Why is there so much resistance to the eternal security of the believer?

[childeye]

OK, if I'm understanding you correctly your argument is the same as that of Jews going back to the Law. In other words, those who do good deeds are seeking there own righteousness. I would submit, however, that we are called to do good deeds. Jesus told His disciples that unless their righteousness exceeded that of the Pharisees they would not see the kingdom of God.

I think you are on the right track when trying to understand my posts. And I am pleased that someone writing on this thread is at least trying to understand my question. Your statement above saying that we are called to do good deeds is however somewhat problematic. For I believe we are called to believe that Jesus is the True Image/Character of God sent by God. However I do agree that good deeds are a product of His quickening Spirit.

The rest of your post is mostly about doing good deeds vs.doing bad deeds. Obviously I have nothing against doing good deeds, but I do see in scripture different motives for doing them. One is like the Pharisees view of righteousness, trying to establish one's own righteousness through choosing as a personal choice to do righteousness. The other righteousness is not a matter of personal choice, but rather an acknowledgment of a the Spirit of Love that becomes quickened in us through the promises of God. For if by grace through faith I hope for righteousness from God through the promise, then I cannot at the same time logically consider that righteousness is a matter of personally choosing to do righteousness. Matthew 5:6.

 

[Deborah13]

And I am pleased that someone writing on this thread is at least trying to understand my question

There are others.

For if by grace through faith I hope for righteousness from God through the promise, then I cannot at the same time logically consider that righteousness is a matter of personally choosing to do righteousness. Matthew 5:6.

The problem that I see with the Pharisees was not that they were trying to be righteous before God by their deeds. They were doing it to gain before men. Jesus said, that they tithed even from their herbs and enlarged their phylacteries to be seen by men, but when it came to the more important things such as mercy they didn't do it. We see the lack of mercy in the story of the good Samaritan.

There were/are others who are trying to earn their salvation by obeying God's commands. What I believe, they fail to see is that even under the old covenant, men were saved by grace through faith, not by their deeds. They are confused.

Can the righteousness unto salvation be described as a personal choice? I believe it can.
If one is born of God, they are a new creature in Christ, they have been changed. The desires of their personal heart have been changed by God Himself. They personally want to do what is right by God's commandments, not to earn their salvation but because God has changed them. Sometimes it is a struggle against temptations, one has to make a choice to not give in to the flesh.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Obviously I have nothing against doing good deeds, but I do see in scripture different motives for doing them. One is like the Pharisees view of righteousness, trying to establish one's own righteousness through choosing as a personal choice to do righteousness. The other righteousness is not a matter of personal choice, but rather an acknowledgment of a the Spirit of Love that becomes quickened in us through the promises of God. For if by grace through faith I hope for righteousness from God through the promise, then I cannot at the same time logically consider that righteousness is a matter of personally choosing to do righteousness. Matthew 5:6.

Every time I hear a defense of this 'good must happen by itself' argument I wonder what happened to this matter of the temptation of the believer. When we are tempted we have to make a purposeful choice to go with good and walk in the Spirit and reject the bad. But this doctrine seems to think all good behavior just flows out of this flowery, joyful, unopposed relationship with God in the Spirit. I wish. Often times the righteous obedience of faith means consciously and willfully saying 'no' to the flesh and saying 'yes' to the ways of God and the Spirit when our flesh is screaming everything but that.

"11 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men, 12 instructing us to deny ungodliness and worldly desires and to live sensibly, righteously and godly in the present age" (Titus 2:11 NASB)


Why is it impossible in OSAS doctrine to do something good, on purpose, because you love God? Why is purposeful obedience always understood as 'trying to earn your own salvation' in OSAS? Peter talks about us purposely seeking out the obedience that comes from consciously knowing and remembering that our sins are forgiven:

"9 For he who lacks these qualities is blind or short-sighted, having forgotten * his purification from his former sins. 10 Therefore, brethren, be all the more diligent to make certain about His calling and choosing you; for as long as you practice these things, you will never * * stumble" (2 Peter 1:9-10 NASB bold mine)

'Be all the more diligent'.....that means YOU do something, not wait around for a bolt of lightning to strike you and make you feel like doing it. That's called the obedience that comes from faith. That is not called 'trying to save yourself by your own good works'.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Can the righteousness unto salvation be described as a personal choice? I believe it can.
If one is born of God, they are a new creature in Christ, they have been changed. The desires of their personal heart have been changed by God Himself. They personally want to do what is right by God's commandments, not to earn their salvation but because God has changed them. Sometimes it is a struggle against temptations, one has to make a choice to not give in to the flesh.

Yikes! This is scary.
We're actually thinking the same things.

"...be like-minded, live in peace..." (2 Corinthians 13:11 NASB)

..

 

[Deborah13]

Yikes! This is scary.
We're actually thinking the same things.

"...be like-minded, live in peace..." (2 Corinthians 13:11 NASB)

..

I know.....2

 

[Jethro Bodine]

There are others.

The problem that I see with the Pharisees was not that they were trying to be righteous before God by their deeds. They were doing it to gain before men. Jesus said, that they tithed even from their herbs and enlarged their phylacteries to be seen by men, but when it came to the more important things such as mercy they didn't do it. We see the lack of mercy in the story of the good Samaritan.

There were/are others who are trying to earn their salvation by obeying God's commands. What I believe, they fail to see is that even under the old covenant, men were saved by grace through faith, not by their deeds. They are confused.

Can the righteousness unto salvation be described as a personal choice? I believe it can.
If one is born of God, they are a new creature in Christ, they have been changed. The desires of their personal heart have been changed by God Himself. They personally want to do what is right by God's commandments, not to earn their salvation but because God has changed them. Sometimes it is a struggle against temptations, one has to make a choice to not give in to the flesh.

Deborah13 , I see this doctrine of 'I won't do anything until I feel like it, or else it would be works, even if it means I do nothing, because I'll still be saved' as being very prevalent in the Protestant church today. It's nothing more than the 'dead faith saves, too' indoctrination presently gripping the Protestant church. The opposite of what James, Peter, John, and Paul all speak about (James 2:14 NASB, 2 Peter 1:9 NASB, 1 John 3:17 NASB, Galatians 5:6 NASB).

 

[Malachi]

In my struggle with sin it pangs me to see flippant, disobedient Christians who have excused themselves from their struggle with sin because they embrace a doctrine that says it doesn't matter if they sin or not, they're irretrievably saved anyways.

This could very well be the root cause of opposition to the Bible doctrine per se. There is little or no preaching on sin within the churches, and many spiritual leaders themselves are sinning blatantly. There is absolutely no reason for Christians (perhaps pseudo-Christians) for using eternal security as a license to sin. There is not a single Scripture that woud support such nonsense.

But coming back to the doctrine itself, we are assured of eternal life because God Himself dwells within the genuine believer. That is what we find repeated again and again in 1 John. For example (1 Jn 4:12-18):
12No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.
13Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit.
14And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world.
15Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.
16And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him.
17Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as he is, so are we in this world.
18There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

But coming back to the doctrine itself, we are assured of eternal life because God Himself dwells within the genuine believer. That is what we find repeated again and again in 1 John. For example (1 Jn 4:12-18):
12No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.
13Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit.
14And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world.
15Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.
16And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him.
17Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as he is, so are we in this world.
18There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love.

Right, and when God doesn't dwell with you because of unbelief in Christ you DON'T have the assurance of salvation. You CAN'T have it because 1) faith is how God dwells in your heart and 2) how you have the assurance of eternal life:

"that He would grant you, according to the riches of His glory, to be strengthened with power through His Spirit in the inner man, 17 so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith" (Ephesians 3:17 NASB)

" faith is the assurance of things hoped for" (Hebrews 11:1 NASB bold mine)

But many OSASer's think even in unbelief in Christ you still have Christ and the assurance of 'things hoped for'. As we see, that's not what the Bible says.

 

[Stan1953]

But that's not the purpose or question of the OP.

Well it was supposed to be, and WIP addressed that immediately. It's a main ToS here at CF.

 

[childeye]

There are others.

Thanks. You are a kind person.

The problem that I see with the Pharisees was not that they were trying to be righteous before God by their deeds. They were doing it to gain before men

. I can agree with you. At any rate my point is that such a righteousness that is on display for the approval of men does not proceed from the Love that is attributable to God's Spirit. There is no vanity in true righteousness.

Jesus said, that they tithed even from their herbs and enlarged their phylacteries to be seen by men, but when it came to the more important things such as mercy they didn't do it. We see the lack of mercy in the story of the good Samaritan.

Again I agree.

There were/are others who are trying to earn their salvation by obeying God's commands. What I believe, they fail to see is that even under the old covenant, men were saved by grace through faith, not by their deeds. They are confused.

And this is driving at my point very well, which is that there are semantics which invite confusion and cause misunderstanding.

Can the righteousness unto salvation be described as a personal choice? I believe it can.
If one is born of God, they are a new creature in Christ, they have been changed. The desires of their personal heart have been changed by God Himself. They personally want to do what is right by God's commandments, not to earn their salvation but because God has changed them. Sometimes it is a struggle against temptations, one has to make a choice to not give in to the flesh.

I can describe the righteousness unto salvation as a personal choice also, and I would qualify that by saying, there was something in the 'person' that 'chose to' believe in the Christ. However, because of semantics, perhaps that 'something' that I am saying is in the person, might be perceived as perhaps the brain, the mental faculty to make decisions, the ability to reason. When in fact I am saying they have faith/trust. Everyone has a brain, but not everyone can believe.

Having said that, I hope you can understand this, or rather I hope I say this well enough. If I showed you a picture of a man standing next to a picture of a man, it would be difficult to know which man or picture I was referring to, if I said "this is a good picture of a man".

Likewise when I say "personal choice" to do righteousness, I am trying to qualify what I mean, by also saying the contrary, as in opposed to acknowledging God as the source of righteousness in mankind'. I do this so that this 'personal moral choice' is seen as a choice made independently apart from any divine force such as Love. And why do I do this? To show that this is the dictionary version of freewill. And why do I care about that? Because I believe it is the same thing as the knowledge of good and evil, a worldly wisdom that honors the availability of an option to do evil so that righteousness is seen as voluntary, rather than that which comes through the nature of God. Romans 1:21.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Thanks. You are a kind person.
. I can agree with you. At any rate my point is that such a righteousness that is on display for the approval of men does not proceed from the Love that is attributable to God's Spirit. There is no vanity in true righteousness.
Again I agree.

And this is driving at my point very well, which is that there are semantics which invite confusion and cause misunderstanding.

I can describe the righteousness unto salvation as a personal choice also, and I would qualify that by saying, there was something in the 'person' that 'chose to' believe in the Christ. However, because of semantics, perhaps that 'something' that I am saying is in the person, might be perceived as perhaps the brain, the mental faculty to make decisions, the ability to reason. When in fact I am saying they have faith/trust. Everyone has a brain, but not everyone can believe.

Having said that, I hope you can understand this, or rather I hope I say this well enough. If I showed you a picture of a man standing next to a picture of a man, it would be difficult to know which man or picture I was referring to, if I said "this is a good picture of a man".

Likewise when I say "personal choice" to do righteousness, I am trying to qualify what I mean, by also saying the contrary, as in opposed to acknowledging God as the source of righteousness in mankind'. I do this so that this 'personal moral choice' is seen as a choice made independently apart from any divine force such as Love. And why do I do this? To show that this is the dictionary version of freewill. And why do I care about that? Because I believe it is the same thing as the knowledge of good and evil, a worldly wisdom that honors the availability of an option to do evil so that righteousness is seen as voluntary, rather than that which comes through the nature of God. Romans 1:21.

2

 

[childeye]

Every time I hear a defense of this 'good must happen by itself' argument I wonder what happened to this matter of the temptation of the believer. When we are tempted we have to make a purposeful choice to go with good and walk in the Spirit and reject the bad.

I don't know what a good must happen by itself argument is. God is Love and He is Eternal. As long as you recognize that the choice/option to do evil is made possible by the tempter, and is not a product of a freewill, that's what is important to me. Why? So that a person doesn't associate freedom with sin and Satan. Temptation is dependent upon deception. If you think you're free because you can sin, then your mind is yet corrupt. That is why the Truth sets one free. Deception begins with saying you don't need God to be good.

But this doctrine seems to think all good behavior just flows out of this flowery, joyful, unopposed relationship with God in the Spirit.

Indeed it does. I don't just think it, I know it and can prove it. All good behavior flows out of the Eternal Spirit of Love/empathy, which is why when you walk in the Spirit of Love, you will not sin. Read this: Love God with all heart mind and soul, Love others as you would want to be loved. What is the power here, our ability to choose contrary to Love? No. Love accomplishes all things.

What you would perceive as opposition to the flow, is just God's way of sanctifying us. And to understand that, we must understand what is unsanctified to begin with. His strength is made perfect in weakness. He won't let it flow till He sees in our heart that we understand and are convinced it is Him and not us. Faith is a two way street. Even when we confess ourselves as sinners it is conceding that we are unable to be righteous, and even that confession comes through God . And as we forgive others even because we know they can't help it, then the flow of His love has begun in us and sanctification/justification is in progress.

Often times the righteous obedience of faith means consciously and willfully saying 'no' to the flesh and saying 'yes' to the ways of God and the Spirit when our flesh is screaming everything but that.

Suppose I said to you, we were sold to sin because we didn't esteem God as God and because of this we became abominations?Romans 1:
24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves:
25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

"11 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men, 12 instructing us to deny ungodliness and worldly desires and to live sensibly, righteously and godly in the present age" (Titus 2:11 NASB)

Yes, but what does grace mean? Does it mean He was good enough to instruct us to do good things and not bad things? Living sensibly requires some common sense, such as Love is the goodness in mankind, not I choose to be good with my ability to obey. You know Satan is who first said we could disobey God, as if there were something wrong with having to obey God. That's not freewill, that's the spirit of rebellion and is nonsense.

Why is it impossible in OSAS doctrine to do something good, on purpose, because you love God? Why is purposeful obedience always understood as 'trying to earn your own salvation' in OSAS? Peter talks about us purposely seeking out the obedience that comes from consciously knowing and remembering that our sins are forgiven:

This is why I am talking about semantics. I am not an OSAS advocate nor am I against OSAS. I see it as arguing semantics. Of course we Love God when we follow God. It is purposeful.

"9 For he who lacks these qualities is blind or short-sighted, having forgotten * his purification from his former sins. 10 Therefore, brethren, be all the more diligent to make certain about His calling and choosing you; for as long as you practice these things, you will never * * stumble" (2 Peter 1:9-10 NASB bold mine)

'Be all the more diligent'.....that means YOU do something, not wait around for a bolt of lightning to strike you and make you feel like doing it. That's called the obedience that comes from faith. That is not called 'trying to save yourself by your own good works'.

Semantics. If I am to be more diligent about making certain God has chosen me, it must mean I must examine if I am producing the fruits that exemplify this. I'm sure this is your point. Your point can't be that God is a placebo.

 

[childeye]

2

Is this 2 you or me?

 

[Kenny_ms]

I was going to quote a few people but at the risk of getting in trouble for debating, I'll just quote another verse in hopes people will one day stop teaching what I feel is false and very dangerous doctrine. At least I assume we can take a side on this, if only to do little more than plant another seed or two.

Philippians 2:12

Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.

What would be the point of the trembling and fear as we work our our salvation if out salvation was guaranteed?

Or for that matter, why would we have to work anything out beyond a certain point, if once that certain point was reached, salvation was guaranteed?

 

[childeye]

I was going to quote a few people but at the risk of getting in trouble for debating, I'll just quote another verse in hopes people will one day stop teaching what I feel is false and very dangerous doctrine. At least I assume we can take a side on this, if only to do little more than plant another seed or two.

Philippians 2:12

Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.

What would be the point of the trembling and fear as we work our our salvation if out salvation was guaranteed?

Or for that matter, why would we have to work anything out beyond a certain point, if once that certain point was reached, salvation was guaranteed?

Perhaps Paul is essentially saying we each need to have our own personal walk with Christ. The fear and trembling is probably in opposition to careless arrogance. I don't think OSAS believers are saying to be careless and arrogant.

 

[Kenny_ms]

I don't think OSAS believers are saying to be careless and arrogant.

Not most, I'd dare say but if they were careless and arrogant, it wouldn't affect their salvation, right?

Perhaps Paul is essentially saying we each need to have our own personal walk with Christ.The fear and trembling is probably in opposition to careless arrogance.

Why would you choose to reduce that sentence to mean just "caress arrogance"? Is there scripture to back up your understanding of that? It seems to me and no harm intended but it seems you pulled that out of thin air because there is nothing in the verse to suggest that, but I've been wrong before, maybe I missed something or you do have scripture..

To me it strongly implies or flat out says be be very afraid of what you do, be very mindful of how you act and fear the wrath of God as you decide what you can an cannot do, in turn meaning we must act in a certain way and if we don't, we lose salvation.

Scripture to back up what I claim? the scripture itself says that, how hard is it to understand it's obvious meaning?

 

[childeye]

Not most, I'd dare say but if they were careless and arrogant, it wouldn't affect their salvation, right?

That's kinda funny. I think an OSAS advocate would say God would fix it with a lesson that would bring about repentance.

Why would you choose to reduce that sentence to mean just "caress arrogance"? Is there scripture to back up your understanding of that? It seems to me and no harm intended but it seems you pulled that out of thin air because there is nothing in the verse to suggest that, but I've been wrong before, maybe I missed something or you do have scripture..

I guess you could say I pulled it out of thin air. It is a sincere assessment.

To me it strongly implies or flat out says be be very afraid of what you do, be very mindful of how you act and fear the wrath of God as you decide what you can an cannot do, in turn meaning we must act in a certain way and if we don't, we lose salvation.

Scripture to back up what I claim? the scripture itself says that, how hard is it to understand it's obvious meaning?

Yeah, but scripture says that perfect Love casts out all fear too. You can't build love for God out of fear of punishment. Yet His rod comforts me. The very reason I believe in Christ is because of his compassion. I do have a phobia. It's called idiots with power. Jesus calms my fears. It's all semantics.
1 John 4:18
There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love.

 

[Butch5]

What if I told you as a young man God spoke to my heart the truth as He showed me a whole bunch of Scriptures that prove OSAS? I left the bookshop having touched life, feeling His peace and love. Then, many years later, I read a famous book that showed how a Christian can lose his salvation. Scriptures were also quoted and interpreted for me. But this time, darkness and fear entered my soul. I was confused, shaken. God felt like a thousand miles away. Thank goodness, the peace was restored through the words of a wise pastor. Would that be good enough for you? I didn't think so.

As far as debates are concerned, Scripture alone is not enough because everyone claims his interpretation is the correct one. You need "feelings" too. "But the wisdom from above is first of all pure. It is also peace loving, gentle at all times, and willing to yield to others. It is full of mercy and good deeds. It shows no favoritism and is always sincere" (James 3:17, NLT). If living unsure about your eternal destiny and hearing more preaching along this line gives you peace and wisdom from above, that is your prerogative.

There will always be those who choose to continue living under the law. And as Ishmael persecuted Isaac, so it is the same today (Galatians 4:29). We all have the same Father, but not all of us have the same mother.

Feelings don't define doctrine. There are several reasons why there are different interpretations. One is that many just don't follow any rules and interpret the Scriptures however they see fit. Then there are those who simple have chosen what they want to believe and band the Scriptures to fit their theology. There are rules to interpretation, common sense, and logic. when we follow the rules interpreting the Scriptures isn't that difficult.

The argument based on fear is fallacious. Whether one has to live in fear or not has no bearing on what the Scriptures say.

There really isn't any argument to be made for OSAS. There is not a single passage of Scripture that says one cannot lose their salvation. Any attempt to support OSAS from Scriptures is based on inferences not facts. However, there is clear evidence that one can lose their salvation.

12 Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved.
13 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. (Luk 8:12-13 KJV)

Jesus said that the words He spoke were the Father's that means that the above statement are the words of God the Father. If anyone knows who believes and who doesn't it's the Father, and according to the words He gave to Jesus some believe for a while and in time of temptation fall away.

 

[Butch5]

2Ti 4:6 for I am already being poured out, and the time of my release hath arrived;
2Ti 4:7 the good strife I have striven, the course I have finished, the faith I have kept,
2Ti 4:8 henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of the righteousness that the Lord--the Righteous Judge--shall give to me in that day, and not only to me, but also to all those loving his manifestation.

So what must one do to finish the race? They must keep the faith. If one rejects Christ, who is responsible for our faith and grace, they have no other way to be saved. They are not able to finish the race.

Paul said he beat his body into submission so that he wouldn't be cast off. He clearly indicates that he could be cast off.

 

[childeye]

Paul said he beat his body into submission so that he wouldn't be cast off. He clearly indicates that he could be cast off.

Yes, he said he must bring his flesh into submission. All that means to me is his flesh is in opposition to God. The way I see it is the flesh is hardwired to hate pain and enjoys comfort. But when our comfort causes others pain, then empathy becomes the power that will choose to forego comfort so that others won't feel pain. Hence we rejoice in tribulation while we live vicariously through others.