The False Security of Eternal Security

[Mitspa]

seems you cannot read any better than Danus. It is universal salvation from death. Huge difference that what most protestants believe as saving from hell.

I am just amazed how many protestants actually do not believe in the Incarnation of Christ. YOu mouth the word apparently but have no understanding of what Christ actually accomplished by His Incarnation, death and resurrection. Did you actually read what I stated, of the texts I gave and the historical record of the Incarnation.

Do any of you actually understand the false doctrine of Universal salvation?

What do you mean by the "incarnation" of Christ? I am not a "protestant" nor do I believe that the True "Body of Christ" is seperated! All that are His are born of His Word and abide in Him, By the Holy Spirit.

 

[Cassian]

Free,

For clarity: the concept that all humans will eventually be saved and spend eternity with God--that none will spend eternity in hell or be destroyed and cease to exist--is not to be discussed. This idea is known as Universal Reconciliation and as Universal Salvation.

Your explantion is what Universalists believe and is also called Universal salvation.
However, universal salvation does not mean universal recapitulation or reconciliation.

It is just amazing that a Christian discussion board claims that the Incarnation of Christ is a heresy. I would like you to give me the evidence of where the Incarnation, universal reconcilation was declared a heresy ever by anyone?
I have never veered from the topic. Danus and you in your ignorance do not understand the meaning of the Incarnation, which is just shocking especially from so-called moderators.

If it is a heresy then you should strike the reason for it from scripture, namely the fall of man, the condemnation of Adam, namely death. Rom 5:12 would be a false statement as would be Gen 3:19. Rom 11:32,, Rom 5:18, II Cor 5:18-19, Col 1:20, John 6:39, I Cor 15:13-23, Heb 2:12-16, Rom 3:24-25, Acts 24:15, Rev 20:12-13.

Everyone of these texts is stating the universal salvation of all men from death. Heb 2:14 tells you very clearly, as does I John 3:8. John 4:42 even tells you that Christ is the Savior of the world, also I John 4:14.

Did you scratch these texts from your Bibles and ingnore the Creeds of the Ancient Church? I should note that they often called it universal recapitulation rather than universal reconciliation. I imagine then you do not believe in the resurrection of the dead, nor that there is an eternity.

Without Christ reconciling the world, there is no need for heaven or hell, so, by denying the Incarnation, all the rest of your arguments regarding salvation of our individual souls is moot, null and void.

How can you call yourself a Christian if you deny one of the two distinquishing marks of Historical Christianity, the Trinity and the Incarnation?

 

[Cassian]

What do you mean by the "incarnation" of Christ? I am not a "protestant" nor do I believe that the True "Body of Christ" is seperated! All that are His are born of His Word and abide in Him, By the Holy Spirit.

I didn't know this would get into theology 101.

Incarnation of Christ. Christ by being born of the Virgin Mary and by the Holy Spirit, became both God and man. In His humanity He was precisely us, became like unto us in all things, except He did not sin. Thus by assuming our fallen human natures, by His death and resurrection, He restored life to our mortal bodies. No man will die permanently as he was condemned to die through Adam.

This restoration occurs in the eschoton at the resurrection. All men will be raised because Christ was raised from the dead, All men will be raised immortal and incorruptible. I Cor 15:53.

If you read the earlier post I gave all the pertinent texts of scripture that teach the Incarnation of Christ and its salvfic content for man, for the world actually. When Adam sinned death was not just to man but to the whole world. Man is intrinsically connected to matter or the material world, thus death was not just inherited by man through adam but the world also suffered decay and corruption. Christ's Incarnation and resurrection ended the power of death, Heb 2:14. I John 3:8.

By the fall, man lost life, and eternal existance. Man would simply be dissolved by death, dust to dust. Christ, if He was to have a relationship with man, not just in this life, but for an eternity as He purposed in creating man, then man would need to be recreated, given life, and eternal existance. This is what is accomplished by the Incarnation of Christ through His resurrection. It is a hallmark of historical Christianity, yet it seems we have many who do not believe in the Incarnation and what it accomplished, universal salvation from death.

Note also, that if Christ missed anyone, did not save even one from death, then none are saved from death. This is what I Cor 15:13-19 is so clearly stating and is also summed up in John 6:39. Christ was given everything in heaven and on earth, Col 1:20 and thus by His death and resurrection He will lose none to death and will raise all men for the judgment. If Christ did not save the world from death, there in no need for having a heaven or hell. No one would occupy either place, since we all would still be condemned to death through Adam.

 

[Danus]

Well, you said these are subjects off from the OP and do not want to derail from that but since you asked....

Yes, I did obtain something to begin my relationship with God. I was raised a Catholic and after attending the Church of Christ realized that that is the true Church. I was baptized and added to God's Church-not the church on earth but His heavenly Kingdom. That is where my name BornAgain came from. No good works I do will earn anything to obtain salvation. I do what God commands us to do. If you are not familiar with the Church of Christ that is what Jesus founded when he said to Peter, upon this rock I build My Church. Not a church with another man's name on it. He did not say upon this rock with be Luther's church, or John the Baptist's church, etc.

And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Matt 16:18 (KJV)

"I will build my church." What has been spoken of by Jesus as "the kingdom of heaven," "the kingdom of God," is here spoken of as "my church." means called out or assembly. Here "my church" means the assembly or people who have been called out of the world by the gospel of Christ.

Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born? 5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. 7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
John 3:4-7 (KJV)

There is one birth; there are two elements, "water," and "the Spirit." Both are essential to the new birth; and the new birth is essential to entering the kingdom. What, then, is meant by being born of water and the Spirit? To enter the kingdom is to be saved. (Col. 1:13, 14.) To be saved one must believe, repent, confess and be baptized for (unto) the remission of sins. (Heb. 11:6; Luke 13:3; Rom. 10:10; Acts 2:38.) To enter the kingdom one must be born of water and the Spirit. Since things equal to the same thing are equal to each other, it follows that to be born of water and the Spirit is to believe the gospel, repent of one's sins, confess one's faith in Christ and be baptized for the remission sins. John 3:5 figuratively states what is literally affirmed in Acts 2:38. To be born "anew" is simply to obey the gospel. It is not surprising that those who deny to baptism its proper place among the conditions of pardon would interpret "water" in John 3:5 to mean something other than baptism; in so doing, they are in conflict with the scholarship of the world, both ancient and modern. Henry Alford, one of the translators of the American Standard Version, wrote that "all attempts to get rid" of baptism in this passage, "have sprung from doctrinal prejudices by which the views of expositors have been warped," and Hooker, himself a writer of more than a hundred years ago, said that "of all ancient writers there is not one to be named who ever expounded this text otherwise than as implying external baptism." One is begotten of the Spirit by believing the Word which the Spirit gave, and born of water by coming forth from the waters of baptism.
The flesh produces fleshly life; the Spirit begets spiritual life. Nicodemus had known only the first; the second he must experience before he could enter and enjoy the blessings and benefits of the kingdom. The law that like begets like was and is a universal one and Nicodemus ought already to have perceived it, instead of marvelling at it. It is as immutable and unchangeable as the law of gravity.

There is where my belief in salvation lies to stay on topic here...so does this require work, I guess so.

Yep. Thanks that clears it up.

 

[westtexas]

Please understand that the OP believes that one must "work" to be worthy of salvation, that salvation from God is merited to the individual based on how good they are.

Been an interesting thread. I've enjoyed following it. I'll let Earnest T speak for himself but that's not the way I read his posts.

 

[Mitspa]

I didn't know this would get into theology 101.

Incarnation of Christ. Christ by being born of the Virgin Mary and by the Holy Spirit, became both God and man. In His humanity He was precisely us, became like unto us in all things, except He did not sin. Thus by assuming our fallen human natures,

I always like to start with the first lie! "assumed our fallen human nature"?
What scripture do you base that on?


Heb 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
Heb 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
Heb 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
Heb 1:4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
Heb 1:5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
Heb 1:6 And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.

Sounds like God? not a man with a "fallen human nature"

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Joh 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
Joh 1:4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.


Joh 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

"full of GRACE AND TRUTH" Not a fallen nature!

BY the way, do you understand what happened to man at the fall? if you did you would not make such a ridicules claim!

 

[Mitspa]

2Co 11:3

But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

2Co 11:4

For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel,

 

[Cassian]

Mitspa,

I always like to start with the first lie! "assumed our fallen human nature"?
What scripture do you base that on?

Heb 2:14. I would imagine that you disagree because you also hold ot a false teaching of Original Sin. YOu believe that man has a sin nature. A teaching you will not find in all of scripture.

In order to die, Christ needed to be mortal. Thus He was born of the Virgin Mary in His humanity, just like any of us. We are all consubstantial, all men are of the same essence as a human being.

If Christ was not mortal in the flesh, then obviously he would neither be able to die like us, nor would He be able to raise our mortal natures to life by that resurrection.

Maybe this is why so many do not believe in the Incarnation. One false teachings leads to other false teachings until scripture has no meaning.

Maybe you can explain how a mortal women can give birth to a non mortal being when that is specifically what we inherit through birth. Also, Christ was also able to sin, but did not sin. This is why we have the story of the devil tempting Jesus. This is not just a futile exercise by Satan. It is why Christ becomes our model and example of faith. It is why He knows our frailities and weaknesses because He experineced them as we do. It is also why He can command us to be perfect as He was perfect. If Christ was not like us, He is a total useless person for our salvation.

You do realize that He was both God and man. YOu don't hold to other false teachings regarding the Incarnation?

 

[Mitspa]

Mitspa,

Heb 2:14. I would imagine that you disagree because you also hold ot a false teaching of Original Sin. YOu believe that man has a sin nature. A teaching you will not find in all of scripture.

In order to die, Christ needed to be mortal. Thus He was born of the Virgin Mary in His humanity, just like any of us. We are all consubstantial, all men are of the same essence as a human being.

If Christ was not mortal in the flesh, then obviously he would neither be able to die like us, nor would He be able to raise our mortal natures to life by that resurrection.

Maybe this is why so many do not believe in the Incarnation. One false teachings leads to other false teachings until scripture has no meaning.

Maybe you can explain how a mortal women can give birth to a non mortal being when that is specifically what we inherit through birth. Also, Christ was also able to sin, but did not sin. This is why we have the story of the devil tempting Jesus. This is not just a futile exercise by Satan. It is why Christ becomes our model and example of faith. It is why He knows our frailities and weaknesses because He experineced them as we do. It is also why He can command us to be perfect as He was perfect. If Christ was not like us, He is a total useless person for our salvation.

You do realize that He was both God and man. YOu don't hold to other false teachings regarding the Incarnation?

Rom 7:14

For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
Rom 7:15

For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
Rom 7:16

If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
Rom 7:17

Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
Rom 7:18

For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.

I think the Holy Spirit ,The Word and the Apostle Paul all disagree with you! lets see what John says?

1Jn 1:8

If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

Sounds like all men have a fallen "sin nature"


Rom 3:10

As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
Rom 3:11

There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
Rom 3:12

They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

I think I will stay with the Apostles and The Word of God!

 

[Free]

Free,



Your explantion is what Universalists believe and is also called Universal salvation.
However, universal salvation does not mean universal recapitulation or reconciliation.

It is just amazing that a Christian discussion board claims that the Incarnation of Christ is a heresy. I would like you to give me the evidence of where the Incarnation, universal reconcilation was declared a heresy ever by anyone?
I have never veered from the topic. Danus and you in your ignorance do not understand the meaning of the Incarnation, which is just shocking especially from so-called moderators.

If it is a heresy then you should strike the reason for it from scripture, namely the fall of man, the condemnation of Adam, namely death. Rom 5:12 would be a false statement as would be Gen 3:19. Rom 11:32,, Rom 5:18, II Cor 5:18-19, Col 1:20, John 6:39, I Cor 15:13-23, Heb 2:12-16, Rom 3:24-25, Acts 24:15, Rev 20:12-13.

Everyone of these texts is stating the universal salvation of all men from death. Heb 2:14 tells you very clearly, as does I John 3:8. John 4:42 even tells you that Christ is the Savior of the world, also I John 4:14.

Did you scratch these texts from your Bibles and ingnore the Creeds of the Ancient Church? I should note that they often called it universal recapitulation rather than universal reconciliation. I imagine then you do not believe in the resurrection of the dead, nor that there is an eternity.

Without Christ reconciling the world, there is no need for heaven or hell, so, by denying the Incarnation, all the rest of your arguments regarding salvation of our individual souls is moot, null and void.

How can you call yourself a Christian if you deny one of the two distinquishing marks of Historical Christianity, the Trinity and the Incarnation?

I am going to strongly suggest that you lose the condescending tone immediately. Not only does it make you come across as exceedingly arrogant, it does not do your position any good as people will be much less likely to listen to what you have to say.

It is amazing what you have so incorrectly deduced from a simple statement of clarification that I made, a statement that is 100% correct. I have not in any way whatsoever denied the Incarnation, claimed the Incarnation is heresy, or denied the Trinity. Do not misrepresent what other users say as that is a violation of the TOS.

 

[Cassian]

Rom 7:14

For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
Rom 7:15

For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
Rom 7:16

If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
Rom 7:17

Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
Rom 7:18

For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.

I think the Holy Spirit ,The Word and the Apostle Paul all disagree with you! lets see what John says?

1Jn 1:8

If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

Sounds like all men have a fallen "sin nature"


Rom 3:10

As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
Rom 3:11

There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
Rom 3:12

They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

I think I will stay with the Apostles and The Word of God!

Apparently you think that we should also be perfect? What do these texts show? They do not prove that Christ was not like us? It just proves we could not remain sinless. All men are born innocent without sin. We are sinners because we sin. A mortal nature is not a sin nature, but it can be a sinful nature which is our problem.

The thing is you are not staying with the Apostles. You hold to several man made theories regarding scripture. Show that Paul actually taught that man has a sin nature? That Christ did not have a nature just like ours.

 

[Cassian]

I am going to strongly suggest that you lose the condescending tone immediately. Not only does it make you come across as exceedingly arrogant, it does not do your position any good as people will be much less likely to listen to what you have to say.

It is amazing what you have so incorrectly deduced from a simple statement of clarification that I made, a statement that is 100% correct. I have not in any way whatsoever denied the Incarnation, claimed the Incarnation is heresy, or denied the Trinity. Do not misrepresent what other users say as that is a violation of the TOS.

Your statement was NOT correct. I was not explaining the heresy of Universalism.

speak for yourself. You are the one that claimed that I was teaching the Incarnation as heresy. Maybe you should read with a little better comprehension or at least ask for clarification before you make unfounded statements. YOu should follow your own rules and don't misrepresent what someone has stated.

 

[Mitspa]

Apparently you think that we should also be perfect? What do these texts show? They do not prove that Christ was not like us? It just proves we could not remain sinless. All men are born innocent without sin. We are sinners because we sin. A mortal nature is not a sin nature, but it can be a sinful nature which is our problem.

The think is you are not staying with the Apostles. You hold to several man made theories regarding scripture. Show that Paul actually taught that man has a sin nature? That Christ did not have a nature just like ours.

All honest people will be able to judge for themselves

Jud 1:3

Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.
Jud 1:4

For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

Jud 1:5

I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not.

 

[Mitspa]

Your statement was NOT correct. I was not explaining the heresy of Universalism.

speak for yourself. You are the one that claimed that I was teaching the Incarnation as heresy. Maybe you should read with a little better comprehension or at least ask for clarification before you make unfounded statements. YOu should follow your own rules and don't misrepresent what someone has stated.

Jas 4:16

But now ye rejoice in your boastings: all such rejoicing is evil.
Jas 4:17

Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.

 

[Free]

Your statement was NOT correct. I was not explaining the heresy of Universalism.

My statement: "For clarity: the concept that all humans will eventually be saved and spend eternity with God--that none will spend eternity in hell or be destroyed and cease to exist--is not to be discussed. This idea is known as Universal Reconciliation and as Universal Salvation," is 100% correct and I never stated you were explaining that. It was simply a statement for clarification, which I made clear, as to what Danus was referring to for the purposes of the TOS.

Many people will spend eternity apart from God, either in hell or annihilated, depending on one's theology.

speak for yourself. You are the one that claimed that I was teaching the Incarnation as heresy. Maybe you should read with a little better comprehension or at least ask for clarification before you make unfounded statements. YOu should follow your own rules and don't misrepresent what someone has stated.

You are once again clearly misrepresenting what I am saying. It is plain to any reader that I have never claimed that you were "teaching the Incarnation as heresy." I haven't even claimed you were teaching anything as heresy.

 

[Cassian]

My statement: "For clarity: the concept that all humans will eventually be saved and spend eternity with God--that none will spend eternity in hell or be destroyed and cease to exist--is not to be discussed. This idea is known as Universal Reconciliation and as Universal Salvation," is 100% correct and I never stated you were explaining that. It was simply a statement for clarification, which I made clear, as to what Danus was referring to for the purposes of the TOS.

Many people will spend eternity apart from God, either in hell or annihilated, depending on one's theology.


You are once again clearly misrepresenting what I am saying. It is plain to any reader that I have never claimed that you were "teaching the Incarnation as heresy." I haven't even claimed you were teaching anything as heresy.

Just for clarification this is what is NOT correct in your statement.

This idea is known as Universal Reconciliation and as Universal Salvation," is 100% correct

they are NOT the same. They have never been the same. If you have it in your rules that they are, then you are in error. The Incarnation which is universal recapitulation or reconciliation has nothing to do with the definition of Universal Salvation.

 

[Mitspa]

Just for clarification this is what is NOT correct in your statement.

they are NOT the same. They have never been the same. If you have it in your rules that they are, then you are in error. The Incarnation which is universal recapitulation or reconciliation has nothing to do with the definition of Universal Salvation.

Jas 3:10

Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not so to be.
Jas 3:11

Doth a fountain send forth at the same place sweet water and bitter?
Jas 3:12

Can the fig tree, my brethren, bear olive berries? either a vine, figs? so can no fountain both yield salt water and fresh.
Jas 3:13

Who is a wise man and endued with knowledge among you? let him shew out of a good conversation his works with meekness of wisdom.
Jas 3:14

But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth.
Jas 3:15

This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish.
Jas 3:16

For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work.

 

[Free]

Just for clarification this is what is NOT correct in your statement.

they are NOT the same. They have never been the same. If you have it in your rules that they are, then you are in error. The Incarnation which is universal recapitulation or reconciliation has nothing to do with the definition of Universal Salvation.

Every source I have checked states that Universalism=Universal Salvation=Universal Reconciliation, which is what the TOS is based on. I have never once read or heard it stated that the Incarnation is what the Bible refers to by 'reconciliation,' until now. Such an assertion needs to be supported.

 

[Danus]

Please understand that the OP believes that one must "work" to be worthy of salvation, that salvation from God is merited to the individual based on how good they are.

Been an interesting thread. I've enjoyed following it. I'll let Earnest T speak for himself but that's not the way I read his posts.

That's the conclusion behind the OP's idea of being saved, then thinking your not at some point.

No one who experiences the grace of God in Salvation by faith, looses it. Ever. We're either saved, or not. There can be doubt. Satan loves to wispier in our ear that we are not saved, and that we are not good enough, but that's not what is being expressed here on this thread.

What this thread is about, what the OP is about, is infused righteousness in place of imputed righteousness. Notice the title; "The False Security of Eternal Security." The OP does not believe that that anyone stays saved if they "mess up" in some way. The OP, believes in following some sort of legalistic pattern to be saved and stay saved.

There is no biblical defense for infused righteousness. None. Many posting here may not even know they hold the view, but theologically that's what it is.

When we began to think think that God does not Love us, or accept us because of things we have not done, or do, or the church we belong to, then that is only evidence of a lack of true faith in God. A misplaced faith.

No one who is saved, by faith, walks away from it.
No one who has experienced the Grace of God by faith from God, looses that.

This thread should be titled "The False Security of Eternal Security in infused righteousness" Then it would makes sense.

 

[Cassian]

Every source I have checked states that Universalism=Universal Salvation=Universal Reconciliation, which is what the TOS is based on. I have never once read or heard it stated that the Incarnation is what the Bible refers to by 'reconciliation,' until now. Such an assertion needs to be supported.

this thread is not the place to put forth a defense of early Christian theology.
but you can check Iranaeus, Justin Martyr, Athanasius, actually His book "On the Incarnation" spells it out very clearly.

first, you have also changed the wording that I used. Secondly, scripture uses the term reconciliation for Christ's Incarnation in the texts that I presented before, specifically II Cor 5:18-19, Col 1:20. The problem is that you are not using the same terminology and meaning of scripture that I used. In your misunderstanding you interjected the meaning of Univeralists on those texts.

It's the same old story. In every false teaching there is a grain of truth. The Universalist have added individual salvation or the salavtion of our souls as part of that reconcilation which scripture does not and neither did the early Church.

However, in short, The Church has always believed in Christ's universal atonement, universal salvation from death, as the Incarnation of Christ, its salvfic content. It is the only reason He become man and assumed our human nature. As stated earlier the term recapitulation as used in the early Church by definition cannot ever be termed universal salvation. It has a completely different meaning.

I also looked at some treatises on Universal Salvation as understood in modern times and none of them even used the term universal salvation from death. None that I read even used the word, Incarnation. They almost exclusively deal with the salvation of ones soul and the idea that hell is temporary which is what actually makes them Universalists.