I guess I don't see where you are coming from. You say that you are not speaking from man's POV and therefore I have to think you are speaking from God's POV. Assuming we are only talking about the danger of 'going to Hell' from God's POV I ask this simple question:
From God's POV, identify what the danger (danger defined as the possibility of suffering harm i.e. go to hell) is there for the Elect (Elect defined as those God knows are in Heaven or Heaven bound)?????
Again, from God's point of view there is NO DANGER of going to hell for those destined to go to heaven. (aside: from man's POV I agree with you, but you stated you are speaking from God's POV)
God's POV
Premise 1: All the elect go to heaven
Conclusion: There is no danger of going to hell for the elect
Agreed, this is one possibility. I would say we (you or me or both of us) have a communication issue.
Agreed. Again, when you say "Yet, you [Fastfredy0] don't know who the elect are" you are talking from man's POV, yet you clearly stated as quoted below that:
So, you are confusing the discussion by making points that are from man's POV.
I agree with the rest of your post. But again I feel we don't agree on what we mean by God's POV. We tried though.
Thanks for being patient and civil.
What God says to us is what we need to know. IMO for someone to say they are speaking from God's POV is arrogant, because God's thoughts are so much higher than ours. I never said I spoke from God's POV, I only said I was not speaking from man's POV, because what the scripture says and teaches is where I'm coming from. I understand the idea of speaking "from God's POV," that it is a fantasy that someone is imagining themselves sitting in God's seat and looking at the world from that POV. But it is conjecture. And for you to say that I claimed to speak from God's POV because I said it wasn't man's POV is arguing from silence, and a straw man, because it's not only one or the other. There is also the POV from the standpoint of scripture, which is not necessarily man's POV.
What we actually have is God's special revelation to us in the scripture, and it is often contrary to man's POV. It just seems to me that when you say you're speaking from God's POV that you really don't know what you're talking about, and that your idea "from God's POV" is merely your imagination. If that's the case, then you're just speaking from your POV even though you call it God's POV. I do get your logic concerning how you come to the conclusion you come to, but I disagree with it because I believe it to be a false conclusion, based on my knowledge of scripture. If God says that every unregenerate person is in danger of going to hell (and in need of salvation), then I take it the danger is real, not merely someone's imagination.
It seems to me that you are categorizing the unregenerate elect as being completely safe and not in danger of hell, unlike the rest of mankind. Yet, I don't see that in scripture. On the contrary, I see warnings everywhere I read in the NT that everyone, including the elect is in danger of hell while in the unregenerate state, and that the elect start out in life the same as everyone else, in the same spiritual condition and the same danger. The elect only become safe after they hear the gospel and believe. IMO you are taking scripture and combining it with human reasoning to come to a false conclusion.
Finally, the doctrine that you and the OP are teaching is irrelevant to the Christian life, as I have already explained. That doctrine is completely useless to edify anyone according to how the scripture teaches us to live and believe, and there is a high probability that it would hinder people from entering the kingdom of heaven (ref. Luke 11:52). It makes me wonder if you are looking for some kind of loophole so that you yourself can feel better about your situation, or soothe a guilty conscience. Why else would you go against what scripture clearly states?
God isn't playing games with words. So when He says things such as I quoted before, we can count on it being real and that it applies to us. And since none of the unregenerate can possibly know if they are elect, the doctrine you are teaching is completely irrelevant to them. And since very few, if any, of the elect who first believe (possibly for some months, if not years) know if they are elect, it is completely irrelevant to them. In fact, if a new believer gets wind of your doctrine and starts to believe it, it is more likely that person would backslide because such a person gets a false sense of security.
Where then is their conscience, if they start to become insensitive to the Spirit's correction? Will they not then justify themselves in their false security, saying "I'm safe," when in fact they are in real danger? Ref. Amos 6:1 "
Woe to those who are carefree in Zion, and to those who feel secure on the mountain of Samaria..." Wouldn't they be in danger of this verse (or others like it) applying to them? I have seen many people smug in their sinfulness, because they had a false sense of security, saying to themselves "I'm safe now." The apostle Paul has a phrase for someone fixed in their false sense of security - a seared conscience, as it were with a hot iron.
What did Paul say to the Corinthians who had a false sense of security saying "all things are lawful"? He replied "but not all things are profitable." This is right after he uses the children of Israel as an example of who got destroyed in the desert (1 Cor. 10). And just as he wrote to the Romans "if you live according to the flesh you shall die," it is clear warning that the danger of judgment is real. And the only way a person can know they are the elect is if they are led by the Spirit. And if a person is led by the Spirit, then what use is it for them to be told they were never in danger of hell? It's totally useless, and is therefore bad doctrine.
To say that the elect is never in danger of hell is to say that the gospel message stating that if a person doesn't believe in Christ (and obey Him), that there is danger of hell, then that part of the gospel message, being irrelevant to the elect, is a big fat lie in reference to the elect. That in regard to the elect, God winks at the warnings because He wants them to believe they are never in danger. Nonsense!
If I say that I am among the elect, because I assess myself according to what I think the scripture teaches, and I have a feeling of security, saying to myself, "I am among the elect, and therefore safe, and have a 0% possibility of being cast into hell," can God reverse that? He is sovereign, and most certainly He can reverse that feeling. Thus Paul's warning "you have not been given a spirit of slavery, leading to fear again..." If I make myself a slave of sin again, will I not lose all sense of God's blessing and approval? Will I not then (according to my conscience) consider myself not among the elect, because I no longer have a feeling of security? Will the Holy Spirit pat me on the head and say to me "you're secure" - I think not. I think He will make me the most miserable person on earth.
If I say to myself "I'm secure, and have 0% possibility of going to hell" who is to say that my security is not false? Who is to say that God will not surprise me in the day of judgment by saying "depart from Me you worker of iniquity"? Just because I do religious things and think myself righteous, and claim that I obey God in all things, doesn't assure that I am one of the elect. Paul considered himself one of the elect, and yet he said "
in order that I may attain to the resurrection from the dead," which implies that he does not consider himself so secure as to claim 0% possibility of being thrown into hell.
My point is that we gain security by what the scripture says (and following it), not by conjectures that the elect have no possibility of being cast into hell. God can reverse anyone's belief that they are among the elect, and thereby prove that they are not elect. Can He do that? He certainly can!!
