Secured Salvation

[Byblos]

John, I started out thinking I agreed with Jac. I do agree with him on (OSAS), the obvious irreconcilable difference being his belief that apostates were ‘once saved’ and my belief to the contrary. God bless you, Bro

(ya had to go back there didn't ya)

I do agree with him that if you do not believe that then you do not believe in OSAS, that's what I've been saying all along.

I swear this is the last I have to say on the subject (maybe).

[DannyM]

John, I started out thinking I agreed with Jac. I do agree with him on (OSAS), the obvious irreconcilable difference being his belief that apostates were ‘once saved’ and my belief to the contrary. God bless you, Bro

(ya had to go back there didn't ya)

I do agree with him that if you do not believe that then you do not believe in OSAS, that's what I've been saying all along.

I swear this is the last I have to say on the subject (maybe).

LOL Sorry

I believe he is putting an unnecessary restriction on (OSAS)

Me too

[jlay]

There are no liberties being taken J, I read scripture the same way you do and come to a different conclusion, that is all.

Total depravity and cooperation are not scriptural terms. They just explain theological concepts. Regardless, your statement was equivocating these terms, and you are implying that cooperative faith is essentially no different than a work. So, uhhhh, no.

On the one hand you say a person can have absolute assurance and on the other you say one can prove they weren't a 'real' Christian. I see that as a contradiction, I'm not sure how much more clearly I can explain it.

How so? Your lumping two examples. Every believer has assurance whether they 'know' it or not. Assurance is a heavenly position. A believer has a way to experience this as I discussed and sited before.
Assurance. If someone has it, they have it. They can't be un-born again. I didn't say prove they weren't real. I said the person that claims to have been a 'real' Christian is contradictory, and their position self-defeating. Either the apostate believed that there was genuine faith to have, in which case they are proving what they are denying, and blowing up their own argument. Or, they are saying there was never such a thing as real faith, and they are lying when they claim they were ever genuine. We must always keep in mind that the context of Hebrews were Jews who were being tempted to reject grace and follow the Judiazers.

The thief on the cross was before the great commission and the institution of baptism.

And the great commission was before the calling of Paul as the apostle to the Gentiles, in which he was given HIS gospel to preach. Maybe someone should have informed Paul about the necessity of water baptism.

What you call works I do not. I see them as God's hand guiding us to become like Christ (although we can never measure up).

Just what am I calling works?
I certainly believe God guides us to live in the new self. Yes, we will never measure up in earthly terms. But we already are made the righteousness of God in Christ, and made to sit in the heavenly places. We already have been made to measure up. Totally, completely, the moment we believed. The difference is that RCCs in some form or another, believe they are directly responsible to contribute to this apart from the work of the cross. And, I don't mean cooperating through faith. Faith is not a work.

Christ's sacrifice as high priest did away with Yum Kippur and the yearly sacrifice of covenant renewal. It is now a new and everlasting covenant not subject to renewal and that is why the gates of hell shall never prevail against the church.

Yes it did, But now you are talking about something entirely Jewish. Christ accomplished many things. I think it is unfortunate that you lump yourself into with these things that never applied to you. You are not a Jew. Israel is most certainly not currently living under the Covenant promised by Jeremiah. But they will one day.

[neo-x]

Hey guys,
Sorry for the late replies, I am not getting much time to spend on the forum.

Rick, Danny, I would love to reply to you last post about our discussion but at this stage think Byblos pointed out a lot of things I wanted to, so I would just be repeating...I hope you do not mind. I will just say that, the gift of grace, of salvation has to come from free will and resides in it. It is not like If someone wants to reject it that he can not. Of course if they would really want to or not is a separate issue here. This is at least what I think. Oh yes, sure, salvation is God's gift, free from the influence of my works, and if you imply that even by turning away that gift stays there because God is still faithful, then I agree but I can't see how one can still have it after rejecting God's son.

Byblos nailed it right

Of course he keeps us strong and won't let us down, that is His promise. But that doesn't mean we can't reject his free gift out of our own free will.

Of course, I agree, nothing will separate us from God unless we choose to do so. It takes a conscious act of the will.

Danny
I have no doubt that you have given ample scripture to back up your position, i could have done the same but again in the most basic of cases we have different interpretations of the scripture and probably that is why the difference in opinion exists, so it wont be doing much good. And again, if its a stalemate, I would just concede this to you bro. No intention of winning debates...but I still have disagreements on your position. minor ones though Peace to you.

Rick

I'll ask again: Do we have free will to reject God when we are in heaven?

I think if you would like to leave heaven - God won't be really minding that. I mean look at Satan he wanted to be out of God's control, he surely cast him out. In simple words if someone keeps banging their head in heaven wanting to go to hell, I don't think they will keep him from his free will. Even angels had free will, Lucifer had and so he rebelled. the scriptres are mute on this point and so anyone including me is just gonna give a hunch but I'm not sure anybody can conclusively decide unless we get there and see it for ourselves, it can be either way. But then I do not see why someone would like to do that, huh! but over a period of infinity...who knows

Jilay

But again, this does not negate the fact that a person can completely reject it.

Sure it does. It's self defeating. I may disobey my parents, but I can't reject the birth they gave me. I can rebel, but I can't unwind my DNA. You are saying that a person can unbirth themself.

I believe that this is simply not a very good way to put this position for example, it supports Danny's original argument classic way that those who turned later were never born again. I imagine it a harmless straw-man, no offense. The thing is when we we are born again the HS dwells in us. That is the spirit we receive and it renews us, no doubt. But does that change our own spirit, does it replaces it? So it is not like we have to "unbirth" ourselves. If we make it such that the spirit does not live in us anymore then we have gotten out of the "born again" state. Of course it does not negate the fact that we were once "born again".

The problem here is, as you (Danny, Rick ) imply that a person can't unbirth himself or turn away from the gift of grace, the opposite position is that there are people who can't turn to Christ, even if they tried. Since we know that those who are apostate now, as you say, were never Christians to begin with. and as you yourself implied that once someone has tasted the heavenly and turn back, there is no way to renew them. This kind of becomes self contradictory at times but still for the sake of it.

Assurance of salvation is from God. His promise. Whether we fall in to doubt doesn't change what is secure and assured to the believer. A person can only have the personal assurance (feeling/knowledge) if they are trusting Christ. In other words the knowing lines up with the truth. Obviously if they begin to doubt their own salvation, they are not feeling assured. Of course this has nothing to do with whether that person is saved or not. We are saved in Christ. Made righteous in Christ. Made to sit in heavenly places, in Christ. Blessed with every spiritual blessing, in Christ. For the believer to experience assurance is not the same as the source of assurance.

Of course we are, there is no denying that we are secured, either we experience assurance or not, it is from God's part not ours. But again if we do not experience it, in faith, doesn't that make the whole point moot. Whats the pointing of believing in it if you still can get it without believing? I agree the feeling of assurance is not the same as the source of assurance, but that is not in question here, the question is how do we know that we are not just experiencing assurance in the wrong way. If you say believe then I would equate this to having faith in assurance and experiencing it but again, as you said, our knowledge or feeling does not directly affects salvation. So you could get it wrong and end up having salvation or you could get it right. But if you can get it even by being doubtful/wrong then the apostate is being dealt an unfair hand. since his believe in it has nothing to do with the assurance. And now you say that he was never saved. But then we have to concede that we have no foreknowledge of the future and we might ourselves be deluded. After all we are also having our assurance with faith. This becomes important because how do we know we have assurance other than believe and if the apostate had that once or claims to have that, who's to say he didn't? Should we discredit him just because he is an apostate, well we could, no problem and personally I agree, a lot of folks are deluded, but I am sure, some aren't.

You see, you can't have it both ways, just because we have it right and the apostate doesn't - doesn't mean he was always wrong to begin with.

Also There are also three types of apostates, and Jilay, here I think your earlier "DNA changing" scenario came in

1. Apostate who believes in God, but in a fight, rebels, he knows his experience is real but somewhere down the lane he doesn't find God according to what he likes.

2. Apostates who were never real Christians to and sometime later left.

3. People who turned after getting to know God, know his mercy and righteousness and later left because they had a change of heart out of their own will. And so can't be renewed.

You are talking about the first case and the second Jilay, but no one is addressing the third because you think such a case doesn't exist.

I am not trying to prove a point here, but will just ask you, are you sure that scenario #3, can never exist? if so, how and how can we be sure of it, is there a standard?

Please, at this point I am not trying to debate for proving my stance, just wanna know what you think about this.
Peace, brothers.

[DannyM]

Brother Neo,

It is not like If someone wants to reject it that he can not. Of course if they would really want to or not is a separate issue here. This is at least what I think. Oh yes, sure, salvation is God's gift, free from the influence of my works, and if you imply that even by turning away that gift stays there because God is still faithful, then I agree but I can't see how one can still have it after rejecting God's son.

The logical conclusion here is that, once born again, once sealed with the inheritance, you will never become un-born-again. We’ve even checked the scriptures and found that they suggest that those who fall away or reject the gift were never saved to begin with.

Of course he keeps us strong and won't let us down, that is His promise. But that doesn't mean we can't reject his free gift out of our own free will.

Of course, I agree, nothing will separate us from God unless we choose to do so. It takes a conscious act of the will.

I just don’t see the scripture to support this, Bro. We haven’t found one unambiguous scripture that says a born again person will and CAN reject his salvation. So I see this as a human add-on and nothing to do with scripture. I understand. The thinking goes, “We MUST be able to give back our salvation if that is what we choose to do of our own free will…” Well, I’d like to see the scripture to support this.

I would just concede this to you bro. No intention of winning debates...but I still have disagreements on your position. minor ones though Peace to you.

I only want to *win* when battling the atheist. Of course I like to thrash out a debate, get to the bottom of things if possible. But I don’t want to ‘beat’ any Brother or Sister. Ever.

God bless

[neo-x]

I just don’t see the scripture to support this, Bro. We haven’t found one unambiguous scripture that says a born again person will and CAN reject his salvation. So I see this as a human add-on and nothing to do with scripture. I understand. The thinking goes, “We MUST be able to give back our salvation if that is what we choose to do of our own free will…” Well, I’d like to see the scripture to support this.

It has to be in context with the human choice, otherwise it is forced, which I doubt would be something you are trying to imply. I am afraid there is no simple one liner in the scriptures that says it but it is consistent with the theme that God will not force you either way. That is the only way God comes out fair.

I only want to *win* when battling the atheist. Of course I like to thrash out a debate, get to the bottom of things if possible. But I don’t want to ‘beat’ any Brother or Sister. Ever.

God bless

I know...no worries

[jlay]

The problem here is, as you (Danny, Rick ) imply that a person can't unbirth himself or turn away from the gift of grace, the opposite position is that there are people who can't turn to Christ, even if they tried.

The opposite position? That is most certainly not a position I hold. Do you hold the position that there are people who can't turn to Christ even if they want to?

but that is not in question here, the question is how do we know that we are not just experiencing assurance in the wrong way.

I am not arguing someone feeling or experiencing assurance.
I am arguing that salvation is assured, and can't be lost. The source of assurance are God's promises, not the human capacity to know it, feel it, never doubt it, or experience it.

So you could get it wrong and end up having salvation or you could get it right. But if you can get it even by being doubtful/wrong then the apostate is being dealt an unfair hand.

Let's please not treat the gospel as if it is some ambiguous thing. The apostate is not dealt an unfair hand, and it appears you've misunderstood my position and are arguing against positions I do not hold.

and as you yourself implied that once someone has tasted the heavenly and turn back, there is no way to renew them. This kind of becomes self contradictory at times but still for the sake of it.

There is a good example. You are not understanding what I am implying, nor do I think you are rightly handling what the writer is saying. The author is saying it is impossible for someone who has been saved to turn back.
If you handle this verse the way you do, then it has terrible consequences that I doubt anyone will honestly apply to themselves. Because you and most of those who do, think that their level of belief and their personal sins haven't crossed that threshold. If they have, then you are done. And you can't ever come back, even if you want to. (If you follow that interpretation)

This becomes important because how do we know we have assurance other than believe and if the apostate had that once or claims to have that, who's to say he didn't?

There are several verses that say we can know. God disciplines those He loves. His sheep know His voice. John 14:21
Assurance exist apart from the human experience. Either God has saved, or He hasn't. Either the Bible is true when it says the person has passed from death to life, or it is not. (John 5:24) If it is possible to pass from the new life, back to death, then the first passing is not what it claims to be. A person being convinced has nothing to do with whether assurance is real or not. This is the issue I pointed out earlier that I believe Byblos is also making.

Faith is the cooperative component. Once we receive salvation in faith, we are born again. Period. New life. Any person can trust or deny their capacity for faith. But once we are born from above, we have new life.

I am not trying to prove a point here, but will just ask you, are you sure that scenario #3, can never exist?

Having just completed an in depth review of Hebrews, I think that is exactly what the writer is saying. It is impossible. An impossible reality.
BTW, believers turn away from God all the time. You will never hear me say that they don't. Peter was a believer who turned away. The difference between you and I, is that you think their sonship is forfeit when they turn away. And I would challenge you or any other to show me the line where someone can un-birth themselves. Because, if you have sinned, then how can you be 'assured' that you haven't crossed that threshold. And if you have (following your view of #3) then you are apostate and without hope.

[RickD]

God has given me his absolute assurance of eternal life, through Christ. The Holy Spirit of God, inside me, testifies to my spirit that what God has promised, He will complete. He is faithful. I have faith in God alone.

If you want to live a life burdened by trying to gain God's acceptance, then that's certainly your choice. Matthew 11:28 But, if you want the freedom and joy that is a result of living as a true child of God who is accepted by Him, a life lived by the Spirit, and not by the flesh, then accept the absolute assurance that He has given you as a born-again child of God. 1 Peter 1:23 says we are born again of an imperishable seed. That's God's promise that every born-again believer has eternal life. You can choose to believe what the God of the bible promises, or choose to believe what a religion of works, and constantly striving for God's approval burdens you with.

If you are here reading this, and feel God's calling you to a relationship with Him alone, free from a religion of striving for God's approval, then sincerely pray to God for His guidance. Proverbs 8:17
We can go on forever, posting verses from the bible that support what we believe. But, ultimately we have to choose to seek God's guidance, and will, through prayer. He will show you if you are open to hear His voice.

[jestes]

I've got a comment about the Hebrews verse everyone has brought up. I read a version of that verse once that seemed to make a whole lot more sense that the way I've seen it usually translated. I don't remember what version of the Bible it was in, but it read something like this: "...it is impossible to renew them again to repentance because they crucify to themselves the Son of Man and subject Him to open shame".

The way that verse is usually written makes it sound like once someone has fallen away that it's "against the rules", so to speak, to renew them again since Jesus died once and for all and he won't be crucified again. If we take that view much farther then it would seem logical that all our sins are forgiven once, but if a believer sins again, he is done for. After all, Jesus applied his death once, can't do it again.... Obviously this isn't an accurate conclusion.

The key for me in understanding this verse was when I read the translation that mentioned "to themselves". When it is read like that, I thought of a friend of mine who once claimed to be Christian. Now he totally rejects the idea of any deity. Basically, he's trying to convince himself he has made the right choice by saying that Jesus was just a crazy man who got what was coming to him, and he's not afraid to tell you about it. It's almost like he knows he wrong, but he is putting so much effort into rationalizing his decision that it's becoming routine and automatic; hardened would be another word. Sounds familiar, doesn't it?

I'm sure we've all heard the expression "so close you could taste it" when we were right on the verge of something. Seems like this verse also fits there.

[DannyM]

God has given me his absolute assurance of eternal life, through Christ. The Holy Spirit of God, inside me, testifies to my spirit that what God has promised, He will complete. He is faithful. I have faith in God alone.

If you want to live a life burdened by trying to gain God's acceptance, then that's certainly your choice. Matthew 11:28 But, if you want the freedom and joy that is a result of living as a true child of God who is accepted by Him, a life lived by the Spirit, and not by the flesh, then accept the absolute assurance that He has given you as a born-again child of God. 1 Peter 1:23 says we are born again of an imperishable seed. That's God's promise that every born-again believer has eternal life. You can choose to believe what the God of the bible promises, or choose to believe what a religion of works, and constantly striving for God's approval burdens you with.

If you are here reading this, and feel God's calling you to a relationship with Him alone, free from a religion of striving for God's approval, then sincerely pray to God for His guidance. Proverbs 8:17
We can go on forever, posting verses from the bible that support what we believe. But, ultimately we have to choose to seek God's guidance, and will, through prayer. He will show you if you are open to hear His voice.

So what is your view on this then, Rick?

[RickD]

So what is your view on this then, Rick?

Danny, the more I think about this, I realize that if my God wasn't able to provide absolute assurance, then He wouldn't be my God. I couldn't imagine worshiping a god who wasn't powerful enough to keep his promises. I've made, and broken more than my share of promises to people I love. I've been hurt more times than I care to remember, and I've hurt more people than I can count. If I didn't rest on the knowledge that God will finish what He began in me, I would be hopeless.
Numbers 23:19

19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill?

[DannyM]

So what is your view on this then, Rick?

Danny, the more I think about this, I realize that if my God wasn't able to provide absolute assurance, then He wouldn't be my God. I couldn't imagine worshiping a god who wasn't powerful enough to keep his promises. I've made, and broken more than my share of promises to people I love. I've been hurt more times than I care to remember, and I've hurt more people than I can count. If I didn't rest on the knowledge that God will finish what He began in me, I would be hopeless.
Numbers 23:19

19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill?

Yep, yep - I hear all that, Bro

[Byblos]

So what is your view on this then, Rick?

Danny, the more I think about this, I realize that if my God wasn't able to provide absolute assurance, then He wouldn't be my God. I couldn't imagine worshiping a god who wasn't powerful enough to keep his promises. I've made, and broken more than my share of promises to people I love. I've been hurt more times than I care to remember, and I've hurt more people than I can count. If I didn't rest on the knowledge that God will finish what He began in me, I would be hopeless.
Numbers 23:19

19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill?

Yep, yep - I hear all that, Bro

We hear that same line of argument from some YECers about the 6 day creation.

[DannyM]

So what is your view on this then, Rick?

Danny, the more I think about this, I realize that if my God wasn't able to provide absolute assurance, then He wouldn't be my God. I couldn't imagine worshiping a god who wasn't powerful enough to keep his promises. I've made, and broken more than my share of promises to people I love. I've been hurt more times than I care to remember, and I've hurt more people than I can count. If I didn't rest on the knowledge that God will finish what He began in me, I would be hopeless.
Numbers 23:19

19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill?

Yep, yep - I hear all that, Bro

We hear that same line of argument from some YECers about the 6 day creation.

Sorry, John, what type of argument?

[Byblos]

So what is your view on this then, Rick?

Danny, the more I think about this, I realize that if my God wasn't able to provide absolute assurance, then He wouldn't be my God. I couldn't imagine worshiping a god who wasn't powerful enough to keep his promises. I've made, and broken more than my share of promises to people I love. I've been hurt more times than I care to remember, and I've hurt more people than I can count. If I didn't rest on the knowledge that God will finish what He began in me, I would be hopeless.
Numbers 23:19

19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill?

Yep, yep - I hear all that, Bro

We hear that same line of argument from some YECers about the 6 day creation.

Sorry, John, what type of argument?

The one that says if you don't believe in a God that can create in 6 days then you don't believe in the God of the Bible, that argument. I use a slightly different version of it which goes something like I don't want to worship a god that will negate our free will and make us into robots. In that sense we're all guilty like that, of confining God to our little boxes of interpretation.