Perserverance of the Saints

[CharlesC]

A lot of churches believe in the Perseverance of the Saints. I still have difficulty in believing fully in a theory written 500 years after Christ died on the cross. These men were bound to have some error in their theories. As Christians, we are to obey the Bible, the Gospel, the inspired Word of God. I read a lot on the web about Calvinism and Arminianism. Both seem to be compelling arguments, but they both are only theories and subject to error. The only truth we can find is by reading our Bibles. The Calvinist group believe in Once Saved Always Saved, but the Bible talks on men taking grace as a license for immorality in Jude. These men obviously were saved, because God only gives grace to Christians. These men were twisting the words of God, to do sinful acts.
Read a article where some Baptist churches are now coming out and saying, that they believe in the Bible more than Calvinism. Meaning Calvinism might be off, because the Bible points to people falling away. This does not point a finger to Arminianism being correct neither. Again, they are only men, thus bound for errors. The Bible is what man is to go off of in salvation. Not what two Saints say about the Bible. We are to read the Bible and stick to faith. Not put our faith in two men whom might have it wrong. The only way we can be sure of our salvation, is to practice what the Bible teaches us. If we love Jesus, we will obey his commandments. Who is with me on this?
I recently wrote my friend a letter, telling him, Once Saved Always Saved wasn't really true. That because he was saved and baptized, that him living a immoral lifestyle, that unpleases God, could be taken as a license to sin. He never goes to church, a drunkard, hates fellow Christians, dealt drugs, encourages others to sin, ect. I told him he better read the Bible again. He did not even have a Bible since age 32. Now in his 70's. This was in effort to see him saved. I bought him one, a while back in hopes he would read it. He is worldly. But he thought, Once Saved Always Saved, meant he could live however he wanted, and still go to heaven. The Bible does not support this. If we see someone caught up in sin, we are to try and persuade that brother into seeing the errors of his ways. James 5: 19-20. No, we are to live a life pleasing to God. Live according to the truth. If we follow the devil, we can't be obeying the Lord.

 

[James Is Back]

Mod Hat On

Thread moved from Controversial Theology to Soteriology.

Mod Hat Off​

 

[Albion]

A lot of churches believe in the Perseverance of the Saints. I still have difficulty in believing fully in a theory written 500 years after Christ died on the cross.

It doesn't really matter when men coined a phrase or expression that describes a teaching that's found in the Bible. What matters is whether or not it is in the Bible, and there's plenty to recommend this one.

 

[Look Up]

The Calvinist group believe in Once Saved Always Saved, but the Bible talks on men taking grace as a license for immorality in Jude. ... I recently wrote my friend a letter, telling him, Once Saved Always Saved wasn't really true. That because he was saved and baptized, that him living a immoral lifestyle, that unpleases God, could be taken as a license to sin. He never goes to church, a drunkard, hates fellow Christians, dealt drugs, encourages others to sin, ect. I told him he better read the Bible again. He did not even have a Bible since age 32. Now in his 70's. This was in effort to see him saved. I bought him one, a while back in hopes he would read it. He is worldly. But he thought, Once Saved Always Saved, meant he could live however he wanted, and still go to heaven. The Bible does not support this. If we see someone caught up in sin, we are to try and persuade that brother into seeing the errors of his ways. James 5: 19-20. No, we are to live a life pleasing to God. Live according to the truth. If we follow the devil, we can't be obeying the Lord.

Whatever the final verdict of the Bible, the above two quotations (separated by " ... "), insofar as they ostensibly claim to represent Calvinism on the matter of the perseverance of the saints or imply the same, constitute a misrepresentation of the Canons of Dordt, notably The Fifth Main Point on "The Perseverance of the Saints," such as Articles 4 through 8 and the following "Rejection of Errors Concerning the Teaching of the Perseverance of the Saints," such as enumerated points "I," "II," and "VII." It further similarly misrepresents the Westminster Confession of the Faith, notably Chapter XIII "Of Sanctification" and Chapter XVII "Of the Perseverance of the Saints"--which confessional claims in effect are repeated in the Savoy Declaration for Congregationalists. The quotations further misrepresent the Baptist Confession of Faith of 1646, Articles XXIII and XXXII and various articles of The Philadelphia Confession of Faith of 1689.

In sum, the two quotations misrepresent the confessional standards of the Calvinism of the Reformation on the matter (along with Reformed offshoots)--continental, British, and American. Nor is Calvinism the view of only one (presumably John Calvin) of two men (the other presumably being Jacob Arminius). Of course whether such confessional standards accurately and adequately represent the Bible on the matter is another question.

I still have difficulty in believing fully in a theory written 500 years after Christ died on the cross.

Context in your post makes me wonder if by "500" you meant "1500"--an estimate closer to the Reformation. Otherwise I ask to what you referred by use of "500."

... the Bible talks on men taking grace as a license for immorality in Jude. These men obviously were saved, because God only gives grace to Christians.

As seems often the case with borderline cases, the claim that the men in question "obviously were saved" seems rather less than obvious; indeed arguably from Jude a rather strong case falls on an opposing claim--that they were not "saved." BTW by the phrase "talking on" I presume you intend "writing against" or "judging" or the like.

 

[Butch5]

A lot of churches believe in the Perseverance of the Saints. I still have difficulty in believing fully in a theory written 500 years after Christ died on the cross. These men were bound to have some error in their theories. As Christians, we are to obey the Bible, the Gospel, the inspired Word of God. I read a lot on the web about Calvinism and Arminianism. Both seem to be compelling arguments, but they both are only theories and subject to error. The only truth we can find is by reading our Bibles. The Calvinist group believe in Once Saved Always Saved, but the Bible talks on men taking grace as a license for immorality in Jude. These men obviously were saved, because God only gives grace to Christians. These men were twisting the words of God, to do sinful acts.
Read a article where some Baptist churches are now coming out and saying, that they believe in the Bible more than Calvinism. Meaning Calvinism might be off, because the Bible points to people falling away. This does not point a finger to Arminianism being correct neither. Again, they are only men, thus bound for errors. The Bible is what man is to go off of in salvation. Not what two Saints say about the Bible. We are to read the Bible and stick to faith. Not put our faith in two men whom might have it wrong. The only way we can be sure of our salvation, is to practice what the Bible teaches us. If we love Jesus, we will obey his commandments. Who is with me on this?
I recently wrote my friend a letter, telling him, Once Saved Always Saved wasn't really true. That because he was saved and baptized, that him living a immoral lifestyle, that unpleases God, could be taken as a license to sin. He never goes to church, a drunkard, hates fellow Christians, dealt drugs, encourages others to sin, ect. I told him he better read the Bible again. He did not even have a Bible since age 32. Now in his 70's. This was in effort to see him saved. I bought him one, a while back in hopes he would read it. He is worldly. But he thought, Once Saved Always Saved, meant he could live however he wanted, and still go to heaven. The Bible does not support this. If we see someone caught up in sin, we are to try and persuade that brother into seeing the errors of his ways. James 5: 19-20. No, we are to live a life pleasing to God. Live according to the truth. If we follow the devil, we can't be obeying the Lord.

If you want to get at the truth reject the "isms".

 

[Brother Chris]

The Reformed view is the most accurate interpretation of the Scriptures. So it isn't about "Calvinism" or other "isms," it's simply about what the bible really teaches. These are not new ideas that were invented. These are biblical truths that were later discovered. As for perseverance of the saints, yes it is biblical. If you are not saved, you will not persevere. You will eventually give up and abandon your profession of faith. But only those who are truly saved and possess eternal life, will persevere til the end. Not because they are better than anyone else, or because they tried harder, it's because God gives them perseverance, just as Romans 15:5 says.

 

[EmSw]

The Reformed view is the most accurate interpretation of the Scriptures. So it isn't about "Calvinism" or other "isms," it's simply about what the bible really teaches. These are not new ideas that were invented. These are biblical truths that were later discovered. As for perseverance of the saints, yes it is biblical. If you are not saved, you will not persevere. You will eventually give up and abandon your profession of faith. But only those who are truly saved and possess eternal life, will persevere til the end. Not because they are better than anyone else, or because they tried harder, it's because God gives them perseverance, just as Romans 15:5 says.

I was wondering about your quote above. If a person does not persevere, let's say, two years down the road. If that person saved before two-year period?

If that person is not saved by faith prior to the two-year period, how does one know he/she is saved? Is perseverance mandatory for salvation?

If that person is saved by faith prior to the two-year period, then OSAS is a false claim.

 

[Butch5]

The Reformed view is the most accurate interpretation of the Scriptures. So it isn't about "Calvinism" or other "isms," it's simply about what the bible really teaches. These are not new ideas that were invented. These are biblical truths that were later discovered. As for perseverance of the saints, yes it is biblical. If you are not saved, you will not persevere. You will eventually give up and abandon your profession of faith. But only those who are truly saved and possess eternal life, will persevere til the end. Not because they are better than anyone else, or because they tried harder, it's because God gives them perseverance, just as Romans 15:5 says.

Later discovered? Jude said that the faith was "once delivered unto the saints." The ideas of Reformation theology entered the church with Augustine some 400 years later. Before that the idea that salvation couldn't be lost was argued against as heresy. The earliest Christians taught that salvation could be lost. A question arises. Did Jesus and the apostles deliver the Gospel? The Reformation teaching is opposed to what was first taught as Christian doctrine. It's hard to imagine that all of the people who we taught by Jesus and the apostles got it wrong. Not only that but they all understood it wrongly the same way. It seems much more likely that Augustine let (knowingly or nor) his Gnostic beliefs influence his doctrine.

However, fro, what you've said above I have to conclude that one cannot know if they are saved. You only know if you persevere to the end. Augustine acknowledged that with his doctrine one couldn't know if they were elect.

 

[Albion]

I was wondering about your quote above. If a person does not persevere, let's say, two years down the road. If that person saved before two-year period?

If that person is not saved by faith prior to the two-year period, how does one know he/she is saved? Is perseverance mandatory for salvation?

If that person is saved by faith prior to the two-year period, then OSAS is a false claim.

He's not saved before the two-year period.

 

[EmSw]

He's not saved before the two-year period.

So, we don't know if any of us are saved. Only lack of perseverance will tell down the road.

 

[Albion]

So, we don't know if any of us are saved. Only lack of perseverance will tell down the road.

We do not know if we are saved. Not in any provable way. But we trust, as Christ said to do. Bear in mind that if Free Will were the way to God, we wouldn't know either.

 

[Butch5]

I was wondering about your quote above. If a person does not persevere, let's say, two years down the road. If that person saved before two-year period?

If that person is not saved by faith prior to the two-year period, how does one know he/she is saved? Is perseverance mandatory for salvation?

If that person is saved by faith prior to the two-year period, then OSAS is a false claim.

That's one of the problems with Perseverance of the Saints, one can't know if they are saved. It is only at the end when they have persevered that they can know. Augustine acknowledged this of his doctrine. However, the Apostle John near the end of his Gospel said,

31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name. (Jn. 20:31 KJV)

You see, according to the original teaching of the Christian faith if one choose to believe and follow Christ they could know that they had the promise of life through His name. Now, they had that promise as long as they continued to believer and follow. If they chose to reject that then they no longer had the promise. But, one could know.

 

[Albion]

That's one of the problems with Perseverance of the Saints, one can't know if they are saved.

One can't know if they are saved by any other theory, either.

It is only at the end when they have persevered that they can know. Augustine acknowledged this of his doctrine. However, the Apostle John near the end of his Gospel said,

31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name. (Jn. 20:31 KJV)

You see, according to the original teaching of the Christian faith if one choose to believe and follow Christ they could know that they had the promise of life through His name.

Baloney. You are making trust seem like certainty. Nothing in that verse says that you can prove you are saved. It says that you should BELIEVE you are. That's quite a different thing. Of course also, a person who takes Election and Eternal Security seriously can do the same thing as is you are reserving for those who don't take it seriously.

 

[Look Up]

I was wondering about your quote above. If a person does not persevere, let's say, two years down the road. If that person saved before two-year period?

If that person is not saved by faith prior to the two-year period, how does one know he/she is saved? Is perseverance mandatory for salvation?

If that person is saved by faith prior to the two-year period, then OSAS is a false claim.

The question essentially assumes divine knowledge of the person-in-question's spiritual condition; in the absence of divine revelation concerning another's spiritual condition it is difficult to know from what vantage point, probably regardless of varied soteriological positions, one might answer other than "we don't know" with any degree of certainty.

At most we might judge tentatively based on visible actions--fruit. But this is always necessary for any church to function as a church. And the church functions long term over many relational encounters rather than in brief in one sweeping and vague condition and question. And if over a period of many relational encounters and disciplinary action a person repeatedly or markedly denies Christ or consistently behaves in a manner contrary to the confession that Jesus is Lord, refuses correction and does not repent at solemn attempts at church discipline to the extent of communal ostracism, then such person has failed to persevere in the faith to the best of the church's knowledge and either "went out from us proving he was never of us" (Calvinism) or at some point in the process loses the salvation he once had (Arminianism).

Meanwhile before and aside from ostracism from the confessing church, there are grey areas in which one does not have divine knowledge of the spiritual condition of the person's heart; at most in such conditions one has tentative concerns or beliefs about the person based on observable fruit over the long haul.

 

[Butch5]

One can't know if they are saved by any other theory, either.


Baloney. You are making trust seem like certainty. Nothing in that verse says that you can prove you are saved. It says that you should BELIEVE you are. That's quite a different thing. Of course also, a person who takes Election and Eternal Security seriously can do the same thing as is you are reserving for those who don't take it seriously.

Sure one can know. All through the Scriptures we are told those who believe will be saved. I can know whether or not I believe. Jesus said,

KJV John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. (Jn. 5:24 KJV)

He who believes has life. Now, that's a promise, I don't believe Jesus is saying one has eternal life at this moment, but the promise is there.

 

[Open Heart]

A lot of churches believe in the Perseverance of the Saints.

Actually it is the minority position in the Christian world.

I still have difficulty in believing fully in a theory written 500 years after Christ died on the cross.

Huh???? Calvin didn't articulate perseverance of the saints until some 1500 years after Christ.

 

[Albion]

Sure one can know.

If so, "one" can also prove it to someone else. Show us how that's done...and don't just refer to believing it to be so or trusting the Bible or Christ's promises or anything else that cannot be proven absolutely, like a lab experiment. Then and only then will you have established your contention.

 

[nobdysfool]

One thing about those who deny Perseverance of the Saints, it opens up an area where churches can, by they way they preach, control a lot of people. You may say, "Oh that doesn't happen in churches!", and I would say, oh yes it does! When offerings are down, the preaching focuses on giving, tithing, etc., and the offerings come back up. Coincidence? I think not.

It's too bad that churches have gotten away from hard preaching against sin, and what happens to sinners when they die. I guess it doesn't mesh well with the happy-clappy, Jesus is my bud, or my home-boy", squishy "love", just say the words and you're saved mush that passes for preaching in many churches.

People who get "saved" under such conditions might fall away when times get hard, because they've never been told that times will get hard.

Were they saved? Maybe, maybe not. It's hard for someone to get saved if they don't hear the True Gospel.

Being saved is more than just saying so, it's living so.

 

[Butch5]

If so, "one" can also prove it to someone else. Show us how that's done...and don't just refer to believing it to be so or trusting the Bible or Christ's promises or anything else that cannot be proven absolutely, like a lab experiment. Then and only then will you have established your contention.

What? Do you know if you believe?

 

[Ignatius21]

A lot of churches believe in the Perseverance of the Saints. I still have difficulty in believing fully in a theory written 500 years after Christ died on the cross. These men were bound to have some error in their theories. As Christians, we are to obey the Bible, the Gospel, the inspired Word of God. I read a lot on the web about Calvinism and Arminianism. Both seem to be compelling arguments, but they both are only theories and subject to error. The only truth we can find is by reading our Bibles. The Calvinist group believe in Once Saved Always Saved, but the Bible talks on men taking grace as a license for immorality in Jude. These men obviously were saved, because God only gives grace to Christians. These men were twisting the words of God, to do sinful acts.

Help me understand your timeline. 500 years??? Who is it you think "wrote" this theory in the 5th Century?

Read a article where some Baptist churches are now coming out and saying, that they believe in the Bible more than Calvinism. Meaning Calvinism might be off, because the Bible points to people falling away. This does not point a finger to Arminianism being correct neither. Again, they are only men, thus bound for errors. The Bible is what man is to go off of in salvation. Not what two Saints say about the Bible. We are to read the Bible and stick to faith. Not put our faith in two men whom might have it wrong. The only way we can be sure of our salvation, is to practice what the Bible teaches us. If we love Jesus, we will obey his commandments. Who is with me on this?

Since when does anyone "believe the Bible" more than they "believe Calvinism?" Calvinism, Arminianism, and any other "ism" is a system of theology that represents what some particular tradition believes to be taught in the Scriptures. One believes Calvinism because he thinks that it represents what's taught in the Scriptures. Or not.

Now, as to all who say "just read the Bible," that's a very recent and modern tradition of approaching the Scriptures. Nobody approaches Scripture except through the lens of some tradition. Even the belief that each individual can "just read the Bible" and come to an understanding of it, and then seek out some community who holds to those beliefs, is itself a modern interpretive tradition.