Question about salvation, repentance, obedience and works

[RickD]

I'm not asking about whether specific persons are apostates. Can you define exactly what an apostate is insofar as you use the term?

Ok, sorry. I guess my simple definition of an apostate would be someone who professed to follow Christ, but the profession ultimately turns out to be false.

Like I said, Judas is the perfect example of an apostate. I believe an apostate could even believe Christ is the Messiah, but ultimately there's no saving faith or trust in Christ.

[Jac3510]

No apologies necessary, Rick. These conversations need to be very nuanced, and it is easy to miss what each other is saying because of them. I think we've demonstrated that well enough already! It's important, though, in my opinion, that we be able to ask these clarifying questions so that such misunderstandings can be resolved.

So I hear you defining apostate as a false professor--someone who says that they have faith, but in fact, they do not. That's not the way I've heard it normally defined, which is why I was asking. I'm not saying you are wrong or right in your definition. I don't really care about that. I'm just trying to see if we are on the same page.

Okay, fine. I'll submit that I agree that there are people who say they have faith but do not. I've known people personally who thought that they believed in Jesus but, in fact, came to realize years later that they were trusting something other than Christ for their salvation. Prior to actually trusting Christ, they would have been false professors (what you are apparently calling apostates). I think Jesus speaks of just such people in Matt 7:21ff.

My question is, what if someone does believe the gospel. Is it possible for that person to, subsequent to their genuine belief in Christ, fall away permanently, be it into a false religion or just atheism simply or anything in between? And to be very clear--let's say this person is never drawn back, even at the very moment of their death. To be clearer still, I'm not asking if you can know whether or not such a person was really ever a believer. I am asking if one who has truly trusted Christ can at some point subsequent to receiving eternal life fall completely away into heinous sin and heresy, denying the gospel, and ultimately die in that state. I know you know MY answer to that. I'm just trying to be clear about YOUR answer.

[Furstentum Liechtenstein]

To be clearer still, I'm not asking if you can know whether or not such a person was really ever a believer. I am asking if one who has truly trusted Christ can at some point subsequent to receiving eternal life fall completely away into heinous sin and heresy, denying the gospel, and ultimately die in that state

You didn't ask me but my answer would be: yes! Such a person will inherit eternal life.

Never mind me. Wait for RickD's answer, and answer him.

FL

[Kurieuo]

I'm seeing you embrace all that. Like I wrote earlier, I hope you're right as then many more will be in heaven. But, many would be put off "Free Grace" based on that alone. Not being able to fathom how a righteous God could do this.

There is a reason that the Bible calls the gospel offensive. There is nothing all that offensive about saying that if you really love Jesus then you get to go to heaven. The very issue that puts you off, though, I think illuminates the very heart of the gospel. You can't fathom how a righteous God would let someone into heaven who hates Him, when other people (you?) have given their lives to serving Him in love. That's just . . . unrighteous! Those people don't deserve heaven! How can people who hate God get the same heaven as people who hated Him?!?

The fact that they do get the same heaven (though see my comments on rewards below) shows God's grace. This is one of the reasons I love Free Grace so much. It takes God's grace seriously. It is so easy to think about the grace of God towards me. But to think about the grace of God towards Hitler?!? No, that is a step too far. But K, that is exactly it. God really does love Hitler that much. I know that you KNOW that, but think about it a minute. I mean, honestly, stop and ponder it. God is not so angry at Hitler's indescribable evil that He cannot save him, that He would be unwilling to save him. God would be absolutely THRILLED to get to enjoy Hitler's company for all of eternity, because God loves him soooooooooooooooo much. God loves Adolph Hitler infinitely more than you could ever think of loving your own family. Again, I know you KNOW this, but stop and let it sink in a moment. God loved Hitler so much that He took all of Hitler's sins--all the torture and murder and heresy--He took ALL of it and put it on His own Son. Jesus already paid the price for all of Hitler's sins. So when God looks at that man, He doesn't see a wicked, evil, anti-semitic dictator. He sees His creation, whom He loves dearly, dead and separated from Him because of his own sin; He sees one He loved enough to die for, and all He asks is that man to let Him save Him. And if Hitler did that even for a moment, then God would have LEAPT at the chance to justify him. That is God's GRACE. It is undeserved, unmerited favor.

And you know what . . . He LEAPT just as quickly at the chance to justify you. It's really mind bogglingly amazing . . . God's grace is sooooooooo beautiful, K. It's so beautiful that some, you are right, are put off by it. But they are only put off by it, I believe, because of their own judgmental nature. How could God love Hitler so much when we hate him so dearly? Answer: because God is gracious. We aren't. We're sinful, spoiled little kids driven by sinful hearts who every once in an occasion just so happen to experience a moment of love in life. In those very few moments, we are like our Father. But most of the time, we're busy sinning up a storm, and so we react against grace. The problem is with us, and the gospel reveals that problem in all of its darkness.

God's grace is beautiful? I guess a subjective judgement. If I'm honest I'd respond yes, in some cases... and no in others.

No, in the case of Hitler. Yes, in the case of Mother Teresa and others who faulter but are by no means responsible for mass murder, sex slave trades and the like.

Rick previously challenged: "Many people are "put off" with Christianity because Christians believe someone can live an extremely evil life, and then accept Christ on his deathbed, and go to heaven."

I responded, "True enough. I am too..." and followed up with, "I am put off that any of us can stand before an entirely righteous God -- yet I hope for our sakes that Christ's promise is true."

In my opinion, God's Righteousness is just as beautiful--His righteous wrath is almost as appealing as His grace to me. I am undeserving. We all are. Grace, I cannot understand, but know its true. Beautiful, I'm not so sure... especially if you're right on Hitler. Since all those millions of Jews who were killed, God is making Himself an enemy by withdrawing justice. So there is a moral dilemma God faces, even within His grace. Does He love Hitler inspite of the millions who deserve justice, or does God love the millions and give justice its due?

This is a strength in my own belief, which appears akin to Rick's who cannot understand how someone could trust in Christ and remain so cold and full of hate.

If "trust" indeed requires certain conditions within us to be met, such as a heart disposition towards God that changes in an instant after the Holy Spirit constantly works on us in our lives (such that we sing in agreement "Twas blind but now I see")... then "trust" is intimately tied to who we are -- whether that is a soul, soul+body, soul+body+spirit complex or something simpler.

And so, Hitler could have desired to believe and gave the nod to Christ's promise -- but Hitler's heart was hardened against God -- such that the conditions for an authentic "trust" (pisteuo) could not have arisen. And it's not like Hitler would have been scammed. He would have known his own heart, just like those torturers who are said to have thanked God who doesn't exists that they lived to be able to inflict according to their heart's content lots torturous pain upon the Jews. Such torturers may have believed in Jesus intellectually, or passively trusted in a proposition, yet they could not passively trust in Christ anymore than you or I can trust Satan -- for certain conditions had not been met.

So, it comes down really to what we believe pisteuo entails I suppose. Furthermore, God can harden hearts, like with Pharaoh. Passively so, like the Sun hardening clay. Yet, Romans 1 talks of God giving people over to their wickedness. So there is some Scriptural support that God could choose to give someone like Hitler over to their depravity -- such that Hitler would incur His wrath at the final judgement. It's not that God didn't or doesn't love Hitler, but rather God has a decision to make that is a moral dilemma -- stand in the corner of the many He loves or stand in the corner of one. The most logical isn't the one.

Looking forward to responding on an ontology of trust a bit more. You certainly have my brain ticking as I never thought of trust being the "letting go of"... so looking forward to giving it some due thought and critique.

[RickD]

Jac wrote:
So I hear you defining apostate as a false professor--someone who says that they have faith, but in fact, they do not. That's not the way I've heard it normally defined, which is why I was asking. I'm not saying you are wrong or right in your definition. I don't really care about that. I'm just trying to see if we are on the same page.

And it's not the way I've seen it normally defined either.

Jac wrote:
My question is, what if someone does believe the gospel. Is it possible for that person to, subsequent to their genuine belief in Christ, fall away permanently, be it into a false religion or just atheism simply or anything in between? And to be very clear--let's say this person is never drawn back, even at the very moment of their death. To be clearer still, I'm not asking if you can know whether or not such a person was really ever a believer. I am asking if one who has truly trusted Christ can at some point subsequent to receiving eternal life fall completely away into heinous sin and heresy, denying the gospel, and ultimately die in that state. I know you know MY answer to that. I'm just trying to be clear about YOUR answer.

With the question worded as it is, I'll try to answer as honestly and as simply as I can. I honestly don't know if it's possible for a believer to completely fall away as you described, because I have a difficult time believing one who has been saved by God's Grace, could or would deny the One who saved him. Once God dwells within me, how could I ever deny Him. Denying a God who literally dwells within me, is not the same as renouncing a doctrine or set of beliefs. But, if someone trusts in Christ and is given the gift of eternal life, then he cannot lose his salvation. Period. I don't see any exceptions. Once one has eternal life, one cannot lose it. If one could lose eternal life, then it wouldn't be eternal.

I hope my answer is clear enough. If not, ask in a different way, that might lead to a clearer answer.


Now I have a question for you, if you don't mind. Does a believer have absolute assurance(in the positional sense of assurance) of his salvation?

[RickD]

Kureiuo wrote:
Does He love Hitler inspite of the millions who deserve justice, or does God love the millions and give justice its due?

K, when I read this, I couldn't help but think of Christ. I believe justice was given its due, when Christ completely paid the price that justice demands. There was justice. The punishment that justice demands was paid. And it was paid in full.

[Gman]

G, in addition to making some outright wrong assertions, I think you are mixing two things.

Wrong assertions? Are you kidding me? Free grace, it's the greatest invention since Swiss cheese... Rape, kill, and destroy your neighbor, and G-d will automatically send His grace to you? Tell that to Satan.. G-d is righteous to judge sin, He HAS too...

There are plenty of Lorship Salvation proponents who make distinctions in "commandments." There are all kinds of commands in the Bible. You as well don't adhere to every command. You have reasons you follow some and not others. You can't simply believe that Christians are supposed to flip open the Bible to any random place and just start doing what it says. No, we have progressive revelation. Do you adhere to how God has chosen to reveal his word? Do you honor what He has appointed for our time?
The NT is full of additional commands. It is also full of instruction. In fact as much as 2/3 of the NT is written to believers with rebuke, correction and instruction on Christian living. Why? Because they were getting it wrong. Even those 1st century believers were screwing it up.

I was the one that enlightened you about the commandments in the NT. In fact there are even more commandments in the NT as opposed to the OT. Progressive revelation doesn't mean that you simply flush large chunks of the Bible down the toilet either.. Most of what you find in the OT still needs to be fulfilled such as Acts 1:6-7.

The one key command we are to obey is to trust Christ and nothing else. Not Christ, plus what we might do in the future. It is interesting that since Paul was commissioned by Christ with the newest revelation that he never once instructs believers to follow the Law. In fact, he goes to great lengths to admonish believers to not do that very thing. Much of the instruction to believers from Paul has to do with living that is contrary to their positional identity 'in Christ.' Paul deals as much with the mind and vision of the believer. "Set your eyes upon Christ." "Be transformed by the renewing of your mind." "Don't look back."

Utterly and completely wrong... In fact Christ did not come to destroy the law.. He came to fulfill it, then He said to KEEP the commandments NOT to destroy them.

Matthew 5:17-19, “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”

Matthew 5:48, “Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.”

John 7:19 “Did not Moses give you the Law, and yet none of you carries out the Law? Why do you seek to kill Me?”

John 14:15 “If you love me, you will keep my commands;

John 14:21 Whoever has my commands and keeps them is the one who loves me, and the one who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and reveal myself to him.”

John 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him

So, let's just assume for the moment that a person has properly placed their trust in Christ alone for salvation.
-How many of their sins are forgiven, past, present and future?

All of them..

-What is required of them to maintain their salvation? (please be specific.)

Salvation is at the get go, just like the Bible says.

-Is the blood of Christ insufficient to cover any of their sins? (If no, please provide contextual scriptural support.)

?? Christ's blood covers all sins.. Where are you getting this?

-What can a person do or not do to contribute in any form or fashion to gain or keep their salvation?

Why is everything with you ask always dependent on salvation? Why can't things be done via faith..?

-Can this person who trust in Christ, grieve the HS, or act contrary to the way a Christian should?

Are we talking about human beings? Of course..

-If works are necessary, how do we know they are genuine?

I never said works are necessary for salvation.. You did. How do we know they are genuine? It's all in the Bible.

-Does trusting in Christ mean a person must be willing to sell all they have and pick up their cross? (If so, then are you saying that a salvation is contingent on the committment of a sinner?)

Does the Bible say that every believer must be willing to sell all they have?

--Is there any distinction between believer and disciple? (If no, please show this contextually from scripture.)

They are all the same in Christ..

-Have you lusted, or been angry with another person since you trusted Christ? If so, were you in danger of losing your salvation?

We need to stop sinning because because of who we are.. Not of what we will become.

-Well, since we are putting it so bluntly. We could say you've been tricked into thinking that acting like an OT Jew has some value that means you love God more than the rest of us.

Again, I never said that.. We walk in faith, not by following dangling salvation carrots.. We follow the commandments out of faith.

-Absolutely we should want to stop sinning. So, please state it clearly. If we are real believers would we be keeping the Sabbath as you do?

If you feel compelled to do.. That is up to you and G-d. Not me..

-G, Paul dealt with these same objections. The grace of God presented by Paul was so radical that he was nearly ousted by the Jerusalem church. In fact, he dealt with these objections in his writings. It is radical, because it says that even the vilest criminal can be made completely right with God, by trusting Christ and nothing else. If we put conditions on people for salvation, whether up front or slip them in the back door, then they will never produce genuine fruit. Why? Because the measure of their salvation will NEVER be in what Christ has done, but what they are doing. They will always look to their own performance as the measure. It's no wonder we so much religious activity and so little genuine fruit in the church.

Again, it's not putting conditions on people for salvation. We do them BECAUSE we are saved.. To be set apart.. Out of faith.

- am amazed at how quickly the in-depth doctrinal teaching of Paul can be dismissed because of a few proof texts from James. It really shows the depth of theology today.

Because we have to look at all of scripture.. Not any one single point.

[Jac3510]

K,

On grace, I guess that's just a fundamental difference in you and me. I genuinely don't see myself as any better than Hitler. I know that sounds like something people say when they are trying to be pious and overly spiritual, but I really don't see it. I mean, Paul thought of himself as the chief of sinners. He said so explicitly in Scripture. He was inspired by the HS to call himself such. You could tell Paul that he wasn't as bad as Hitler, but he didn't seem to think that. He thought that he was the chief of them! And yet, who would not say that Jesus' grace to Paul was a beautiful thing?

But even if I did see Hitler as worse than me, that would only amplify the beauty of God's grace in my eyes. As I said before, he who is forgiven much loves much. That God can, that God desires, to forgive someone so depraved . . . well, to quote the song you referenced, I can sing with deep honesty, "Amazing grace, how sweet the sound that saved a wretch like me." It is so amazing precisely because God saves the wretched.

And frankly . . . and I hesitate to say this, because I know how it will sound, so please hear me in the tone I intend it . . . frankly, when you talk about how God's grace to you or Mother Teresa is beautiful but how it is repulsive when granted to Hitler, I hear echos of Luke 18:11-12. No one deserves grace more than anyone else, and no one deserves punishment any more. Even the most righteous among us is as filthy rags. You know all of that. It is just something I take very, very seriously. I am acutely aware of my own sin, and the thought that God would justify me . . . well, if He would do that, then Hitler or anyone else is a no-brainer.

Anyway, as to the ontology of trust:

I certainly agree with you that there are certain preconditions to trust. It is, I think, just as impossible to simply decide to trust in something as it is to simply decide to believe it, as if trusting were purely a matter of the will and nothing else. No, I don't see trusting as a shear act of will. Part of trust, as I see it, is being intellectually certain that the person is trustworthy. That may mean different things for different people, but I don't think you can trust what you fundamentally find untrustworthy. You may WANT to trust them, but if you can't, that's typically an intellectual problem more than a problem of the will.

On the other hand, you may regard someone as trustworthy, and may simply choose not to trust them to do something. You may just choose to do it yourself. So, for me, that's how this whole thing applies to God. We either find Him believable or we don't. Can Jesus save us or not? Once we hear all that, though, we have to come to the place where we stop working and let Him do it for us. Knowing it is one thing. Letting Him do it, that's quite another. And all that, I think, plays into the emotions--the stronger the the belief that He is trustworthy, and the heavier the weight we are giving to Him, the more relief we feel. So, again, the one forgiven much loves much. That's, I think, where the emotional devotion makes its entrance.

But the actual act of trust? Once the preconditions are met, I see that as a choice--and choosing is in the domain of the will, not the intellect. We choose to act on what we believe, and the act, in this case, is to rest, to cease from work, since God has said He will do it for us.

So says I, anyway.

[Jac3510]

With the question worded as it is, I'll try to answer as honestly and as simply as I can. I honestly don't know if it's possible for a believer to completely fall away as you described, because I have a difficult time believing one who has been saved by God's Grace, could or would deny the One who saved him. Once God dwells within me, how could I ever deny Him. Denying a God who literally dwells within me, is not the same as renouncing a doctrine or set of beliefs. But, if someone trusts in Christ and is given the gift of eternal life, then he cannot lose his salvation. Period. I don't see any exceptions. Once one has eternal life, one cannot lose it. If one could lose eternal life, then it wouldn't be eternal.

I hope my answer is clear enough. If not, ask in a different way, that might lead to a clearer answer.

I think it is clear enough, but I hope that the internal wrestling match you seem to be having illustrates what Byblos and I have been getting at. There are no exceptions on the FG gospel. It CANNOT be lost. That you can't fathom how a person could fall away is neither here nor there. If you take that incredulity and insist that a person just cannot fall away and, faced with the reality that some do, opt for the solution that they were just never really saved, then while you have preserved the idea that you can never lose your salvation, it seems that you have done it at the cost of absolute assurance. After all, I suspect at least some of those who fell away were at some point just as confident in their faith then as you are now. So if they were deceived, how do you know you are not now?!?

So there are only two logically possible answers here. Either the person falls away and is still saved, preserving absolute assurance; or they fall away, proving they were not saved, at the cost of absolute assurance.

Now I have a question for you, if you don't mind. Does a believer have absolute assurance(in the positional sense of assurance) of his salvation?

Yes. It's very, very simple:

1. Everyone who believes in Jesus has everlasting life;
2. I have believed in Jesus;
3. Therefore, I have everlasting life.

There's no way around that for me. It doesn't matter what I do, up to and including falling away. I still have everlasting life, which by its very nature cannot be lost. So my assurance is logical and absolute. Take whatever unwelcome bedfellows you want with that. That, my friend, is God's grace in action. He saves the UNGODLY. It wouldn't make any sense to say that if we fall away and become ungodly,suddenly we aren't able to be saved because of that, when it is the ungodly who need the saving anyway!

[Jac3510]

To be clearer still, I'm not asking if you can know whether or not such a person was really ever a believer. I am asking if one who has truly trusted Christ can at some point subsequent to receiving eternal life fall completely away into heinous sin and heresy, denying the gospel, and ultimately die in that state

You didn't ask me but my answer would be: yes! Such a person will inherit eternal life.

Never mind me. Wait for RickD's answer, and answer him.

FL

LOL, well you didn't give me a reason to grill you, FL!

Welcome to the FG club. It's not all that fun here. Most people tend to not like us very much . . .

[Kurieuo]

Kureiuo wrote:
Does He love Hitler inspite of the millions who deserve justice, or does God love the millions and give justice its due?

K, when I read this, I couldn't help but think of Christ. I believe justice was given its due, when Christ completely paid the price that justice demands. There was justice. The punishment that justice demands was paid. And it was paid in full.

on account of our sin against God... not others.

[RickD]

Kureiuo wrote:
Does He love Hitler inspite of the millions who deserve justice, or does God love the millions and give justice its due?

K, when I read this, I couldn't help but think of Christ. I believe justice was given its due, when Christ completely paid the price that justice demands. There was justice. The punishment that justice demands was paid. And it was paid in full.

on account of our sin against God... not others.

But K, our sin against others IS a sin against God.

[RickD]

Jac wrote:
There are no exceptions on the FG gospel. It CANNOT be lost.

I thought I made it clear that there are no exceptions with my belief about salvation too.

That you can't fathom how a person could fall away is neither here nor there. If you take that incredulity and insist that a person just cannot fall away and, faced with the reality that some do, opt for the solution that they were just never really saved, then while you have preserved the idea that you can never lose your salvation, it seems that you have done it at the cost of absolute assurance.

My not being able to understand how one could fall away to the point that you were saying, is not an insistence that a believer cannot fall away. And, I have not been faced with a reality that believers have fallen away to the depths that you outlined. And further, I didn't opt for a solution that they were never saved. My position has been clear on this. I cannot judge a person's salvation. I've said that I don't know if someone is a believer, and has fallen away, or that same someone may have never been saved. It's possible that one who appears to have been a believer, and appears to have fallen away, may be an apostate.

After all, I suspect at least some of those who fell away were at some point just as confident in their faith then as you are now. So if they were deceived, how do you know you are not now?!?

Jac, correct me if I'm wrong. I assume when you talk about one that has fallen away, you are talking about a believer. If a believer falls away he is still a believer. Whether or not he has the confidence of his assurance.

So there are only two logically possible answers here. Either the person falls away and is still saved, preserving absolute assurance; or they fall away, proving they were not saved, at the cost of absolute assurance.

No, that's not logical. I agree with the first possibility. One falls away, and is still saved, preserving absolute assurance.
But the second I disagree with. One who was never saved cannot fall away. He cannot fall away from something he never had. So the second logical possibility would be that a person was never saved, and never had assurance(positional). Still preserving absolute assurance, because one who was never saved, never had absolute assurance. If one is not saved, his feelings of assurance are neither here nor there. The unsaved do not have positional absolute assurance. Also, a believer doesn't have to have feelings of assurance, to have positional assurance.

[Kurieuo]

Kureiuo wrote:
Does He love Hitler inspite of the millions who deserve justice, or does God love the millions and give justice its due?

K, when I read this, I couldn't help but think of Christ. I believe justice was given its due, when Christ completely paid the price that justice demands. There was justice. The punishment that justice demands was paid. And it was paid in full.

on account of our sin against God... not others.

But K, our sin against others IS a sin against God.

Yes, so God forgives our sin against Him.

When we wrong another, we sin against God because we go against His righteousness. So God forgives us for breaking His "code" but what about our sin against the other...

If you cheat on your wife you've offended your wife and God. God forgives your sin against Him, but your sin still remains against her. Only she can forgive your sin against her -- not God.

[RickD]

Kureiuo wrote:
Does He love Hitler inspite of the millions who deserve justice, or does God love the millions and give justice its due?

K, when I read this, I couldn't help but think of Christ. I believe justice was given its due, when Christ completely paid the price that justice demands. There was justice. The punishment that justice demands was paid. And it was paid in full.

on account of our sin against God... not others.

But K, our sin against others IS a sin against God.

Yes, so God forgives our sin against Him.

When we wrong another, we sin against God because we go against His righteousness. So God forgives us for breaking His "code" but what about our sin against the other...

If you cheat on your wife you've offended your wife and God. God forgives your sin against Him, but your sin still remains against her. Only she can forgive your sin against her -- not God.

So,going with what you're saying, does sin against our neighbor require a punishment, or justice that Christ hasn't paid for?
I guess I see all sin as ultimately against God. If all the sin we commit against everybody we've ever sinned against still remains, if not forgiven by each person we've sinned against, then what hope do we have. We would still be in our sin, wouldn't we?

There's no possible way I could ask forgiveness from, let alone even remember, everyone I've ever sinned against. Now that you brought it up, God has forgiven a crapload of my sin.