Evidence for God from Science

cslewislover wrote:I would like to post some pages from Hard Sayings of the Bible (Walter Kaiser et al, InterVarsity Press, 1996) regarding some verses related to apostasy. They are very interesting! There are four verses discussed in this book that relate to losing one's salvation or perhaps never having had it in the first place. This first one is from 2 Peter 2:20. The others are 2 Peter 1:10, Hebrews 6:4-6, and 10:26. If I put up all the pages, it may be a bit long - but worth the read. (Also related to these is Mark3:28-29, regarding the unpardonable sin.)

Continued . . .

1 Peter 1:10 Make Your Calling and Election Sure? (pp 724-726)

Because Christians take salvation seriously, we are often plagued with doubts about it. Even if the problem does not afflict us, most Christians have had friends who were fearful that their salvation might be in doubt. Therefore the exhortation to ethical duty in 2 Peter 1 is not in itself an issue, for similar exhortations occur throughout the New Testament. But what does the author mean in 2 Peter 1:10 in exhorting us to make our “calling and election sure”? Does this mean that if we do not live the type of lifestyle that he is suggesting, we may not be elect? Does it mean that we might not be saved? Or does it mean that we might lose the salvation that we already have?

The passage is certainly calling for more effort. The call for zeal in the phrase “be all the more eager” tips us off to that fact. If that were not enough, this verse comes right after another exhortation to moral living. In 2 Peter 1:5-7 we discover a chain of virtues that Christians are strongly encouraged (using a phrase similar to “be all the more eager”) to develop. Developing them will make us effective and productive in our relationship to Christ, while the failure to develop them means that we are blind and have forgotten the cleansing from past sins that we have experienced. We are not surprised at this encouragement to moral effort, for the false teachers in 2 Peter are false precisely in that they are not living morally (false teaching in 2 Peter and in many other New Testament writings is false because it sets a wrong moral example, not just because it teaches wrong doctrine). They apparently claim to see, but in Peter's eyes they are blind.

To make one's “calling and election sure,” then, is to guarantee or confirm or ratify (the term has those meanings in various contexts) the calling one has received. The calling, of course, is the calling to Christ referred to in 1 Peter 1:3. The ideas of calling and election are closely associated. Paul in Romans 8:30 puts election before calling, which is a logical order (God would decide and make a choice, or elect, before he called the person to Christ, or so it would seem to us), but other New Testament writers, including Paul himself, often pair the two concepts as virtual synonyms (see 1 Cor 1:26-27; 1Pet 2:9; Rev 17:14). The point is that this word pair (and Peter is fond of word pairs) indicates God's action in bringing a person to Christ. This is what needs to be confirmed or ratified by the ethical obedience of the Christian. However, the author is not saying that moral effort can produce election to Christ's kingdom. The calling and election are first (the grace of God appears in 1 Pet 1:3), just as faith comes first in his list of virtues in 1 Peter 1:5. Everything else is to be a fruit of faith. What Peter does believe is that without moral living one will not enter the kingdom, which is precisely what Paul also believed (1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 5:21).

Peter makes his point clear in the second half of the verse. To confirm one's calling is not to “stumble.” This term can mean to sin, as in James 2:10, 3:2. But if this were all Peter had in mind, the sentence would be so obvious as to be meaningless: If you live ethically (do these things), you will not sin (fall). Therefore Peter is using the term as it is used in Romans 11:11, to “fall” in the sense of “come to grief” or “fall disastrously.” In Jude 24 a related term refers to God's grace in keeping people from falling in this way, meaning “leaving the faith.” The opposite of falling, then, is to “receive a rich welcome into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (2 Pet 1:11). In other words, the author pictures Christians on a journey begun with the calling and election of God. If they fall on the way, they will never reach the goal of the kingdom (salvation). But if they do not stumble, and instead develop the virtues he has already listed, they will in the end arrive at the kingdom and be warmly welcomed into it.

This teaching is important within the context of 2 Peter. As noted above, the false teachers in the church were not living according to Christian standards, yet they were claiming to be elect and on their way to Christ's kingdom. The author is denying this claim. While the whole New Testament witnesses to forgiveness of sin for all who repent, and acknowledges that Christians do sin from time to time, no author in the New Testament, whether Paul or James or Peter or John, believed that a person could be living in disregard of Christian standards and still be “saved” (or still inherit the kingdom). As Jesus said, a good tree bears good fruit (Mt 7:17). You cannot consistently get “unsaved” fruit from a “saved” tree.

The call in 2 Peter, then, is to move onward. There is no attempt to solve the question as to whether one can be “lost” after being “saved.” Peter's concerns are much more practical. “Make sure that you are in fact saved!” That is, if you have experienced the call of God, you are to ratify it by your obedience to him, your moral submission. If you do this, there will be no doubt of your salvation nor of your eventual welcome into the kingdom. What about those who are concerned that they might not be truly elect? Their lifestyle of obedience to Christ, which flows from trust in him, should be convincing proof of their state of grace; if they lack this evidence, they would do well to repent and to make their “calling and election sure.”

See also comment on Hebrews 6:4-6; 10:26; Philippians 3:10; 1 John 3:6, 9.

cslewislover wrote:I would like to post some pages from Hard Sayings of the Bible regarding some verses related to apostasy. They are very interesting! There are four verses discussed in this book that relate to losing one's salvation or perhaps never having had it in the first place. This first one is from 2 Peter 2:20. The others are 2 Peter 1:10, Hebrews 6:4-6, and 10:26. If I put up all the pages, it may be a bit long - but worth the read. (Also related to these is Mark3:28-29, regarding the unpardonable sin.)

Continued.


Hebrews 10:26 No Forgiveness for Deliberate Sin? (pp 689-690)

All who examine their lives according to Jesus' standards discover sin; it may not be a frequent event or a flagrant sin, but none of us has lived up to what Jesus has revealed of the Father's character. We are also forced to admit that some of our sin is deliberate. That is, we do not deliberately set out to sin, but we know in ourselves that some deed or activity is wrong (at least for us, if not for everyone), yet we stifle our consciences and do it anyway. At times we may even recognize that we planned our sin quite carefully, or at least planned to walk into temptation, knowing full well (in our hearts, if not in our minds) that we would give in. If this is an accurate description of the human condition, then Hebrews 10:26 is very disturbing. Is this verse making the distinction that the Old Testament does between deliberate and accidental sins? Is it saying that there is forgiveness for accidental or unknowing sins, but not for the other type? And if this is the case, are all of us who have knowingly sinned after our conversion lost? If that is in fact the meaning, this verse should cause terror and despair rather than mere concern.

The Old Testament makes a clear distinction between willful or deliberate sin and inadvertent sins.(1) After discussing the procedure for obtaining forgiveness for inadvertent sins in Numbers 15:22-29, the author adds, “But anyone who sins defiantly, . . . that person must be cut off from his people” (Num 15:30). The example that follows this passage tells of a person who gathered wood on the Sabbath, presumably because his fire was going out and he had neglected to gather enough wood the previous day. Surely this was a small act, unlike murder or even theft. But it was also clear that he had consciously gone out to do work on the Sabbath and was not ignorant of the law against work on that day. It was a deliberate sin. He was stoned to death at the command of the Lord. A deliberate sin is not to be taken lightly.

Although the Old Testament makes a distinction between deliberate and accidental sin, that does not appear to be the point being made in Hebrews, which looks at life from a perspective of Jesus' already having come and died for sin. If Jesus understands human weakness and helps those who are tempted (Heb 2:17-18; 4:15), he is hardly going to fail to understand our failure. Similarly, Paul's response to failure was to restore the person (Gal 6:1), even when the sin was quite serious (2 Cor 2:5-11). (2) Hebrews is not a Pauline writing, but it comes out of the same circle of acquaintances (Heb 13:23). We would therefore expect similar attitudes toward forgiveness of sin.

The point Hebrews is making can best be seen by following the author's progression of thought. Having noted the adequacy of Christ's sacrifice in Hebrews 10:1-18, he urges the readers to draw near to God with confidence (Heb 10:19-22). This is expressed in (1) holding on to the hope that we have in Christ, (2) encouraging each other to live the faith in practice and (3) gathering together (Heb 10:23-25). The opposite of these would be to withdraw from the Christian gatherings, to stop doing public expressions of faith, and to give up commitment to Christ and hope in him. In other words, the opposite would be apostasy.

That this is the point of the passage is clearly seen in Hebrews 10:29, where the “deliberate” sinners are described as those who have “trampled the Son of God under foot,” treated the “blood of the covenant” as something common (in other words, looked upon Jesus' death as just any common criminal's death) and “insulted the Spirit of grace.” This is deliberate sin, but deliberate in the sense that a person willfully is renouncing Christianity and rejecting Jesus, his death and the personal experience of the Spirit (which is the slander against the Holy Spirit condemned in Mk 3:28-29).

It is not that such deliberate sinners (or apostates) did not know the truth. The author is clear on that point. Only “after we have received the knowledge of the truth” is such an action so serious. Like those mentioned in Hebrews 6:4-8, they have been fully initiated into Christianity, for the phrase ”knowledge of the truth” is common in the later New Testament writing for having come to full Christian conversion (Jn 8:32; 1 Tim 2:4; 4:3; 2 Tim 2:25; Tit 1:1; 1 Jn 2:21; 2 Jn 1). But they have chosen to reject their experience of Christ. Had they received a distorted picture of Christianity there might have been hope, for one could correct the distortion. But they have developed a “sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God” (Heb 3:12). For such people there is no sacrifice for sin remaining; they have rejected the only one that exists. What remains is the judgment of God.

This does not mean that the early church took sin lightly, deliberate or accidental. Any sin called for rebuke and restoration or, if unrepented of, discipline (see Mt 18:15-20; 1 Cor 5:1-5). And sinning could lead to sickness (Jas 5:15) or death (1 Cor 11:30). Furthermore, deliberately hardening one's conscience and disobeying God could start one on the way to this outright rejection of the faith. It might also indicate that the person remains outside the faith, for Jesus is not yet Lord to the one who disobeys him (1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 5:19-21). Yet serious as their condition is, the possibility remains that all such people can be brought to repentance in one way or another. There are still arguments to be put forward and evidence to be shown. For the people the author is talking about, however, nothing of the kind is possible. They knew the truth fully, but have deliberately renounced what they once embraced. There is no new evidence or arguments to present. We can only tremble at the thought of the judgment awaiting them and take care that we stay far away from the slope that leads down into that pit.

See also comment on Hebrews 6:4-6; 2 Peter 2:20; 1 John 5:16-17.

(1) With the possible exception of the Day of Atonement, the Old Testament required no sacrifices for what we call sin. The unintentional sins mentioned there are situations in which a person of the community does not know the law. Only after doing something do they discover that God has prohibited it. Other types of sin and guilt offerings that were required were for such things as the healing of leprosy (restoring the former leper to the community) and the blood of childbirth, neither of which involves any moral failure. Old Testament offerings were primarily for ritual impurity and had almost nothing to do with what we call sin.
(2) The sinner here is probably not the person mentioned in 1 Corinthians 5, but a leader who had opposed Paul and forced him to withdraw from the church during the “painful visit” (2 Cor 2:1). Paul wrote his “letter of tears” after this, and the church responded by disciplining the rebel leader (2 Cor 2:3-4). So the sin was rebellion against God's apostle, perhaps even expelling the apostle from the church he had founded.

cslewislover wrote:I would like to post some pages from Hard Sayings of the Bible (Walter Kaiser et al, InterVarsity Press, 1996) regarding some verses related to apostasy. They are very interesting! There are four verses discussed in this book that relate to losing one's salvation or perhaps never having had it in the first place. This first one is from 2 Peter 2:20. The others are 2 Peter 1:10, Hebrews 6:4-6, and 10:26. If I put up all the pages, it may be a bit long - but worth the read. (Also related to these is Mark3:28-29, regarding the unpardonable sin.)

I will go ahead and post the Mark 3:28-29 pages in the other thread discussing blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... =9&t=33350


Hebrews 6:46 Is Repentance Ever Impossible? (pp 681-683)

Most Christians know of individuals who for one reason or another have left the faith. They may not have actually denied the faith, but they are certainly not practicing the faith. For such people this is a very troubling passage. Is there anyone who cannot be brought to repentance? Can a person have shared the Holy Spirit and then be lost? And are these people really eternally lost? Is this really a description of a Christian?

First, this passage is not unique but rather is part of a group of passages concerning people who cannot be forgiven or brought to repentance. Mark 3:28-29 refers to blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, which will never be forgiven. The context is that of people observing the work of the Spirit through Jesus and calling it the work of the devil. In 1 John 5:16 the author speaks of a “sin unto death” (KJV) about which, the elder implies, prayer is useless. Finally, the verse under consideration here refers to a class of people who cannot “be brought back to repentance.” The issue is not whether God would forgive them if they repented, but whether there is any way to bring them to repent at all. The answer is no. They are like farmland that produces nothing useful; “in the end it will be burned.” People can so harden themselves against God that nothing will keep them from hell.

Second, the people under discussion are fully initiated Christians. In the preceding passage, the author contemplates whether he should discuss Melchizedek, a difficult teaching, or return to the basic teachings of the faith. He lists these foundational experiences as repentance, faith and teaching on (a) baptism (differentiating the Christian baptism from other types of cleansing rituals), (b) reception of the Spirit (laying on of hands), (c) resurrection of the dead and (d) eternal judgment. If the instruction they received had been defective, there would be some reason to go over it again. But he will not return to these teachings, for he knows these readers. They are fully initiated Christians. There was nothing defective in how they were brought to Christ, so there is no use in going back over the basics.

These individuals are “enlightened” (often a reference to baptism, but at the least meaning that they have received accurate teaching about God), “have tasted the heavenly gift” (often a reference to participating in the Lord's Supper, but at the least meaning salvation or reception of the Spirit), “have shared in the Holy Spirit” (who except Christians receives this?), and “have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age” (probably indicating their experience of prophetic words and miracles, seen as a present experience of what would be fully realized in the coming age; see Gal 3:1-5). These are people with a full Christian experience, defective in no way. In fact, this is one of the clearest descriptions of Christian initiation in the New Testament.

Third, what is the author's concern about these people? Hebrews 6 is an excursus the author inserted into the argument because he is afraid that when he gets to the difficult subject of Melchizedek the readers will “turn him off.” He is not afraid that they will not understand or go to sleep while this section of the book is read, but that they will reject the teaching and with it their commitment to Christ. Throughout the book he is concerned that they will leave their Christian faith and return to Judaism. The concept of an order of priests after Melchizedek (namely Jesus, the only one he cites as being in that order) contrasts with, and is an implicit criticism of, the Aaronic order that served in Jerusalem, which is something the readers may not have wanted to hear. The author is warning them before he brings the difficult teaching not to apostatize, because the consequence of such an action is damnation.

His warning comes as a description of what it would mean to apostatize. That he is talking about full-blown apostasy is clear, for he uses the phrase “they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace” (Heb 6:6). That is, they once confessed that Jesus was Lord and Messiah, which means they repented of the injustice of the crucifixion. Now in rejecting the faith they are declaring that the crucifixion was correct after all—Jesus was a blasphemer and not Messiah. Such a public recantation exposes Jesus to public disgrace.

Is it possible that the author is simply writing about a hypothetical situation? If so, there are two possible ways to understand it. The first is that both the author and his readers know that this cannot happen, so it is hypothetical for all of them. In that case one wonders why the author wasted hi ink. His purpose clearly is to exhort them not to return to Judaism. If his warnings are only hypothetical, how would they keep people from apostatizing? The second possibility is that the author knows this is hypothetical, but he believes his readers will take it seriously. In that case it would serve as a warning, but it would be deceptive. Is the author of Hebrews likely to defend the truth with deception? Would he scare his readers with a situation he knows could never happen?

What, then, is the author of Hebrews saying? He is refusing to return to basics on the grounds that there is no use in doing so for people who have been accurately initiated into the Christian faith. His arguments to keep them in the faith must come from deeper truth, not from a clarification of the foundational truth. He then points out by way of warning that if fully initiated Christians turn their backs on Christ, they will so harden themselves that nothing anyone can do will bring them back to repentance. Their end result will be eternal damnation. But, he concludes, while this is a real possibility for some, “we are confident of better things in your case” (Heb 6:9). If he were not, at least for some of them, there would have been no use in writing the letter at all. They may be on the verge of apostasy, but they have not made the decision and crossed the line.

In so writing the author strikes the balance found throughout the New Testament. The New Testament authors write out of an experience of the grace of Christ and a firm conviction that they are on their way to a greater inheritance in heaven. At the same time, they write with a concern that they or their readers could apostatize and thus lose what they already have. So long as people are following Christ they are supremely confident about them. If their readers turn back to the world, rejecting the rule of Christ, then the New Testament authors never express any hope that without repentance such people will enter heaven. This is a sobering, but no a fear-producing, type of tension seen in Paul (1 Cor 9:27; Gal 5:2, 7-10; Phil 3:12; 2 Tim 4:7, sometimes speaking of his concern for others), James (Jas 5:20, the purpose of the letter being to “save [a sinner, meaning a believer who has turned to the world] from death”), Jude (Jude 23) and John (1 Jn 5:16-17 KJV, the emphasis being on praying for people before they commit the “sin unto death”). The call to the modern reader is to pay attention to the warning and “to imitate those who through faith and patience inherit what has been promised” (Heb 6:12) so that the author would say of us as well, “We are confident of better things in your case—things that accompany salvation.”

See also comment on Mark 3:28-29; Hebrews 10:26; 2 Peter 1:10; 1 John 5:16-17

cslewislover wrote:I would like to upload some pages from Hard Sayings of the Bible regarding some verses related to apostasy. They are very interesting! There are four verses discussed in this book that relate to losing one's salvation or perhaps never having had it in the first place. This first one is from 2 Peter 2:20. The others are 2 Peter 1:10, Hebrews 6:4-6, and 10:26. If I put up all the pages, it may be a bit long - but worth the read. (Also related to these is Mark3:28-29, regarding the unpardonable sin.)

I didn't read the rest yet but the pages regarding 2 Peter 2:20 seem to suggest one can lose their salvation with the continued unrepentant sinning.

Fürstentum Liechtenstein wrote:

BavarianWheels wrote:Can a person accept Christ as his Lord and Savior, then live as though he/she didn't?

Yes. From the cultural norm's point-of-view, YES. Here is an example:

Fürstentum Liechtenstein wrote:There is a case I like to share: At work, this one guy comes around to chat with me every so often. He calls me «Pastor» and likes to talk about Jesus, faith, the church and so on. I believe the guy is saved because what comes out of his mouth is consistent with what a person with a repentant heart would say...except that this man's brain is totally fried. He's not all there. Sometimes he sounds like an idiot, sometimes he's calm and makes sense. He will occasionally use the Lord's name in vain but I think this is more out of habit than out of any malicious intent.
This man smokes a marijuana joint every morning, eats a king size bag of Cheetos and washes it down with a liter of beer. I'm not sure if his brain was fried before he was saved or afterwards. But I'm pretty sure he's saved.
FL

If this man - Daniel is his name - were to walk into any church (save a Catholic church) he would be escorted out. He looks dirty, shifts his weight from one leg to another constantly - giving his body a non-stop balancing motion - and rarely looks at me in the eyes. He is stooped over and bends his neck upwards to keep his head parallel to the ground. His teeth are bared, not in a smile but in a painful grimace. From all appearances, this guy is ready for Hell. But I'm pretty sure he's saved.

Daniel is an extreme example, I admit. With Jesus as Lord of one's life, fruit will be produced for Jesus is the vine and we are the branches. And I know - I'd bet a paycheck on this - that even Daniel produces fruit! Most Christians won't see Daniel's fruit as they will focus on the bizarre human being that he is.

The average Christian I meet who claims to be saved is a changed individual from what he once was. This seems to be a recurring story, and it certainly is mine as well. This is why I said,

This is not the scenario I had in mind when I proposed the question, although this fits to a degree also.

First off we see from Jac3510's statement that he doesn't care what he believes later as long as he believed once. (incidently, Satan and all his minions also believe) The difference between Jac3510's statement and that of your coworker/friend Daniel, is that YOU DO see his heart as willing to search and probe God. Contrast this with Jac3510 stating (absolutely) his indifference to what happens next in life. Daniel at least seems to care outwardly, so a Christian might, as you have, assume Daniel is at least in his right mind at times and searches for God/Christ. He has that going for him. Jac3510, on the other hand, doesn't care. One could assume by this we would NEVER see any outward appearance of submitting to God's will. Since jac3510 says he doesn't care, you could assume correctly that his inner self would also not be searching for anything other than self-satisfaction and/or self-preservation. Is this latter person saved having simply believed at ONE time, then having zero fruit outwardly nor inwardly? If God's written Word consisted of only the words in John 3:16, then we wouldn't be having this discussion. However John 3:16 is not the only revealed Word of God.

God forgives a penitent sinner over and over. God cannot forgive those that do not care to be forgiven. Remember Jac3510 makes his own "bed" of being without care after believing at one time. He does not need to be penitent after having believed.

Smoking marijuana, eating Cheetos, and drinking beer are not anything that keeps one from salvation.

I agree with you, Christians afforded time after having accepted Christ, will produce some fruit. It could be as simple as keeping in touch with God through Christ in prayer and in study initially on their own. That is fruit...remaining in Him!

Fürstentum Liechtenstein wrote:If this man - Daniel is his name - were to walk into any church (save a Catholic church) he would be escorted out.

Boy, I hope not. One is reminded of the possibility of these "Daniel's" being angels or even real persons as incidental tests of our true convictions.
.
.

Byblos wrote:

cslewislover wrote:I would like to upload some pages from Hard Sayings of the Bible regarding some verses related to apostasy. They are very interesting! There are four verses discussed in this book that relate to losing one's salvation or perhaps never having had it in the first place. This first one is from 2 Peter 2:20. The others are 2 Peter 1:10, Hebrews 6:4-6, and 10:26. If I put up all the pages, it may be a bit long - but worth the read. (Also related to these is Mark3:28-29, regarding the unpardonable sin.)

I didn't read the rest yet but the pages regarding 2 Peter 2:20 seem to suggest one can lose their salvation with the continued unrepentant sinning.

Yes, and the Hebrews 10:26 essay is very good. Part of it says: "deliberately hardening one's conscience and disobeying God could start one on the way to this outright rejection of the faith. It might also indicate that the person remains outside the faith, for Jesus is not yet Lord to the one who disobeys him (1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 5:19-21)" (p 690).

In the essay on 2 Peter 1:10, it includes: "While the whole New Testament witnesses to foregiveness of sin for all who repent, and acknowledges that Christians do sin from time to time, no author in the New Testament, whether Paul of James or Peter of John, believed that a person could be living in disregard of Christian standards and still be 'saved' (or still inherit the kingdom). As Jesus said, a good tree bears good fruit (Mt 7:17). You cannot consistently get 'unsaved' fruit from a 'saved' tree" (p 726).

In the Moody Handbook of Theology (Paul Enns, 1989, 2008), it describes conversion and regeneration. Conversion takes an active acceptance on our part to God's efficacious grace. Once a genuine conversion takes place, regeneration begins, which is the work of the Holy Spirit (and not our own). If we don't have a new nature that shows a new will to obey God, then the Holy Spirit must not be there doing his regenerating work. We can still backslide and we can still sin, but we should have the will to obey God if salvation (conversion) involved God and not just man (pp 350 353).

BavarianWheels wrote:First off we see from Jac3510's statement that he doesn't care what he believes later as long as he believed once.

I think Jac3510 is using extreme statements to prove certain points. The points being that works are not required for salvation and that salvation is a free gift of God; that once you are adopted as a child of God, you are adopted and nothing you can do will get you unadopted, and that works cannot be a sure witness of your salvation because many pagans have works, and better ones at that.

I have the same convictions. As for this idea of Jac's:

BavarianWheels wrote:Contrast this with Jac3510 stating (absolutely) his indifference to what happens next in life.

God gives to the repentant & born again a new heart and gives new desires to that heart. Here's a concrete example: before I was saved I wanted an airplane of my own...now, I don't care at all about owning my own plane. God put into my heart the desire to help various ministries financially, and removed my desire to have an airplane. (He thus took most of my mad money away! no $$$ for an airplane )

So, if you read again Jac's statement about his indifference to his future actions after salvation, it makes more sense if you understand it in the context of «my» airplane. Many desires of the unrepentant heart fall by the wayside at the moment of salvation.

I could say that I didn't care either about the future at the moment of my salvation. All I wanted to do was find out about God. I can say now that I still don't care about my good works. I could make a whole list of them to impress you...but they bore me. The Spirit does them through me and I get some pleasure from them because God has deigned to use me as a tool.

That's about it.

FL

I had written a request for information regarding this topic to RBC (Radio Bible Class) on the web, and Dan Vander Lugt (http://www.rbc.org/bible-study/answers- ... rLugt.aspx), one of the ministry's main authors, responded with this answer:

Vicki,

Anyone who continues to live in conscious, willful sin is in danger of hell. We read these sobering words in 1 John 3:9,10.

No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God's seed remains in him: he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God. This is how we know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are: Anyone who does not do what is right is not a child of God; nor is anyone who does not love his brother.

Many Bible passages underline the reality of our security as believers in Jesus Christ: John 10:28-30; 13:1; Romans 8:29-39; 1 Corinthians 3:15; 12:13; Ephesians 1:13; 4:20; Jude 24.

Believers can backslide, however, and lose the joy of salvation. The New Testament gives us many examples of believers who drew back from their fellowship with Jesus Christ: the disciples (Matt. 26:56); Peter (Matt. 26:69-75); the Christians in Corinth (2 Cor. 12:20,21); and the Asian churches (Rev. 2:4,14,15,20).

We must distinguish between backsliding and departing from the faith—apostasy. A true Christian may backslide, be chastened, and then repent and return (Heb. 12:6; Rev. 2:5). A person who has merely professed faith without a genuine encounter with Christ can depart, prosper outwardly, and never return. The apostle John said that some who had left the fellowship of believers and were now teaching false doctrine showed by their actions that they never really belonged (1 John 2:19).

It may be impossible for us to make a judgment as to whether the person is a backsliding Christian or an impostor. Sometimes only time will tell.

The doctrine of eternal security is taught in Scripture, but it is intended to comfort true Christians who are earnestly concerned with living faithfully for Jesus Christ. People who once professed faith and are now living sinfully without remorse should not be comforted by assurance that their profession of faith guarantees their salvation. We gain nothing by examining the nature of the “decision” they made. We need to point out to them that their present lifestyle is out of keeping with their profession by showing them Scriptures like 1 John 3:4-9. They must be led to self-examination. If they are genuinely saved, God will chasten them (Heb. 12:6). They will repent and return.

Dan Vander Lugt

While I generally agree with what your correspondent writes, some of it is a little hard:

cslewislover wrote:No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God's seed remains in him: he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God.

If that is true, we're all toast. We're all on our way to Hell. In that case, B.W.'s book A Land Unknown: Hell's Dominion* should be sold as a brochure for a retirement home, a retirement home every human being is going to...except Jesus.

FL

*Xulon Press, author B.W. Melvin

Fürstentum Liechtenstein wrote:While I generally agree with what your correspondent writes, some of it is a little hard:

cslewislover wrote:No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God's seed remains in him: he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God.

If that is true, we're all toast. We're all on our way to Hell. In that case, B.W.'s book A Land Unknown: Hell's Dominion* should be sold as a brochure for a retirement home, a retirement home every human being is going to...except Jesus.

FL

*Xulon Press, author B.W. Melvin

It's OK FL. I know from reading his other articles that he doesn't mean it that way. He writes elsewhere that we all sin; he's speaking here of living a life of sin. The article that I had read, from which I had written him, was on the assurance of salvation, and he uses that phrase in that article: once saved, always saved.

What I conclude from all this is that we can have at most a moral assurance of salvation, not an absolute one.

Byblos wrote:What I conclude from all this is that we can have at most a moral assurance of salvation, not an absolute one.

Lol. So by "moral," do you mean that God will honor his obligation to redeem us as long as we don't forsake Jesus? What those authors wrote, and Dan, about apostasy seems accurate. You may get some more stirrings out of the pot since I know that the pastors I've heard emphasize the idea that an apostate never made a genuine committment to Christ. But based on these authors and the verses they quote, that doesn't seem to always be the case. Maybe our free will is stronger than we realize, strong enough to break free of the Holy Spirit. I don't know. Apostasy is an odd, mysterious thing.

cslewislover wrote:Maybe our free will is stronger than we realize, strong enough to break free of the Holy Spirit. I don't know. Apostasy is an odd, mysterious thing.[/color]

My position is that if it's not strong enough to break free, it's not free will at all!
.
.

BavarianWheels wrote:

cslewislover wrote:Maybe our free will is stronger than we realize, strong enough to break free of the Holy Spirit. I don't know. Apostasy is an odd, mysterious thing.[/color]

My position is that if it's not strong enough to break free, it's not free will at all!
.
.

This has some bearing on the topic being discussed:

I found out that at my church, one of the members was recently convicted for 1st degree murder, with a sentence of life imprisonment and a possibility of parole after having served 25 years. I found this out during last Wednesday's Bible study.

I was surprised. I asked the others present if this man was born-again and no one answered except the man who had brought us this news. «Yes, he is saved» was the answer. The pastor didn't say anything. So I asked, «How can a saved individual commit murder?» and I was told that this man had had a drug addiction and that the murder was commited while stoned yet saved.

Comments?

FL

Fürstentum Liechtenstein wrote:I found out that at my church, one of the members was recently convicted for 1st degree murder, with a sentence of life imprisonment and a possibility of parole after having served 25 years. I found this out during last Wednesday's Bible study.

I was surprised. I asked the others present if this man was born-again and no one answered except the man who had brought us this news. «Yes, he is saved» was the answer. The pastor didn't say anything. So I asked, «How can a saved individual commit murder?» and I was told that this man had had a drug addiction and that the murder was commited while stoned yet saved.

Comments?

Pretty interesting (not for the murder victim, however). I guess I would defer to those people's judgement or discernment, at least for the time being. Maybe you could visit this person in prison and see him for yourself.