its meaning to be previously appointed(Mat 28:16); under authority, designated(Luke 7:8); determined(Acts 15:2); appoint(Acts 22:10; 28:13); ordained(Rom 13:1). The argument that those who believed appointed or set themselves in order, is I think a very weak one. So, if God appoints to eternal life, then “eternal” it will be.
Hebrews 7:24-25 "But this Man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood. Wherefore he is able also to Save them to the uttermost that come unto God by Him, seeing He ever liveth to make intercession for them". Because Christ continues forever in His priesthood He saves the believer “to the uttermost”. Iow, there is nothing left wanting, nothing left undone in the salvation of the believer which, therefore, translates into “eternal security”. Faith, salvation and eternal life are gifts of God; and, I doubt anyone will claim God will take back His gifts.
1Peter 1:5 ”Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.” This is speaking of believers and how God will safely see them through until their salvation is finally completed – in heaven. The perseverance of the saints is a divine gift; but, it is a gift by which we “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of His good pleasure" -Philippians 2:12-13
And my personal favorite:
Hold Thou me up, and I shall be safe -Psalm 119:117
_____________________________
“beware lest you lose the substance by grasping at the shadow”
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation and Eternal Security - One Stop Thread - 5/23/2008 5:34:18 AM
|
|
|
Tychicus
Posts: 103
Joined: 1/29/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
Rather than using the term "adoption", how about the concept of regeneration? At the moment of faith, God through the Holy Spirit regenerates the believer. Is there any verse that even implies that such regeneration can be undone? No.
Hi Free Grace,
I agree that regeneration is a better term for what you believe. As you are probably aware the term regeneration became popular around the 16th century, based on the work of John Calvin, who taught what you describe here. So, yes, "regeneration" cannot be undone, according to that teaching.
The problem is that "regeneration" in that sense is not a Bible word. It does not show up in the NIV at all, and just twice in the King James (Matt 19:28, Tit 3:5). Its definition (the Greek word paliggenesia) includes concepts like "new age", "renewal" or "new birth". Nothing in the meaning of the word, or the contexts of those passages, or usage in first century Greek, implies that paliggenesia cannot be undone, or has a meaning similar to John Calvin's.
The Matthew passage has a totally different meaning, so all you have left is one passage, Tit 3:5, which could possibly have a meaning similar to Calvin's. Just one verse. The NIV has the translation "washing of rebirth" (Greek loutrou paliggenesias). Nothing in the passage explains what this means; some scholars believe it is related to baptism. In any case, nothing in the context implies "cannot be undone". You would have to read in that meaning based on your theology. Please do a word study, and look closely at this passage.
So, just because the followers of John Calvin started to use the word "regeneration" in the 16th century, giving it a particular theological meaning, it doesn't follow that the Bible (and based on just one verse!) uses that word (paliggenesia) with the same meaning.
quote:
Also, we know that the Holy Spirit "seals" each believer, per
Eph 1:13 "In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation- having also believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise"
Eph 4:30 "And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption."
All believers have been sealed by the Holy Spirit for when? The "day of redemption". That is proof enough for me that once saved by grace through faith, we are held by God's seal of the Holy Spirit, until the day of redemption.
Here again, just think about the word "seal". If you "seal" a letter it can be unsealed. The word "seal" does not imply "can't be unsealed".
For example look at Matt 27:66, where the same word "seal" (Greek sphragizw) is used to seal the stone on Jesus's tomb. The soldiers "sealed the stone" intending it to stay sealed forever. But we see in 28:2 that the stone was unsealed.
If God seals someone for the "day of redemption", and that person subsequently rebels against God, then there is no logical reason why God can't unseal that person. That is up to God. Maybe your theological belief says that God won't unseal them, but that is your theological belief. There is nothing in the word "seal", or in those passages in Ephesians, that implies that belief.
quote:
There are no passages that state that one's saved status can be lost. Yes, one can lose their faith, and one can "fall away, but that doesn't speak of loss of salvation.
I am not aware of the Bible using the terms "saved status" or "loss of salvation". So you wouldn't expect to find a passage that states whether one's "saved status" can be lost or not. Perhaps the concept of "saved status" is misleading. Don't forget, the Scripture almost always uses the word "save" in the present or future tense, not in the past.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation and Eternal Security - One Stop Thread - 5/23/2008 7:16:46 AM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 7210
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: kelman
quote:
ORIGINAL: Tychicus
Whereas the simple version of Eternal Security is counter-intuitive because it sounds "wrong", the Perseverance version is counter-intuitive because it sounds complicated. I'm not sure how perseverance is complicated. It's simply that God will preserve a child of His from ultimately and finally falling into the conditions that would jeopardize his eternal salvation.
Interesting definition of perseverance, kelman. Thanks. But since there are no "conditions that would jeopardize" one's eternal salvation, the reformed doctrine of perseverance isn't Biblical. God gives eternal life the moment one believes in His Son. And no one can snatch anyone from the hand of God. So, there are no conditions that can jeopardize one's eternal salvation.
quote:
Acts 13:48 "And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed." The eight or so uses of "ordain" demonstrate its meaning to be previously appointed(Mat 28:16); under authority, designated(Luke 7:8); determined(Acts 15:2); appoint(Acts 22:10; 28:13); ordained(Rom 13:1). The argument that those who believed appointed or set themselves in order, is I think a very weak one. So, if God appoints to eternal life, then “eternal” it will be.
Actually, the English word "appoint/ordain" isn't used with God as the One who appoints/ordains except in 2 uses, Acts 22:10 and Rom 13:1. The Greeks had a much better word for that concept in the word "horizo" when God is the One appointing/ordaining, which is also used 8 times in the NT. Luke actually used both of them 6 times each, more than any other NT writer.
Tasso:
1 Cor 16:15 "devoted" per NIV, NASB, NKJV "Addicted" KJV "set" ASV
Matt 28:16 "appointed" ASV, KJV "told to go" NIV "designated" NASB
Luke 7:8 "under authority" NIV "placed under authority" NASB, NKJV "set under" ASV, KJV
Acts 15:2 "appointed" NIVASV "determined" NKJV, NASB, ASV
Acts 22:10 "assigned" NIV "appointed" NKJV, KJV, NASB, KJV
Acts 28:23 "arranged" NIV "appointed" ASV, KJV, NKJV "set" NASB
Rom 13:1 "established" Niv, NASB "appointed" NKJV "ordained" KJV, ASV
Horizo:
Acts 10:42 "God appointed" NIV, NASB "God ordained" NKJV, ASV, KJV
Luke 22:22 "Son of Man will go as has been decreed" NIV "determined" NKJV, KJV, NASB, ASV
Acts 2:23 "God's set purpose" NIV "God's determined purpose" NKJV "God's predeterminate plan" NASB "determinate counsel" KJV, ASV
Acts 11:29 "disciples decided" NIV "disciples determined" NKJV, KJV, NASB, ASV
Acts 17:26 "He (God) determined" NIV, NKJV, NASB, ASV
Acts 17:31 "He (God) appointed" NIV, NASB "He ordained" NKJV, KJV, ASV
Rom 1:4 "declared (by God) with power to be the Son of God" NIV, NKJV, NASB, KJV, ASB
Heb 4:7 "God set" NIV "God designates" NKJV "God fixes" NASB "God defines" ASV, and "God limits" KJV
For horizo, all but 1 use (Acts 11:29) are used to indicate that God is the One who appoints or ordains.
The best understanding of tasso in Acts 13:48 is "inclined" or "disposed", which in fact is what my Greek lexicon says for Acts 13:48. The contrast in the context is the unbelieving Jews who Paul charged with "judging themselves unworthy of eternal life with the believing Gentiles who were inclined or disposed to eternal life.
Look up the word disposed/inclined, and you will see that from the context, it fits perfectly.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation and Eternal Security - One Stop Thread - 5/23/2008 7:21:19 AM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 7210
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Tychicus
quote:
Rather than using the term "adoption", how about the concept of regeneration? At the moment of faith, God through the Holy Spirit regenerates the believer. Is there any verse that even implies that such regeneration can be undone? No.
Hi Free Grace,
I agree that regeneration is a better term for what you believe. As you are probably aware the term regeneration became popular around the 16th century, based on the work of John Calvin, who taught what you describe here. So, yes, "regeneration" cannot be undone, according to that teaching.
The problem is that "regeneration" in that sense is not a Bible word. It does not show up in the NIV at all, and just twice in the King James (Matt 19:28, Tit 3:5). Its definition (the Greek word paliggenesia) includes concepts like "new age", "renewal" or "new birth". Nothing in the meaning of the word, or the contexts of those passages, or usage in first century Greek, implies that paliggenesia cannot be undone, or has a meaning similar to John Calvin's.
The Matthew passage has a totally different meaning, so all you have left is one passage, Tit 3:5, which could possibly have a meaning similar to Calvin's. Just one verse. The NIV has the translation "washing of rebirth" (Greek loutrou paliggenesias). Nothing in the passage explains what this means; some scholars believe it is related to baptism. In any case, nothing in the context implies "cannot be undone". You would have to read in that meaning based on your theology. Please do a word study, and look closely at this passage.
So, just because the followers of John Calvin started to use the word "regeneration" in the 16th century, giving it a particular theological meaning, it doesn't follow that the Bible (and based on just one verse!) uses that word (paliggenesia) with the same meaning.
Since I'm not a Calvinist, I'm not very interested in his thoughts. However, since you note the Greek word "paliggenesias" is rebirth, let me ask you: can a "birth" be undone? I rest my case. 
quote:
If God seals someone for the "day of redemption", and that person subsequently rebels against God, then there is no logical reason why God can't unseal that person.
This isn't about man's "logic". It's about the Bible. Can you show me any verse that tells us that the seal of the Holy Spirit can be broken, or has been ever?
The Bible tells us that we are sealed unto the day of redemption. You can deny that, but it's true.
quote:
That is up to God. Maybe your theological belief says that God won't unseal them, but that is your theological belief. There is nothing in the word "seal", or in those passages in Ephesians, that implies that belief.
Then just show me a passage where the seal is said to be broken or can be. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
OSAS Arminian Destroys Calvinism - 5/23/2008 8:37:30 PM
|
|
|
Lifesaver
Posts: 2
Joined: 1/7/2007
Status: offline
|
There is no issue with regard to being once-saved-always-saved.
The issue is whether your choice is not real choice and is actually just preprogrammed. Would that be legitimate?
What would be the point if all choices are not real and all things are precaused, premade and premeditated? It would be like going through the motions, with a dull, cold and dry outcome without the input of anyone else.
An alternative to this would be if God were to allow you the choice to be with you and you with Him. But, God would need to foresee all affairs just to ensure it was all righteous, holy and true.
From God's perspective, He wants to walk with those who are independent beings dependent on Him and are not merely just robots. I have to believe this with all my heart by faith as God provides a relationship with Him, we can have that relationship by fulfilling certain conditions, one being that we come to the cross of salvation repentantly.
If I am wrong about osas arminian, I don't think God will judge me because this understanding does not go against my own conscience or find difference in the Word of God.
Thank you Holy Spirit for your clarity.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation and Eternal Security - One Stop Thread - 5/24/2008 1:32:52 AM
|
|
|
Tychicus
Posts: 103
Joined: 1/29/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
I just meant that there is no clear statements about certain theological doctrines, i.e., the Trinity, Jesus is God, infant baptism, etc. Jesus never actually said the words: "I am God". The same for Perserverance. We don't find it said: "believers can never lose their salvation". We frequently must compare any number of passages to arrive at truth. Okay, a few passages which I think are pretty clear concerning Perseverance.
Acts 13:48 "And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed." The eight or so uses of "ordain" demonstrate its meaning to be previously appointed(Mat 28:16); under authority, designated(Luke 7:8); determined(Acts 15:2); appoint(Acts 22:10; 28:13); ordained(Rom 13:1). The argument that those who believed appointed or set themselves in order, is I think a very weak one. So, if God appoints to eternal life, then “eternal” it will be.
Hebrews 7:24-25 "But this Man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood. Wherefore he is able also to Save them to the uttermost that come unto God by Him, seeing He ever liveth to make intercession for them". Because Christ continues forever in His priesthood He saves the believer “to the uttermost”. Iow, there is nothing left wanting, nothing left undone in the salvation of the believer which, therefore, translates into “eternal security”. Faith, salvation and eternal life are gifts of God; and, I doubt anyone will claim God will take back His gifts.
1Peter 1:5 ”Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.” This is speaking of believers and how God will safely see them through until their salvation is finally completed – in heaven. The perseverance of the saints is a divine gift; but, it is a gift by which we “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of His good pleasure" -Philippians 2:12-13
Thank you for a clear response. I might not totally agree, but I appreciate the helpful tone.
So, apparently you agree that there are no direct statements teaching Eternal Security (or Perseverance). Your examples, also, are just one or two verses, not a complete passage with teaching in context. Instead you believe we must "compare any number of passages to arrive at truth".
Now I agree that it is helpful to compare scripture passages to get more complete knowledge, but I also am aware, as I'm sure you are, that there are lots of direct teachings in the Bible. For example, look at 1 Cor 5- 15, which gives extensive teaching on several issues, from the treatment of the "sinning brother", lawsuits, marriage, eating food offered to idols, tongues/prophesy, the resurrection of Christ, etc., etc. Really, you can find extended teachings all over the Bible.
Think about what this means. Although God inspired his apostles to teach on lots of issues, Eternal Security didn't make the list. Now, of course you might assume that the apostles taught this verbally in their preaching, and just by bad luck none of this teaching made its way to the Scriptures or to any other of the early historical writings. But that's quite an assumption; and since you clearly believe in God's sovereignty, I'm sure you don't believe in just plain "bad luck". So God must have not considered this doctrine very important.
And also consider the passage 1 Cor 10:1-13, which describes what happened in the time of Moses when God's people fell into rebellion, with the results being "twenty-three thouand fell in a single day", "destroyed by sepents", "destroyed by the Destroyer". This is about as harsh language as you'll find describing God's judgment on the Israelites. What a golden opportunity here for Paul to teach Eternal Security! A perfect place to make clear that those who count as "true believers" will not go to hell or lose their eternal reward, whatever other punishment there may be. But Paul never takes the opportunity, here nor elsewhere! This is quite astounding to me, if Paul really believed in Eternal Security.
So, the only evidence you have for Eternal Security are just these isolated texts that somehow "pieced together" can establish the doctrine. So I'll briefly look at the three NT passages:
Acts 13:48. This is a great text for Sovereignty and Predestination, but a discussion along those lines belongs elsewhere! So I won't talk about the meaning of "ordain". But even assuming your definition is correct, this says nothing about whether "unordaining" is possible. As Job said long ago, "The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord."
But, as you noted, this ordaining it to "eternal life", and so "eternal" it may be. Here again, you are building theology on the occurrence of an English word. There is no linguistic reason to think there is some special meaning to the term "eternal life" that means it can't be revoked. That is just an assumption. When Adam was created he had eternal life; it would be quite proper to say he was "appointed" or "ordained" to eternal life (Gen 2:17, 3:22). Nevertheless he did die, because he later disobeyed God.
Heb 7:24-25. The whole context of this passage is about how Jesus's priesthood is superior to that of the Levitical priests. And so in 7:23 it says that "there have been many of those priests". But because Jesus has a "permanent priesthood", he is able to "save completely", because he "always lives to intercede for them" (quotes from NIV, but I'm also looking at other translations and Greek words, and this translation is accurate and consistent with others). In any case, the contrast is between Jesus's permanence compared with the mortal Levitical priests. The point is not that the Levitical priests can only give an Arminian style salvation that can be lost, but that Jesus gives a full-fledged Calvinistic salvation. That's not the point of the word "completely" or "to the uttermost" (Greek panteles). Trust me on that one!
1 Pet 1:5. It is interesting that here the word "salvation" is something that is "ready to be revealed in the last time", not something that we already have. Sure, God will see us through, but what if we rebel? Consider also the term "through faith (dia pistews) are shielded by God's power". "Faith" is an active word, and can also mean "faithfulness" (e.g. the same Greek word is used for "faithfulness" in Gal 5:22). So the assumption is that we are still having faith, or being faithful.
In summary, these three examples will teach Eternal Security only if you read this doctrine into the passages. There is nothing intrinsic to the passages that teach or imply this doctrine. There is no logical reason to think the apostles meant to teach, or even hint at, this doctrine when they wrote these verses down, nor any reason to think the readers heard these meanings. Remember, their past religious experience did not include this doctrine, so they would not have read in these meanings as might be natural for people today who are affiliated with certain churches or denominations.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation and Eternal Security - One Stop Thread - 5/24/2008 4:23:27 AM
|
|
|
kelman
Posts: 3709
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Tychicus
So, apparently you agree that there are no direct statements teaching Eternal Security (or Perseverance). I believe it is taught as clearly as many other theological doctrines. Of the most important doctrines there are few that have "direct statements" if by that you mean, for example, Jesus saying the words: "I am God".
quote:
Think about what this means. Although God inspired his apostles to teach on lots of issues, Eternal Security didn't make the list. Now, of course you might assume that the apostles taught this verbally in their preaching, and just by bad luck none of this teaching made its way to the Scriptures or to any other of the early historical writings. You are assuming a fact not in evidence. Many obviously disagree with you, believing instead that the doctrine of Eternal Security did, in fact, make the Apostles' written list.
quote:
Your examples, also, are just one or two verses, not a complete passage with teaching in context. Instead you believe we must "compare any number of passages to arrive at truth". Had time for only two. But, I think the context of Hebrews 7:24-25 is pretty clear. In these two verses Christ is said to be the eternal Priest and of those who come to Him He is able to "saved to the uttermost". There can be little doubt as the meaning of those words. Uttermost is rendered even more strongly in the Arabic, Latin Vulgate, Syriac, and Ethiopic versions - "to the utmost perfection"; "forever".
quote:
Heb 7:24-25. The whole context of this passage is about how Jesus's priesthood is superior to that of the Levitical priests.And so in 7:23 it says that "there have been many of those priests". But because Jesus has a "permanent priesthood", he is able to "save completely", because he "always lives to intercede for them".. This is all very true; but, who is Christ interceding for?...believers. Can He fail? Will the Father deny Him?
Part of the duties of the High Priest included intercession and as Christ did not fail as High Priest He will not fail in His duty as Intercessor for the believer. This is clearly seen in 1John 2:1 when "believers" are told Christ is their Advocate.
quote:
The point is not that the Levitical priests can only give an Arminian style salvation that can be lost, but that Jesus gives a full-fledged Calvinistic salvation. That's not the point of the word "completely" or "to the uttermost" (Greek panteles). Trust me on that one! Sorry, guess I'm not the trusting kind :) especially when I think it is clear that "completely" and "uttermost" mean, well.... "completely" and "uttermost".
Neither Calvin or Arminian is the point. The point is Christ is the High Priest and the Intercessor - for those who come to God through Him. To say that it is not teaching that Christ is the Intercessor for believers really makes no sense expecially since a number of other passages also affirm it. Does the context teach as you described above?...absolutely. But, that does not negate that these verses enlarge the teaching to include the advocacy role of Christ for those who come to God through Him. Again I ask, can Christ fail in His role as Advocate for believers?
quote:
1 Pet 1:5. It is interesting that here the word "salvation" is something that is "ready to be revealed in the last time", not something that we already have. When we read the verse in its context, we see first that Peter calls believers "begotten of God". And by the resurrection of Christ they have the expectation of receiving their reserved inheritance. And is not "reserved" in the present tense which describes an action which is viewed as having been completed in the past, once and for all, not needing to be repeated? Therefore, the salvation is in the present and we receive the inheritance reserved for us in heaven in the future...iow, it's a done deal.
quote:
Sure, God will see us through, but what if we rebel? If your rebellion is a lasting one, how can you say God will see you through? The verse says we are kept by the power of God; and, the method He uses to do so is "faith". Iow, He will keep us faithful.
quote:
In summary, these three examples will teach Eternal Security only if you read this doctrine into the passages. I see the opposite as being true. The only way to not readily see these passages are teaching eternal security is to read "out" the doctrine "from" the passages.
_____________________________
“beware lest you lose the substance by grasping at the shadow”
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation and Eternal Security - One Stop Thread - 5/24/2008 5:49:44 AM
|
|
|
Tychicus
Posts: 103
Joined: 1/29/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
Since I'm not a Calvinist, I'm not very interested in his thoughts.
Well, you should be. Calvin was a bright man. And when you talk about the word "regeneration" it would be helpful to know that the theology of "regeneration" mostly originated with him; at least he spent lots of pages writing about it. You are a bit of a Calvinist  , although perhaps not so much as kelman is.
quote:
However, since you note the Greek word "paliggenesias" is rebirth, let me ask you: can a "birth" be undone? I rest my case.
Well, I do think most people who are born actually die.
quote:
This isn't about man's "logic". It's about the Bible. Can you show me any verse that tells us that the seal of the Holy Spirit can be broken, or has been ever?
We know that seals can be broken, as noted before in Matt 28:2. You are assuming that the "seal of the Holy Spirit" is a special kind of seal that cannot be broken.
Furthermore, the Bible doesn't exactly talk about a "seal of the Holy Spirit". The word for "seal" is a verb, i.e. it reads something like "you were sealed by the Holy Spirit." And the "you" is plural, and so the passage could be referring to the church being sealed as a group. But in any case, it is quite a stretch to assume the Bible is speaking of a literal seal that is placed on each believer. It is a figure of speech. It is not wise to make dogmatic assertions based on a figure of speech.
quote:
Then just show me a passage where the seal is said to be broken or can be.
Of course I can't show you a passage that says the seal of the Holy Spirit can be broken. But, then, neither can you show me a passage that says that it can't be broken. So we can argue forever like this, and never resolve a thing.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation and Eternal Security - One Stop Thread - 5/24/2008 7:07:35 AM
|
|
|
Tychicus
Posts: 103
Joined: 1/29/2006
Status: offline
|
Hi kelman. Thanks for your quick response. It is late where I am, so I'll give a quick response this time.
quote:
I believe it is taught as clearly as many other theological doctrines. Of the most important doctrines there are few that have "direct statements" if by that you mean, for example, Jesus saying the words: "I am God".
I just gave you several examples in 1 Cor of direct and extended teachings. There are examples like this all over the Bible, as well as plenty of other shorter teachings which are still very specific. As one random example, Matt 6:14-15, "if you forgive others their trespasses, you heavenly Father will also forgive you, but if you do not forgive others their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses." This is short, but specific. None of the texts that supposedly support Eternal Security even approach this clarity.
Related to Jesus saying "I am God", that is a different topic. I think it has much better support than Eternal Security, but it will take us far afield to get into that. Certainly this doctrine was accepted by the great majority of the church from early times. And there are lots of passages that speak to this issue that do not rely on the interpretive grid of middle ages theology. Anyway, this section is on Eternal Security, so we can't get into this too far. But I'll concede you make a good point. However, I still think Eternal Security needs to be defended on its own merits, and that is what this forum section is for.
quote:
You are assuming a fact not in evidence. Many obviously disagree with you, believing instead that the doctrine of Eternal Security did, in fact, make the Apostles' written list.
It did not make the written list of extended passages with direct teaching. At least I haven't seen such a passage proposed.
quote:
Christ is said to be the eternal Priest and of those who come to Him He is able to "saved to the uttermost". There can be little doubt as the meaning of those words. Uttermost is rendered even more strongly in the Arabic, Latin Vulgate, Syriac, and Ethiopic versions - "to the utmost perfection"; "forever".
How do any of these meanings (or the Greek panteles) imply Eternal Security? Or something that cannot be lost or revoked? Or even imply that salvation is something that we now possess? (After all, verse 25 ends with "he always lives to intercede for them" -- what is the point of that if our salvation is a "done deal", accomplished in the past?)
The whole point here is that Jesus's sacrifice was "perfect" or "forever", in contrast to the Levitical priests. I am quite honestly astounded that you can dogmatically assert Eternal Security from this passage!
quote:
This is all very true; but, who is Christ interceding for?...believers. Can He fail? Will the Father deny Him?
. . .
Again I ask, can Christ fail in His role as Advocate for believers?
Okay, I see a typical Calvinist argument here. Since Christ is an Advocate, if someone decides to rebel against him to the point that he falls away, then Christ would have failed. Therefore, it cannot happen, assuming the person was one of the elect.
I'm sure you will disagree with me, but I just don't think this manner of reasoning is intuitive to the average person, or really to anyone who is not a committed Calvinist. It's perfectly logical if you buy into that view, but to other people it just doesn't fly.
I do not think it is reasonable to assume that the first century readers of the book of Hebrews were educated Calvinists. And if they were not Calvinists, they would not read the passage in this way. If you have an Advocate, and yet you choose to rebel against the Advocate, or leave the Advocate, it is your loss. It is not the Advocate's fault. It doesn't mean the Advocate failed.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation and Eternal Security - One Stop Thread - 5/24/2008 8:30:40 AM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 7210
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Tychicus
quote:
However, since you note the Greek word "paliggenesias" is rebirth, let me ask you: can a "birth" be undone? I rest my case.
Well, I do think most people who are born actually die.
Dying does not "undo" a birth.
quote:
quote:
This isn't about man's "logic". It's about the Bible. Can you show me any verse that tells us that the seal of the Holy Spirit can be broken, or has been ever?
We know that seals can be broken, as noted before in Matt 28:2. You are assuming that the "seal of the Holy Spirit" is a special kind of seal that cannot be broken.
I asked you for some Biblical proof that God's sealing can be broken. Matt 28:2 is only a physical human seal. My point only deals with God's sealing.
quote:
Furthermore, the Bible doesn't exactly talk about a "seal of the Holy Spirit". The word for "seal" is a verb, i.e. it reads something like "you were sealed by the Holy Spirit." And the "you" is plural, and so the passage could be referring to the church being sealed as a group. But in any case, it is quite a stretch to assume the Bible is speaking of a literal seal that is placed on each believer. It is a figure of speech. It is not wise to make dogmatic assertions based on a figure of speech.
Eph 4:30 is clear enough. We are sealed unto the day of redemption. That surely doesn't sound as though it's going to be broken. Anyway, until you produce some support for thinking that God's sealing can be broken, you don't have an argument.
quote:
quote:
Then just show me a passage where the seal is said to be broken or can be.
Of course I can't show you a passage that says the seal of the Holy Spirit can be broken. But, then, neither can you show me a passage that says that it can't be broken.
I already did. Eph 4:30. Believers are sealed for the day of redemption.
quote:
So we can argue forever like this, and never resolve a thing.
The Bible ends the argument. We are sealed for the day of redemption. And there are no verses that warn believers that the seal can be broken.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation and Eternal Security - One Stop Thread - 5/24/2008 11:28:18 AM
|
|
|
Ezra
Posts: 1784
Status: offline
|
quote:
The problem is that "regeneration" in that sense is not a Bible word. It does not show up in the NIV at all, and just twice in the King James (Matt 19:28, Tit 3:5). Its definition (the Greek word paliggenesia) includes concepts like "new age", "renewal" or "new birth".
The "problem" is purely imaginary. Since regeneration can and does mean the new birth, and since the new birth is the basis for becoming a child of God, why don't you simply pause there and ask yourself what the new birth is? Many have not fully thought through the implications of the new birth, and what a stupendous work of God it is.
If the new birth is a superatural work of the Holy Spirit, and those who are born again become children of God (John 1:12,13), that must be taken as irreversible. Before one is born again, one must receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. As Titus 3:4-7 makes it crystal clear, it is not by works of righteousness which we have done that we receive the Spirit, but it is according to God's grace that we are saved.
Just as a human birth is irreversible, so is the new birth. And this is so, because those who believe have received the gift of eternal life -- the gift of God Himself. The Holy Spirit is both the seal and the "earnest" of our redemption. And those who are saved are also kept by the power of God, and predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son. The same are called, justified, sanctified, and ultimately glorified. All of this is solidly grounded in Scripture.
People stumble at God's salvation because it is purely a gift of God's grace. And humans like to believe that they can merit favor or somehow earn God's favor with their own righteous deeds. Hence all the false religions and cults.
Why is the salvation of the child of God secure? Because our salvation is not an event or a process as much as it is a Divine Person. The Lord Jesus Christ Himself is our salvation -- He is our life and our eternal life, and He not only comes to dwell within the believer, but the Holy Spirit eternally joins every child of God to His Body. The ones who are truly saints are also members of His Body -- bone of His bone and flesh of His flesh (Eph.5:30). And this is a "great" Divine Mystery (Eph. 5:32).
_____________________________
And whosoever will, let him take the Water of Life freely. Revelation 22:17
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation and Eternal Security - One Stop Thread - 5/24/2008 11:49:59 AM
|
|
|
savedforgod
Posts: 16
Joined: 7/12/2006
Status: offline
|
No matter how bright Calvin was, brightness does not regernerate your spirit with God's life. I do not believe Calvin was saved. He wanted to be saved another way which God does not save.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation and Eternal Security - One Stop Thread - 5/24/2008 6:23:09 PM
|
|
|
Tychicus
Posts: 103
Joined: 1/29/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
I just meant that there is no clear statements about certain theological doctrines, i.e., . . . Jesus never actually said the words: "I am God". The same for Perserverance. We don't find it said: "believers can never lose their salvation".
I'd like to make a simple clarification on my previous answer to this. Although there is no passage where Jesus says "I am God", there are lots of extended passages on the topic. For example John 1:1-18, Phil 2:5-11, Col 1:15-20, and the several discourses in John 5-10. There may be some disagreement on how exactly to formulate the doctrine, but there is lots of scripture to work with. Whole passages, not just isolated "proof texts".
My observations is that the doctrine of Eternal Security has no such scriptural support. I am still looking for someone to put forth one extended passage that actually deals with the topic.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation and Eternal Security - One Stop Thread - 5/24/2008 7:06:09 PM
|
|
|
Tychicus
Posts: 103
Joined: 1/29/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
quote:
quote:
Free Grace: However, since you note the Greek word "paliggenesias" is rebirth, let me ask you: can a "birth" be undone? I rest my case.
Tychicus: Well, I do think most people who are born actually die.
Free Grace: Dying does not "undo" a birth.
But they are still dead.
(I think we both need to look at 1 Tim 1:6 before proceeding any further on this debate about words. )
quote:
Eph 4:30 is clear enough. We are sealed unto the day of redemption. That surely doesn't sound as though it's going to be broken. Anyway, until you produce some support for thinking that God's sealing can be broken, you don't have an argument.
Well, I think most seals can be broken. Ask the next person you meet, "If you put a seal on a jar, is it ever possible for it to be broken?" Or, "If God puts a seal on something, can God break the seal, whenever or for whatever purpose he wants?"
Look again at Eph 1:13, "having believed, you were sealed . . .". Now, if a person stops believing then God might want to take away the seal. People can debate this issue, but you can't prove your position just by saying that the word "seal" is there, and then insisting that the word "seal" has a special meaning that you define.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation and Eternal Security - One Stop Thread - 5/24/2008 7:26:47 PM
|
|
|
Tychicus
Posts: 103
Joined: 1/29/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
quote:
The problem is that "regeneration" in that sense is not a Bible word. It does not show up in the NIV at all, and just twice in the King James (Matt 19:28, Tit 3:5). Its definition (the Greek word paliggenesia) includes concepts like "new age", "renewal" or "new birth".
The "problem" is purely imaginary. Since regeneration can and does mean the new birth, and since the new birth is the basis for becoming a child of God, why don't you simply pause there and ask yourself what the new birth is? Many have not fully thought through the implications of the new birth, and what a stupendous work of God it is.
If the new birth is a superatural work of the Holy Spirit, and those who are born again become children of God (John 1:12,13), that must be taken as irreversible. . . .
Hi Ezra,
Thanks for your thoughts. I agree that God's work is stupendous, and in many ways beyond our understanding. I can see that you have studied a lot, and have learned well.
But my question is, how can any of us know the mind of God perfectly, or be able to understand his ways? How can we formulate doctrine perfectly? As I noted before, John Calvin was a very smart man, and I believe a very godly man. He wrote about many of these things you are observing here, and especially about the new birth and regeneration, way back in the 1500's. And yet, as all of us will agree, not even John Calvin was perfect.
So, what I am looking for, to be able to supplement these theological ideas, is some actual Scripture, actual passages and not just isolated proof texts. And we need to look at these passages in context, and realize that the first century readers didn't have the extra 2000 years of theological teaching that we have today. We have to try to read the scriptures from their perspective. That will help us understand the doctrine more perfectly. If you can come up with some extended passages on this topic, please let us know.
Thanks for your input.
|
|
|
|
| |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
