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

[Butch5]

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.

The righteousness of the Pharisees was keeping the Law, not a choice to do good. The Scriptures don't tell us that God gives us righteousness. There are things that we do that are declared righteous by God. One of those things is having faith. God doesn't just consider people righteous simply because they said a few words like I believe. The hope that all believers have are the promises made to Abraham. The reason you and I can be saved and have eternal life is based in the promises to Abraham. Abraham received those promise based on his deeds.

15 And the angel of the LORD called unto Abraham out of heaven the second time,
16 And said, By myself have I sworn, saith the LORD, for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son:
17 That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies; {shore: Heb. lip}
18 And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice. (Gen 22:15-18 KJV)

And there was a famine in the land, beside the first famine that was in the days of Abraham. And Isaac went unto Abimelech king of the Philistines unto Gerar.
2 And the LORD appeared unto him, and said, Go not down into Egypt; dwell in the land which I shall tell thee of:
3 Sojourn in this land, and I will be with thee, and will bless thee; for unto thee, and unto thy seed, I will give all these countries, and I will perform the oath which I sware unto Abraham thy father;
4 And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed;
5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws. (Gen 26:1-5 KJV)

The hope of Christianity is based on Abraham's belief of what God said and His obeying what God said. God swore the oath when Abraham obeyed not before.

 

[Butch5]

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.

He said the reason that he beat his flesh into submission was so that after preaching to others he wouldn't be cast off. He didn't say anything about pain or comfort.

 

[childeye]

He said the reason that he beat his flesh into submission was so that after preaching to others he wouldn't be cast off. He didn't say anything about pain or comfort.

My point is the flesh is in opposition to God. Elsewhere Paul says that God told him His grace was sufficient. 2 Corinthians 12:9. If I read you correctly, you feel you need to beat your flesh into submission. How's that going? It never worked for me. What worked for me was what I said, 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.

 

[Kenny_ms]

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



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


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.

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

Thanks for the honest answer.

Yeah, but scripture says that perfect Love casts out all fear too. You can't build love for God out of fear of punishment.

That is absolutely true, yet seemingly contrary to that, God still threatens us with Hell.

But it's not really contrary, it says "perfect love" but as I see it, we can't be convinced as humans with just perfect love and nothing else in order for God to get us and keep us saved, there has to be a threat, or not so perfect love (tough love?. Perfect love works for God and perfect people but guess what...God is but we aren't....yet.

Now, once we are on board, that perfect love can start to work for us in mans society and man's relationship with God.

Those are just the first thoughts that came to mind so, take it for what it's worth, but it does explain how the "perfect love" verse could be true but at the same time, it obviously can't be depended on to get us saved or there would be no need for the threat of Hell.

 

[Butch5]

My point is the flesh is in opposition to God. Elsewhere Paul says that God told him His grace was sufficient. 2 Corinthians 12:9. If I read you correctly, you feel you need to beat your flesh into submission. How's that going? It never worked for me. What worked for me was what I said, 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.

Again, Paul said nothing about pain and comfort. He talks about beating his body into submission so that he is not cast off.

 

[childeye]

Those are just the first thoughts that came to mind so, take it for what it's worth, but it does explain how the "perfect love" verse could be true but at the same time, it obviously can't be depended on to get us saved or there would be no need for the threat of Hell.

Okay, I grant you that a threat of hell can be persuasive and is even necessary for some, but that doesn't necessarily mean perfect Love can't get it done. It just means wicked people have little faith in any perfect Love. People with little love have a hard time believing that such a perfect Love can exist in them. The cross is a powerful tool to that end. For Jesus submits to torture and death and yet forgives his tormentors saying they know not what they are doing. He defeats even hell taking captivity captive, all through perfect Love.
Psalm 68:18
Thou hast ascended on high, thou hast led captivity captive: thou hast received gifts for men; yea, for the rebellious also, that the Lord God might dwell among them.

 

[Kenny_ms]

Okay, I grant you that a threat of hell can be persuasive and is even necessary for some, but that doesn't necessarily mean perfect Love can't get it done.

I agree, perfect love may have been enough for some anyway.

 

[childeye]

Again, Paul said nothing about pain and comfort. He talks about beating his body into submission so that he is not cast off.

So what you're saying is fear of being cast off is the reason he beats himself? You do know Paul had a devil, don't you? 2 Corinthians 12:7. This thorn in the flesh could have something to do with that. He's afraid of being puffed up with knowledge. That is probably the flesh he is talking about. For being puffed up with knowledge is carnal.

 

[childeye]

I agree, perfect love may have been enough for some anyway.

Since Jesus has the keys to hell and this guy/God forgave those who tortured and crucified him, then what can defeat this Love?

 

[Malachi]

i

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:

Jethro,
It should be obvious -- it goes without saying -- that without saving faith there can be no salvation. But because you are so single-mindedly focused on faith, you have forgotten all about the result of faith which is the New Birth. And that changes everything.

The New Birth is supernatural -- "born from above" and "born of God", and irrevocable -- "sons of God" (Jn 1:12,13). The New Birth produces new creatures in Christ, and the Holy Spirit "baptizes" or immerses these new creatures into the Body of Christ. And nothing whatsoever can sever any component of the Body of Christ, and the love of God through Christ. Thus it is the New Birth and the "sealing" of the Holy Spirit which GUARANTEE ETERNAL LIFE.

So once you bring that into the picture you get a proper balance. This new creature is "created unto good works" (Eph 2:10) and if there are no good works, then that is evidence that this is not a new creature, and must go back to "square one".

 

[childeye]

The righteousness of the Pharisees was keeping the Law, not a choice to do good. The Scriptures don't tell us that God gives us righteousness. There are things that we do that are declared righteous by God. One of those things is having faith. God doesn't just consider people righteous simply because they said a few words like I believe.

Butch5, I believe a person is counted as righteous when they believe from the heart that Jesus as seen on the cross is how God is. I don't believe they can become unrighteous after God declares them righteous. This is difficult to write about because of the semantics involved. But just suppose wickedness is finding fault in anything. For instance, someone gives charity and it is not good enough, for he still had more to give. And when he gave all he had, it was counted as simply trying to look good. Since all things are built on faith, then nothing stands un-accusable to the wicked mind, including God, Who is Holy. This is the whole lesson of scripture. Do you believe that there is a place where a man can rest from the endless accusations? Does a man ever cease having to prove himself day in and day out? Is there a place where the works cease and a man can rest because he is above reproach? That place is in Christ.

 

[childeye]

A lot of talk about faith here. So let's define what this faith pertains to. I said this, "Since Jesus has the keys to hell and this guy/God forgave those who tortured and crucified him, then what can defeat this Love?" That is the faith. 1 John 3:16. Hebrews 2:14. 2 Corinthians 4:6.

 

[Deborah13]

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.

Not disagreeing with you. How did Paul do that? He kept the faith. If he hadn't kept the faith, he would have left the faith.

 

[Obadiah]

Not necessarily directed at any one poster in particular, but there have already been warnings by multiple staff placed in this thread to follow the rules here. For some reason some people are reluctant to back their good points with scripture, even though in many cases that would have been very easy to do. This seems to be the most common violation and I continue to fail to understand why some people don't want to take advantage of the very word of God to support what they say! Do they honestly believe their own words carry more weight than the words of God Himself?

At any rate, this will be the final warning in this thread to follow the forum guidelines and the Terms of Service. Sadly, further violations will result in actions being taken, up to and including closing this thread if needed. As was requested earlier, read the Terms of Service posted at this hyperlink, and read the guidelines for this particular forum quoted below and posted at this hyperlink then follow them. To be fair, this will apply to EVERYONE EQUALLY and will have nothing to do with whether or not a particular moderator agrees or disagrees with the position taken in the post. Thank you.

In addition to the general ToS, these special guidelines apply to this forum in particular:

"Christian Theology is by definition the study of God through His word, the Bible. Apologetics goes hand in hand with theology as it is the branch of Christian theology which attempts to give a rational defense of the Christian faith. That makes the Apologetics and Theology forum unique from many of our other forums in that this is a place specifically for these types of discussions.

With this in mind, the following guidelines should be followed.

• Original posts should reference specific scripture and what it is the member wants to say or ask about that scripture.
• Subsequent responses either opposing or adding additional information should include references to specific supportive scripture relevant to the thread and offer explanation of the member's understanding of how that scripture applies.
• Opinions are plenty and have little value so please do not state positions that have no basis in scripture.
• Do not use phrases such as, “You’re wrong.” This is insulting and inappropriate and there are nicer ways to disagree without being insulting.
• Once you have made a point, refrain from flooding the forum with numerous posts making the same point over and over with nothing new to support it.
• You may ask a member questions as to what they believe on certain topics relative to the subject of the thread, but please keep in mind the member is under no obligation to answer.
• Failing to answer someone’s question doesn’t necessarily amount to an admission of error or surrender but keep in mind that in any debate if you refuse to or can not answer a reasonable question, it may weaken your position."
  
  Also pay particular attention to ToS section 2.7 which states "All Bible verses and passages must be referenced (NASB, NIV, etc.) unless it is public domain like the KJV, YLT, etc." If you aren't sure if it is public domain, just include the version reference. It's really not that hard to do.

 

[WIP]

WIP,
I'll try this one on if you can explain to me why you find issue with Eternal Security here.

The text I quoted from 2 Peter 2:18-22 seems to talk about some that have fallen away. The last three verses in particular.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Is this 2 you or me?

Me....no, you....no...it's me....no, it's...

 

[Jethro Bodine]

i
Jethro,
It should be obvious -- it goes without saying -- that without saving faith there can be no salvation. But because you are so single-mindedly focused on faith, you have forgotten all about the result of faith which is the New Birth. And that changes everything.

The New Birth is supernatural -- "born from above" and "born of God", and irrevocable -- "sons of God" (Jn 1:12,13). The New Birth produces new creatures in Christ, and the Holy Spirit "baptizes" or immerses these new creatures into the Body of Christ. And nothing whatsoever can sever any component of the Body of Christ, and the love of God through Christ. Thus it is the New Birth and the "sealing" of the Holy Spirit which GUARANTEE ETERNAL LIFE.

So once you bring that into the picture you get a proper balance. This new creature is "created unto good works" (Eph 2:10) and if there are no good works, then that is evidence that this is not a new creature, and must go back to "square one".

Would you mind passing your post along to FreeGrace?
You can't not believe in Christ and be a new creation at the same time.

17 Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come. 2 Corinthians 5:17 NASB

In his doctrine, he has new creations who don't believe in Christ.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

i
Jethro,
It should be obvious -- it goes without saying -- that without saving faith there can be no salvation. But because you are so single-mindedly focused on faith, you have forgotten all about the result of faith which is the New Birth. And that changes everything.

The New Birth is supernatural -- "born from above" and "born of God", and irrevocable -- "sons of God" (Jn 1:12,13). The New Birth produces new creatures in Christ, and the Holy Spirit "baptizes" or immerses these new creatures into the Body of Christ. And nothing whatsoever can sever any component of the Body of Christ, and the love of God through Christ. Thus it is the New Birth and the "sealing" of the Holy Spirit which GUARANTEE ETERNAL LIFE.

So once you bring that into the picture you get a proper balance. This new creature is "created unto good works" (Eph 2:10) and if there are no good works, then that is evidence that this is not a new creature, and must go back to "square one".

But this is what is in debate, whether or not the new birth is permanent.
For some reason OSAS thinks it's literally impossible for the Holy Spirit to go out of a person once he has taken up residence there. I mean literally and actually impossible for the Holy Spirit to leave a body no matter how much he bangs on the walls of that body to get out. How ridiculous. The new birth is not a literal new baby. It's figurative language for a person who now has a new heart and spirit within them:

6 "Then the Spirit of the LORD will come upon you mightily, and you shall prophesy with them and be changed into another man. (1 Samuel 10:6 NASB)

Obviously, in the passage above we see the new birth by the Holy Spirit is not a literal new person that is born in addition to the old existing one, and as a result can't be erased from being a historical and actual fact of existence like a literal child being born is. It's figurative for a person having a different personality than what they had before. Personalities are not permanent that they can not be changed back. In the case of the new birth, all God has to do is say 'I'm out of here' and 'BOOM' no more new creation. This 'a child can't be unborn' is a ridiculous, unBiblical argument.

 

[childeye]

But this is what is in debate, whether or not the new birth is permanent.
For some reason OSAS thinks it's literally impossible for the Holy Spirit to go out of a person once he has taken up residence there. I mean literally and actually impossible for the Holy Spirit to leave a body no matter how much he bangs on the walls of that body to get out. How ridiculous. The new birth is not a literal new baby. It's figurative language for a person who now has a new heart and spirit within them:

6 "Then the Spirit of the LORD will come upon you mightily, and you shall prophesy with them and be changed into another man. (1 Samuel 10:6 NASB)

Obviously, in the passage above we see the new birth by the Holy Spirit is not a literal new person that is born in addition to the old existing one, and as a result can't be erased from being a historical and actual fact of existence like a literal child being born is. It's figurative for a person having a different personality than what they had before. Personalities are not permanent that they can not be changed back. In the case of the new birth, all God has to do is say 'I'm out of here' and 'BOOM' no more new creation. This 'a child can't be unborn' is a ridiculous, unBiblical argument.

The problem is semantic confusion. Is God unfaithful? That is the impression I am left with after reading your post, that God is unfaithful. If you believe that, then this Christ who would suffer death on a cross of torture and forgive his tormentors saying they know not what they do, doesn't exist. John 19:17. However had you said a person can fall away from the faith, then the person is being unfaithful, not God. Unfortunately, there are semantics and I cannot respond to many posts adequately when there is anbiguity as to what they mean when they say something.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

The problem is semantic confusion. Is God unfaithful? That is the impression I am left with after reading your post. This guy who would suffer death on a cross of torture because his Love is so deep doesn't exist. John 19:17.

You think that because, probably, the OSAS indoctrination runs so deep in you that you can only hear non-OSAS as 'God dumps you', instead of what non-OSAS actually is, 'you dump God'. Am I right?

"33 "But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father who is in heaven." (Matthew 10:23 NASB)

See, the person denies the Father, first. But OSAS thinks the argument is that God does the denying of the person first. If that were true, that is what would make God unfaithful and a liar. But as it is, that is not the argument.