The False Security of Eternal Security

[Mitspa]

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.

2Co 1:12

For our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God, we have had our conversation in the world, and more abundantly to you-ward.

2Co 1:13

For we write none other things unto you, than what ye read or acknowledge; and I trust ye shall acknowledge even to the end;

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

 

[Free]

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.

I will have to look into those.

first, you have also changed the wording that I used.

What wording?

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.

How did I interject meaning onto texts you have given if I haven't even yet addressed those texts?

But now I will deal with them. No, they do not in any way use 'reconciliation' to refer to the Incarnation. Looking at the contexts:

2Co 5:14 For the love of Christ controls us, because we have concluded this: that one has died for all, therefore all have died;
2Co 5:15 and he died for all, that those who live might no longer live for themselves but for him who for their sake died and was raised.
2Co 5:16 From now on, therefore, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we once regarded Christ according to the flesh, we regard him thus no longer.
2Co 5:17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come.
2Co 5:18 All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation;
2Co 5:19 that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation.
2Co 5:20 Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.
2Co 5:21 For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. (ESV)

Nothing at all about his incarnation, yet his death is mentioned in the context of living for him, which sounds quite similar to being reconciled.

Col 1:19 For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell,
Col 1:20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross.
Col 1:21 And you, who once were alienated and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds,
Col 1:22 he has now reconciled in his body of flesh by his death, in order to present you holy and blameless and above reproach before him, (ESV)

I'm not sure how you can think this supports your idea that reconciliation is based on the Incarnation as it clearly states it is "by his death" that we are reconciled.

Let's look at some clearer passages:

Rom 5:10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life.
Rom 5:11 More than that, we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation. (ESV)

Again, it is by the death of Christ that we are reconciled.

Eph 2:13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.
Eph 2:14 For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility
Eph 2:15 by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace,
Eph 2:16 and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility.

Again, it is through the cross that there is reconciliation.

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 cannot see how that can be the case as the Bible makes clear that reconciliation is through Christ's death, not his incarnation. Not one text makes that connection.

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.

And they shouldn't use the word 'incarnation' since the Bible doesn't either, as I have shown. As for the term "universal salvation from death," it doesn't make sense to me, so what do you mean by that?

 

[Eventide]

The wages of SIN is DEATH

IMO it's not that difficult to see that the death burial and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ has justified life in all men, while at the same time not having that justification of life 'realized' in all men.

His grace is unto all and upon all that believe..

This is foundational imo.. and doesn't mandate that all men are saved simply because they have justification of life in Christ.

In the beginning God provided a covering for ADAM and his wife, the mother of all living.. and that speaks volumes imo.. He has clearly not died for our sins only, but for the sin of the world.. for He IS the Lamb of God who taketh away the sin of the world.

That doesn't mean that all men receive Him and are adopted as sons.. but it also doesn't mean that He has not redeemed every last one of us in the first Adam.

The wages of SIN is DEATH.. and DEATH has passed upon all men..

But guess what..?

ALL MEN shall be RAISED from the DEAD, the just and the unjust.. the righteous and the eternally damned.. that's what the scriptures do say... do they not ?

So if the wages of sin is death, and all men shall be raised from the dead.. then do the math..

 

[Cassian]

Free,

What wording?

the wording I have consistantly used is salvation from death, or universal salvation from death, or universal reconciliation from death, or recapitulation.

YOu have shortened it to what is actually universalism, namely universal salvation. or universal reconciliation. Completely different meanings or content of those terms.

How did I interject meaning onto texts you have given if I haven't even yet addressed those texts?

I was not even speaking about the texts but the wording I used and your wording which is not the same, thus interjecting the false understanding of what I had stated.

I'm not sure how you can think this supports your idea that reconciliation is based on the Incarnation as it clearly states it is "by his death" that we are reconciled.

that is precisely the Incarnation. Christ became man so that He could redeem man. This has nothing to do with individual salvation. It has all to do with Christ overcoming the fall, death. Christ reconstituting mankind, the world, giving life back to a dead and dying world. It is the ONLY reason we will have a resurrection of the dead because Christ raised our mortal natures to life.

Again, it is by the death of Christ that we are reconciled.

precisely again. Christ in His human nature, the Incarnation, saved mankind the world by death by overcoming death. You have apparently missed the whole purpose of Christ coming into this world. Adam lost life, eternal existance. There is no way a dead, mortal being can restore himself to life, to an eternal existance again. It is the ONLY reason Christ needed to become man, to assume our natures in order to heal, give life to those natures.

Again, it is through the cross that there is reconciliation.

Precisely correct again. It is because of the Incarnation. Christ reconciled the world to God through his death and resurrection. How clear can it be. You see it but do not understand it.

Notice the stark contrast when we enter the believer into the picture which is the reason that Christ saved the world, to have believers or to have communion with man whom He created to share an eternity with Him. As believers we reconcile ourselves to God by faith and are being saved by faith. Faith does not save you from death, the fall of man, the loss of eternal existance.

I cannot see how that can be the case as the Bible makes clear that reconciliation is through Christ's death, not his incarnation. Not one text makes that connection.

Unless you believe Chrsit was not really man, did not actually bare our natures, was not born of a Virgin human being, you cannot separate the Incarnation from His death. It is our human nature, His Humanity that died, not God. It is our human nature, that was raised from death, not God. What did you think was the purpose of the Incarnation?

And they shouldn't use the word 'incarnation' since the Bible doesn't either, as I have shown. As for the term "universal salvation from death," it doesn't make sense to me, so what do you mean by that?

So, yoiu don't accept the word, Incarnation. For the same reason many do not accept the Trinity?

By salvation from death, read Rom 5:12 which is the fall. Man lost life, was condemned to death. Loss of eternal existance, dust to dust, Gen 3:19, then read Rom 5:18 where it states that Christ because of that condemnation of death, the FREE Gift came to all men which was life, I Cor 15:22 states it even better in an equation. Then scripture confirms the Incarnation, Heb 2:14 as the reason to overcome death same verse. Same statement in I John 3:8.

As further evidence of Christ overcoming death, we have Act 24:15 where all the dead shall be raised, as also the premise to I Cor 15:22 is I Cor 15:13-19, If the dead are not raised, then Christ is not risen and our faith is in vain. Rev 20:12-13 speaks of all the dead being raised. Clearly, Christ overcame death, defeated Satan and restored eternal existance (life) to mankind and the world. It is the same sequence in John 6:39 for mankind/world, vs 40 being those of the mass of humanity saved from death, those that see and believe will be raised to live with Him for an eternity.

In order to have anyone be able to see and believe and have eternal consequences, death needed to be ended and life restored to creation. Without Christ overcoming death, there is no need for a heaven or hell. Who would occupy either place?

It seems you have missed the actual salvation of Christ and transposed it somehow to mean only for some believers leaving all the rest of humanity dying and returning to dust. It effectively eliminates the need for hell, since they never recieved life, and eternal existance in order to live in hell for an eternity.

And to keep this in the context of the topic, the only eternal security one has is that Christ was raised, thus all men will have an eternal existance. However where man will spend that eternity depends on man, his faith, his endurance. It is the same "salvation" that Adam was participating in with God before the fall, and death, decay and corruption entered into this world. The fact that Adam fell, fell from his personal relationship with God, refutes the whole argument of eternal security of a beleiver. If it was actually true, Adam would never have fallen.

 

[Cassian]

Re: The wages of SIN is DEATH

IMO it's not that difficult to see that the death burial and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ has justified life in all men, while at the same time not having that justification of life 'realized' in all men.

An impossiblity. Just how can life not be imparted to some human beings, when Christ assumed our human nature and raised it to life, to an eternal existance. We are all the same essence, or consubstantial with each other. Change one nature and all natures are changed. Death was imparted to our natures and so is life imparted to our natures. The former by Adam, the latter by Christ.

The only way your statement would have validity is that man has different natures and Christ assumed a certain nature thus saved those same with the same nature. Of course this means that not all men die either, since not all are from Adam. It is a direct contradiction to Rom 5:18 and I Cor 15:22.

His grace is unto all and upon all that believe..

No His grace was upon all of mankind. While all mankind were still sinners, Christ died for us. He died for the ungodly. Are there any who are not sinners, or not ungodly that He would not need to die for?

This is foundational imo.. and doesn't mandate that all men are saved simply because they have justification of life in Christ.

YOu are confluting to distinct aspects of our salvation. If you don't have life, an eternal existance, there is no reason for anyone to believe since there is no eternal consequence for that belief. YOu might have a relationship with Christ in this life, but upon death you return to dust and remain permanently dust.

In the beginning God provided a covering for ADAM and his wife, the mother of all living.. and that speaks volumes imo.. He has clearly not died for our sins only, but for the sin of the world.. for He IS the Lamb of God who taketh away the sin of the world.

Yes, universal atonement. How can a sacrifice of death be partial. If His blood covered one sin, it covered all sins. How can you separate sin and blood? One drop for one sin?

That doesn't mean that all men receive Him and are adopted as sons.. but it also doesn't mean that He has not redeemed every last one of us in the first Adam.

state it in the reverse and you actually have it correct.

The wages of SIN is DEATH.. and DEATH has passed upon all men..

Wrong death. The death referred to here is spiritual death, loss of a relationship. OUr sin cannot condemn us to physical death again. Man cannot die physcially more than once. Death was the punishment, the judgement of Adam's sin. He died both deaths, spiritual and physical. I might add that you should take note of the sequence here, because in I Cor 15:45 we have the sequence of salvation which is the reverse order. We need physical life before we can have spiritual life (relationship). This goes right back to your statement above where I said, it should be reversed.

But guess what..?

ALL MEN shall be RAISED from the DEAD, the just and the unjust.. the righteous and the eternally damned.. that's what the scriptures do say... do they not ?

yes, they do, but that contradicts you first statement above. YOu said it would not be realized in all men, now you say it does.

So if the wages of sin is death, and all men shall be raised from the dead.. then do the math..

except that you are using the wrong definition of death here. Spiritual death is not what was defeated. In fact it was established because whether you abide with Christ or apart from Him in hell is dependent on those sins. Those that do not believe, are condemned because part of believing is repentance, the forgiving of our sins. So sins can still result in death, the second death as scripture calls it, the spiritual separation of man from God, either in this life, or for an eternity.

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

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.

I've never said such or believe such. Obedient works are the condition God has placed upon His free gift of salvation. If one quits obeying he gives up the free gift. Obedience to God cannot, does not ever merit salvation. Did Abraham's obedience in offering Isaac earn him salvation?


From my op:


There are two sides to salvation:

1) man's faithfulness to God

2) God's faithfulness to man.

These two sides can easily been seen in verses as Jn 10:27,28


Man's faithfulness to God is a continued hearing and following

God's faithfulness to man is not allow those that continue to hear and follow be snatched from His hand


Jn 6:37

Man's faithfulness to God is a continued coming to Christ.

Christ's faithfulness to man is those that continue to come to Christ will not be cast out.


Jn 3:16

Man's faithfulness to God is a continuing belief

God's faithfulness to man is not allow those with a continuing belief to perish


Jn 5:24

Man's faithfulness to God is a continued hearing and believing

God's faithfulness to man is to not allow those that continue to hear and follow to come into condemnation.


So salvation is conditional upon man's faithfulness to God.

 

[Danus]

I've never said such or believe such. Obedient works are the condition God has placed upon His free gift of salvation. If one quits obeying he gives up the free gift. Obedience to God cannot, does not ever merit salvation. Did Abraham's obedience in offering Isaac earn him salvation?

You just said it again!

Obedient works are not the condition. They are the Result!

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

You just said it again!

Obedient works are not the condition. They are the Result!

If one is not obedient he is disobedient, one is one or the other and God does not save the disobedient but has vengeance upon those that obey not, 2 Thess 1:8; Rom 2:8,9 One has to FIRST obey to be obedient and be saved. Too many verses put obedience BEFORE salvation not after.

Disobedience/doing nothing is not the condition to receive the free gift. obedience is the condition.

 

[Free]

And to keep this in the context of the topic, the only eternal security one has is that Christ was raised, thus all men will have an eternal existance. However where man will spend that eternity depends on man, his faith, his endurance. It is the same "salvation" that Adam was participating in with God before the fall, and death, decay and corruption entered into this world. The fact that Adam fell, fell from his personal relationship with God, refutes the whole argument of eternal security of a beleiver. If it was actually true, Adam would never have fallen.

You are misreading a few of my points, so to keep this on topic, and to clarify your position, which was my point the whole time, do you believe that many will spend eternity apart from God?

 

[Cassian]

You are misreading a few of my points, so to keep this on topic, and to clarify your position, which was my point the whole time, do you believe that many will spend eternity apart from God?

Absolutely, in fact most. But apparently the point of Christ's work slips right by you. If Christ did not reconcile the world from death, hell does not even exist. There is no need for hell or heaven.

 

[Butch5]

On the way to work this morning I was scanning through the radio dial and came across a program where someone (Adrian Rogers I think) was teaching on eternal security. His "proof text" was Jn 10:28 "And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any [man] pluck them out of my hand." From what I heard he never mentioned verse 27 that goes with verse 28, verse 27 says "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:"


To qualify as one of Christ's sheep and be in the hand of God requires that one hear and follow Christ. Both verbs "hear" and "follow" are in the Greek present tense showing an on-going, sustained acton and not just a one time or occasional action. One of his own will chooses to hear and follow and as long as he hears and follows Christ he cannot be snatched from God's hand. But if one of his own will chooses to quit hearing and following, he disqualifies himself from being a sheep of Christ and removes himself from God's hand.


There are two sides to salvation:

1) man's faithfulness to God

2) God's faithfulness to man.

Verse 27 shows (1) man's faithfulness to God by man having an ongoing, sustained hearing and following. Verse 28 shows (2) God's faithfulness to man in not allowing man to be snatched away as long as man remains faithful to God. The radio speaker only wanted to talk about (2) God's faithfulness to man as if God will be unconditionally faithful to man whether or not man remains faithful to God in his hearing and following.


(The radio speaker falsely claimed Judas was never saved and then purposely misquoted Jn 6:64 by saying "Jesus knew from the beginning that Judas would not believe.")

Hey, you're not supposed to read that in context.

 

[Danus]

I've never said such or believe such. Obedient works are the condition God has placed upon His free gift of salvation. If one quits obeying he gives up the free gift. Obedience to God cannot, does not ever merit salvation. Did Abraham's obedience in offering Isaac earn him salvation?

You just said it again!

Obedient works are not the condition. They are the Result!

If one is not obedient he is disobedient, one is one or the other and God does not save the disobedient but has vengeance upon those that obey not, 2 Thess 1:8; Rom 2:8,9 One has to FIRST obey to be obedient and be saved. Too many verses put obedience BEFORE salvation not after.

Disobedience/doing nothing is not the condition to receive the free gift. obedience is the condition.

...Maybe this will help. Conditional means, Subject to one or more conditions or requirements being met; made or granted on certain terms.

The word Free, in the context of "FREE GIFT" means without cost, IE without condition, or in exchange for NOTHING!

You can't say that one must meet a condition by obeying in order to gain a free gift. That's an oxymoron.

So far you have said that salvation is obtained by the believer in exchange for their doing something, IE obeying. That's you position Bass. You can't have it both ways.

If Salvation is a free gift then it is unconditional, meaning there is nothing anyone can do in exchange for it. Your position is that someone must Do something to then be saved. The bible says there is nothing anyone can do to be saved, and that it is God who does the saving by his choice, by his own good pleasure to do so. That's not what you have expressed that you believe.

You said there is no security in salvation, you said that's all false, yet God says you are saved. You don't believe that. Other people on this thread also do not believe that. So for you and them, salvation is not a free gift.

 

[Butch5]

...Maybe this will help. Conditional means, Subject to one or more conditions or requirements being met; made or granted on certain terms.

The word Free, in the context of "FREE GIFT" means without cost, IE without condition, or in exchange for NOTHING!

You can't say that one must meet a condition by obeying in order to gain a free gift. That's an oxymoron.

So far you have said that salvation is obtained by the believer in exchange for their doing something, IE obeying. That's you position Bass. You can't have it both ways.

If Salvation is a free gift then it is unconditional, meaning there is nothing anyone can do in exchange for it. Your position is that someone must Do something to then be saved. The bible says there is nothing anyone can do to be saved, and that it is God who does the saving by his choice, by his own good pleasure to do so. That's not what you have expressed that you believe.

You said there is no security in salvation, you said that's all false, yet God says you are saved. You don't believe that. Other people on this thread also do not believe that. So for you and them, salvation is not a free gift.

The Apostle John also doens't agree with what you've said here.

14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. (Rev 22:14 KJV)

Obedience gives one access to the tree of life.


Also, conditions don't negate a gift being free. Take for instance the door prize. When one enters they do somethign whether it is to take a ticket, fill out a form or something. They must do something to receive a number. Their doing this doesn't mean the gift is not free.

 

[Mitspa]

Absolutely, in fact most. But apparently the point of Christ's work slips right by you. If Christ did not reconcile the world from death, hell does not even exist. There is no need for hell or heaven.

Remember this is the one who does not believe that man has a fallen "sin nature" Or that Christ Jesus was "The Word" and Word was God! But today who knows ?

 

[farouk]

Remember: the obedience of faith (Hebrews 11.8) is acceptable before God, not what is motivated by a desire to gain merit with Him. The believer is saved 'by faith' (Ephesians 2.8).

 

[Danus]

The Apostle John also doens't agree with what you've said here.

14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, thatthey may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. (Rev 22:14 KJV)

Obedience gives one access to the tree of life.


Also, conditions don't negate a gift being free. Take for instance the door prize. When one enters they do somethign whether it is to take a ticket, fill out a form or something. They must do something to receive a number. Their doing this doesn't mean the gift is not free.

I'm not claiming door prizes are free. Your still missing the point, but it really doesn't matter.

The point is, the saved are chosen saved, and the saved obey, they are blessed. It is not a condition for salvation, it is a result OF salvation, to which the saved are consciously aware of.

The OP, and others, do not believe this. The OP already says there is NO security in salvation, it's false. If you want to call that faith, go right ahead.

 

[rrowell]

You didn't claim door prizes are free, Butch did, do you even read what you reply to?

Show me the scripture (Not Charles Spurgeon, or John Calvin) where You are picked a "chosen saved" and I was not? how did YOU receive this Gift you think YOU got and other not so lucky people didn't?, we've already heard your opinion, show with Scripture Danus....

You seem to think you know what the OP thinks more than the OP himself? maybe this his how you came to call your self elect?

Like the posts you do not read before you reply, like so the Bible you do not read before you call your self "elect"

The OP did NOT say there is NO security in salvation, he said you have "security" by "faithful obedience"

 

[Butch5]

I'm not claiming door prizes are free. Your still missing the point, but it really doesn't matter.

The point is, the saved are chosen saved, and the saved obey, they are blessed. It is not a condition for salvation, it is a result OF salvation, to which the saved are consciously aware of.

Was the apostle wrong?

The OP, and others, do not believe this. The OP already says there is NO security in salvation, it's false. If you want to call that faith, go right ahead.

There is security for the now believes and obeys as long as they continue in that.

 

[Mitspa]

Was the apostle wrong?



There is security for the now believes and obeys as long as they continue in that.

Hey Butch, are you not the one who believes that all believers in Christ Jesus goes to hades? That might effect your opinion on this thread, dont you think?

 

[Free]

Hey Butch, are you not the one who believes that all believers in Christ Jesus goes to hades? That might effect your opinion on this thread, dont you think?

I have no problem with the belief that believers go to hades, as hades isn't gehenna.