“Full Assurance of Faith” (Hebrews 10:22)

[Jim Parker]

I call them the 'not really' doctrines of OSAS.
In OSAS the list is really quite long of all the scriptures that don't really mean what they say.

The question of what not abiding in Christ really means for the one no longer abiding in Christ, or who has never been in Christ to begin with, is answered for us in John's minor letters.

"24 ...let that abide in you which you heard from the beginning. If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, you also will abide in the Son and in the Father. (1 John 2:24 NASB)
12He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life." (1 John 5:12 NASB)

We see two things here: 1) The condition for abiding in the Son and the Father is that you abide in "what you heard from the beginning". And abiding in the Son and the Father is what you have to do in order to have eternal life, because you have to have the Son and the Father in order to have eternal life. 2) He's warning saved people presently abiding in the word of the gospel to abide (continue) in the gospel, not people who are 'not really' saved and who need to start abiding in the gospel.

The bottom line is, in order to have eternal life you have to have the Father. But if you cease to abide in Father you no longer have eternal life.

Word.

 

[netchaplain]

What this argument boils down to is the warnings in scripture, written to people presently abiding in the gospel warning them not to be deceived and to continue to abide in him so they can continue to have eternal life, are sufficient to keep the believer from not abiding in the gospel anymore.

I see the admonishments aiding in identifying to the believer those who are false professors who are really unbelievers.

It seems ironic to claim to believe, then latter claim not to believe. Only one who falsely claims to believe can eventually claim unbelief, because true belief never becomes a false belief. One could think he believed even though in reality he doesn't, but the Lord eventually makes both manifest, if it's true belief or actual unbelief, it cannot be both.

 

[WIP]

I see the admonishments aiding in identifying to the believer those who are false professors who are really unbelievers.

It seems ironic to claim to believe, then latter claim not to believe. Only one who falsely claims to believe can eventually claim unbelief, because true belief never becomes a false belief. One could think he believed even though in reality he doesn't, but the Lord eventually makes both manifest, if it's true belief or actual unbelief, it cannot be both.

Just to clarify for me. Is it then safe to say that no one can make a claim of true belief because we can never predict whether we might be capable of falling into unbelief at some future point in our lives and then realizing we were not really a true believer?

 

[netchaplain]

Just to clarify for me. Is it then safe to say that no one can make a claim of true belief because we can never predict whether we might be capable of falling into unbelief at some future point in our lives and then realizing we were not really a true believer?

Hi WIP - That's a bit difficult for me to understand because I do not believe one who is truly in the faith can become an unbeliever. I'm just indicating that those who truly do not believe (which most in the beginning would think they do, i.e parable of the sower) will eventually see for themselves that they don't believe.

 

[smaller]

Concerning the above passage, it was the unbelieving branches of Israel who were not spared (Rom 11:20), same for all Gentiles.

They were quite entirely blinded in unbelief. Romans 11:8 tells us that God Himself blinded them by a spirit of slumber put upon them so they could neither hear nor see. And that would be "seeing and hearing" in the Spiritual senses of the term. The exact same conditions that every unbelieving gentile also has, as shown by Acts 26:18 and 2 Cor. 4:4, again showing that such are dominated in their minds, being blinded by the darkness/power of Satan, the god of this world who blinds them to the Gospel. This is in fact the 'natural state' of every 'natural man.' Fully intended by God for them to be in that state, of unbelief. Kind of settles the question on what proceeds first, Grace from God to see or the natural man conjuring up his own 'faith.' I don't find room for the latter views. And we ourselves were also in the exact same blinded unbelieving state, under the prince of the power of the air, the spirit of disobedience, prior to our seeing. Eph. 2:2.

Scriptures are very consistent in this matter of the blinded natural man. Intended by God Himself for them to be that way.

Deuteronomy 29:4
Yet the Lord hath not given you an heart to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear, unto this day.

It was even worse for the people who came out of Egypt. All but 2 died in the desert from what? Yep. UNbelief. Even after all the things of God they saw and experienced, upfront, close and personal. Again indicating the dire condition of the natural man of the flesh, the carnal man in the flesh. Blind as bats. And made so by Gods Intentions.

God is only interested in the younger vessel. The "second" offspring. The spiritual man. Paul shows this in many places and many ways. The elder/blinded/natural/carnal flesh man serves this purpose. To give a place for Gods birthing of the second man. 1 Cor. 1:42-47. The natural man doesn't have a chance or a clue. He is actually against the spiritual children, Gal. 4:29, both of whom happen to walk in the same set of shoes. Gal. 5:17.

God concluded not only all Jews in unbelief (Rom 11:32) but also all Gentiles (Rom 3:23), and unbelief is the same as sin. Only those who come to faith receive eternal life, which IMO means you cannot loose eternal life or it's not eternal.

Blessings!

I agree with you. It is impossible for the Spiritual man to be lost. These are children of Gods Promises in Christ, which they WILL RECEIVE. However I would not extend that courtesy to the flesh man, none of whom will be continuing on. Even our own flesh dies because of sin and returns to the dust.

Romans 8:10
And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

Colossians 3:3
For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God.

Not a person of us who have a 'natural carnal' body is any better than any other sinner in this regards:

Romans 3:9
What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;

The flesh man with indwelling sin and evil present is not moving on. And that is inclusive of our own flesh bodies as well. We really do not even know yet what we will be. 1 John 3:2. A taste and/or a seed does not constitute the whole flavor to come or the whole body to come.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I'm just indicating that those who truly do not believe (which most in the beginning would think they do, i.e parable of the sower) will eventually see for themselves that they don't believe.

And that's WIP's point.
How does the person who is sure they are a true believer (but who is really not) find comfort in their believing knowing that the day may come when they slip into unbelief and, thus, find out they haven't 'really' believed all along? They can't find comfort in a theology like that, of course. But in Biblical non-OSAS the person who presently believes is presently saved (1 Corinthians 15:1-2 NASB). He possess eternal life. There is no question of whether or not one is saved for the person who believes. It isn't until one enters into the territory of unbelief that the (former) believer falls from the security and assurance of God's salvation and must then wonder if he is saved. It's really quite elementary.

 

[netchaplain]

How does the person who thinks they are a true believer, but who is really not, find comfort in their believing knowing that the day may come when they slip into unbelief and, thus, find out they haven't really believed all along?

An example I gave is in Luke 8:13 which concerns "They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away."

I see no impossibility that "receive with joy" can involve them thinking they believe, but eventually find out for themselves otherwise, due to "no root," and these would no longer seek "comfort of the Scriptures." If they truly believed "they would no doubt have continued" (1John 2:19).

 

[chessman]

Who said "lake of fire"?

You did. Here:
http://christianforums.net/Fellowsh...aved-its-right-here.63864/page-2#post-1180649

Branches that do NOT remain in Jesus (like the ones that got cut off) are gathered up and thrown in the fire. (like, "lake of fire")

iakov

I didn't.

Yes you did.

To what do you think the word "fire" refers if not to the fires of hell?

I told you. Given the context, it seems to me Jesus was using the figurative illustration of a vinedresser cutting off and burning up vines that no longer were bearing fruit. It was His way of telling the "already clean" disciples why they were being left here till God called them home (till it was their time to die). A grape vine's primary purpose is to bear grapes (fruit). If they no longer bear much fruit, they are pruned and dried and burned. Same thing for His disciples. Their primary purpose was/is to bear fruit (i.e make other disciples). Those that are no longer doing much fruit bearing (disciple making) are done and "cut off" (they die), they wither (their bodies decompose) and they are gathered (at the return of Christ) and burned with fire (judged and refined) then given glorified bodies.

Jesus did not say, "If one of you does not abide in me". He said "If a man does not abide in me." That refers to everyone in general, not specifically to the apostles.

Right. I didn't say otherwise. My point was Jesus specifically said they were "already clean". From a salvation standpoint, they were already clean and thus ready to be cut off and brought to be with the Lord. But they had more work to do. Namely, to bear other disciples. Thus, they were being left. And boy did they ever bear more fruit/disciples.

And notice what else He said:

John 15:6 (LEB) If anyone does not remain in me, he is thrown out as a branch, and dries up, and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned.​

Who's "they"? Jesus? Why plural then if Jesus meant this to illustrate their final Judgment and sentencing to Hell? Rather, He means gardeners (plural) who prunes the vines so new ones can grow in their place.

Where does Jesus ever use the word "fire" to refer to a process of judgment and purification?

You mean besides here in John 15?

Jesus' Word says this:

Matthew 3:11 I baptize you with water for repentance, but the one who comes after me is more powerful than I am, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. ​

Or here, after Jesus left His disciples:

Acts 2:3-4 (LEB) And divided tongues like fire appeared to them and rested on each one of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other languages as the Spirit gave them ability to speak out.

1 Corinthians 3:15 (LEB) If anyone’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, but he himself will be saved, but so as through fire.

1 Peter 1:7 (LEB) so that the genuineness of your faith, more valuable than gold that is passing away, but is tested by fire, may be found to result in praise and glory and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ,

Revelation 3:18 (LEB) I advise you to buy from me gold refined by fire, in order that you may become rich, and white clothing, in order that you may be clothed and the shame of your nakedness may not be revealed, ...
​

But really, no other examples are necessary for my case because it is the context of John 15 that determines what Jesus meant by "fire" there in that John 15:6 usage. And futhermore, we know exactly what He meant. He was illustrating what a gardner does to branches that have produced their lot of fruit (other disciples) and no longer are doing so.
Again, Do you think our salvation rests upon how much fruit we produce? Cause in horticulture, the cutting off and burning of branches sure does.

Jesus' most common use of the word "fire" refers to hell.

Even if this were true, it doesn't mean that a minority usage isn't what Jesus meant in John 15:6.

Since Jesus consistently uses the word "fire" to refer to hell, (Mat 3:12, Mat 5:22, Mat 7:19, Mat 13:40-42, Mat 13:49-50, Mat 18:8-9, Mat 25:41 and that's just from Matthew

Thank you for making my point. The reason we know that Jesus was referring to Hell/fire in those passages is because He said so. Yet, He did not say so in John 15:6.

That's my point.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

An example I gave is in Luke 8:13 which concerns "They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away."

But see, this doesn't answer the question about security and assurance. It's impossible for any believer to have security and assurance if the potential for no longer believing looms over them exposing the believing they are doing today as not really believing at all. But in Biblical non-OSAS the person is saved during the time in which he believes no matter how strong or weak that faith is. And he has access to everything that his believing entitles him to during that time. It isn't until he stops believing that the benefits of the believing he had cease. But in OSAS he finds out he never had them to begin with. That's not a very secure doctrine of salvation. I see no assurance of salvation in that doctrine. You won't know that you are truly saved until after you die.

What Luke 8:13 teaches me, and which confirms my own observations, is that faith is not so much the 'either-or' proposition that so many in the church make it out to be as it is a matter of 'weak vs. strong' faith. It should be no surprise that my wife who fell from the faith always had a weak faith. But I know she was saved because she spoke in tongues (Acts 10:45-46 NASB). And that is what Jesus says in the parable, the seed failed, not because it never really got planted and never really began to grow or that the person never really believed but because it's root did not go down deep enough to sustain growth in times of trouble and persecution and the desire for other things.

 

[Cygnus]

John 10:29 pretty much tells us OSAS.

My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand.

 

[Cygnus]

(1) JN 15:1 "I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardener. 2 He cuts off every branch in me that bears no fruit,

What is meant by bearing NO fruit?

If a person just does one "Godly" deed....then they have beared fruit....and will not be cut off.

 

[Cygnus]

(2) RO 11:17 If some of the branches have been broken off, and you, though a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root, 18 do not boast over those branches. If you do, consider this: You do not support the root, but the root supports you. 19 You will say then, "Branches were broken off so that I could be grafted in." 20 Granted. But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but be afraid. 21 For IF GOD DID NOT SPARE THE NATURAL BRANCHES, HE WILL NOT SPARE YOU EITHER.

Isn't this verse talking about Isreal as being the branch?

 

[Jethro Bodine]

If they truly believed "they would no doubt have continued" (1John 2:19).

The problem here is the church adds the 'if they truly believed' part to the passage. I don't see any indication in the passage that those who departed never really believed to begin with:

"19They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they all are not of us." (1 John 2:19 NASB italics in original)

The word 'really' is not in the original text. It's been added to aid in interpretation. But it's entirely unfitting for what John says next. See, just 5 verses later he tells his saved, abiding audience to whom he is speaking to let what they heard abide in them and not go the way of those in whom it did not. If nothing else, it's certainly a suggestion that they could do that:

" 24As for you, let that abide in you which you heard from the beginning. If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, you also will abide in the Son and in the Father." (1 John 2:24 NASB)

It doesn't make any sense to interpret vs. 19 as 'they never really believed in the first place, that's why they left' and then turn right around and warn those who are abiding in what they heard not to follow the deceitful doctrine of the Gnostics and leave either. If OSAS was true he wouldn't say that. He would have no need to, knowing they could never leave. They would not be among those who never really believed in the first place.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

John 10:29 pretty much tells us OSAS.

My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand.

No one can ever take away my relationship with God and the Son against my will. It does not prove OSAS. It proves what it says, that no one can take away your salvation. Which is particularly meaningful to those who are familiar with the drawbacks of the first covenant where someone could ruin your relationship with God. Like having a yutz for a priest like Eli.

 

[Cygnus]

The problem here is the church adds the 'if they truly believed' part to the passage. I don't see any indication in the passage that those who departed never really believed to begin with:

"19They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they all are not of us." (1 John 2:19 NASB italics in original)

The word 'really' is not in the original text. It's been added to aid in interpretation. But it's entirely unfitting for what John says next. See, just 5 verses later he tells his saved, abiding audience to whom he is speaking to let what they heard abide in them and not go the way of those in whom it did not. If nothing else, it's certainly a suggestion that they could do that:

" 24As for you, let that abide in you which you heard from the beginning. If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, you also will abide in the Son and in the Father." (1 John 2:24 NASB)

It doesn't make any sense to interpret vs. 19 as 'they never really believed in the first place, that's why they left' and then turn right around and warn those who are abiding in what they heard not to follow the deceitful doctrine of the Gnostics and leave either. If OSAS was true he wouldn't say that. He would have no need to, knowing they could never leave. They would not be among those who never really believed in the first place.

1st John 2:19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us.

Who is the "of us"?

 

[Cygnus]

No one can ever take away my relationship with God and the Son against my will. It does not prove OSAS. It proves what it says, that no one can take away your salvation. Which is particularly meaningful to those who are familiar with the drawbacks of the first covenant where someone could ruin your relationship with God. Like having a yutz for a priest like Eli.

True...."No one can ever take away my relationship with God and the Son" That no one would even include yourself.

Now, I did notice you added the term "will" to that verse.

Your verse reads like this "My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand unless it is your will.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

1st John 2:19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us.

Who is the "of us"?

It either means John and his company of ministerial servants, or all believers in general.

They went out from us believers because they are not of us believers. That's all he's saying. And that's what non-OSAS argues: One who stops believing leaves the faith for exactly that reason--they stop believing, or never really did to begin with. No distinction is necessary. Unbelief in either case has the exact same outcome. They lose God and the Son, and eternal life.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

True...."No one can ever take away my relationship with God and the Son" That no one would even include yourself.

Sounds good, but it completely contradicts Paul and John who set the condition for remaining saved as continuing to believe. God does not do our believing for us. He provides the faith to believe, but he does not force us to give in to the power of faith and believe. Believing is the duty of man. Faith is what God gave us to fulfill that duty. Some choose not to fulfill that duty (1 John 5:10 NASB).

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Now, I did notice you added the term "will" to that verse.

Your verse reads like this "My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand unless it is your will.

I was talking about our will.
No on can snatch you out of God's hand against your will. But we know from plain scripture that you yourself can choose not to believe anymore, and as a result, lose the Father, the Son, and eternal life:

"24 ...let that abide in you which you heard from the beginning. If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, you also will abide in the Son and in the Father." (1 John 2:24 NASB)
"God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. 12He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life." (1 John 5:11-12 NASB)

 

[WIP]

Hi WIP - That's a bit difficult for me to understand because I do not believe one who is truly in the faith can become an unbeliever. I'm just indicating that those who truly do not believe (which most in the beginning would think they do, i.e parable of the sower) will eventually see for themselves that they don't believe.

Thank you for your reply. Then, if I am understanding you correctly, there is no real assurance of salvation because one just never knows until we stand before the judgment seat.