Calvin's Commentarys and Perseverance

Cajun Huguenot · Jan 8, 2006

I posted these quotes from Calvin's Commentaries once before and have brought them forward because of the discussion of OSAS and Perseverance that I have been engaged in on the Ask a Calvinist forum.

Many in the Reformed Faith today have confused the Baptist (non-Calvinist) view of OSAS with the historic Perseverance of the Saints doctrine that was once taught by all Reformed Churches.

OSAS is NOT the same as Perseverance of the Saints. It is a truncated, misguided, imposter of the true Reformed Doctrine of Perseverance.

Below area some samples of what Calvin says in his commentaries on the subject of Perseverance of the Saints. I can produce more if they are needed.

++++++++
We see too many of this class in our own day, who eagerly embrace the Gospel, and shortly afterwards fall off; for they have not the lively affection that is necessary to give them firmness and perseverance. Let every one then examine himself thoroughly, that the alacrity which gives out a bright flame may not quickly go out, as the saying is, like a fire of tow; for if the word does not fully penetrate the whole heart, and strike its roots deep, faith will want the supply of moisture that is necessary for perseverance. (Commentary Matt. 13:20)

Although, then, the charity of many, overwhelmed by the mass of iniquities, should give way, Christ warns believers that they must surmount this obstacle, lest, overcome by bad examples, they apostatize. And therefore he repeats the statement, that no man can be saved, unless he strive lawfully, so as to persevere to the end. (Commentary Matt. 24:13)

But the general instruction of the parable consists in this, that it is not enough to have been once ready and prepared for the discharge of duty, if we do not persevere to the end. (Commentary Matt. 25:1)

Here Christ warns them, in the first place, that it is not enough for any one to have begun well, if their progress to the end do not correspond to it; and for this reason he exhorts to perseverance in the faith those who have tasted of his doctrine... He distinguishes his followers from hypocrites by this mark, that they who falsely boasted of faith give way as soon as they have entered into the course, or at least in the middle of it; but believers persevere constantly to the end. If, therefore, we wish that Christ should reckon us to be his disciples, we must endeavor to persevere. (Commentary John 8:31)

But as he governs those whom he has elected, all the engines which Satan can employ will not prevent them from persevering to the end with unshaken firmness. And not only does he ascribe to election their perseverance, but likewise the commencement of their piety. (Commentary John 13:18)

He again lays before them the punishment of ingratitude, and, by doing so, excites and urges them to perseverance. It is indeed the gift of God, but the exhortation to fear is not uncalled for, lest our flesh, through too great indulgence, should root us out. (Commentary John 15:6)

In like manner, when Christ exhorts us, in this passage, to perseverance, we must; not rely on our own strength and industry, but we ought to pray to him who commands us, that he would confirm us in his love. (Commentary John 15:9)

He has laid down the doctrine, and now, with the view of impressing it upon the minds of the Corinthians, he adds an exhortation. He states briefly, that what they had hitherto attained was nothing, unless they steadfastly persevered, inasmuch as it is not enough to have once entered on the Lords way, if they do not strive until they reach the goal, agreeably to that declaration of Christ He that shall endure unto the end, etc. (Commentary 1 Cor 9:24)

Here we have an exhortation to perseverance, by which he admonishes them that all the grace that had been conferred upon them hitherto would be vain, unless they persevered in the purity of the gospel. And thus he intimates, that they are still only making progress, and have not yet reached the goal. (Commentary Col. 1:23)

He commends them for having begun well; but lest, under the pretext of the grace which they had obtained, they should indulge themselves in carnal security, he says that there was need of perseverance; for many having only tasted the Gospel, do not think of any progress as though they had reached the summit. Thus it is that they not only stop in the middle of their race, yea, nigh the starting-posts, but turn another wayBut if he is possessed by faith, we must persevere in it, so that he may be our perpetual possession. Christ then has given himself to be enjoyed by us on this condition, that by the same faith by which we have been admitted into a participation of him, we are to preserve so great a blessing even to death. (Commentary Heb. 3:14)

And, indeed, we see that under the Papacy a diabolical opinion prevails, that we ought to doubt our final perseverance, because we are uncertain whether we shall be tomorrow in the same state of grace. But Peter did not thus leave us in suspense; for he testifies that we stand by the power of God, lest any doubt arising from a consciousness of our own infirmity, should disquiet us. (Commentary 1 Pet. 1:5)

He does not speak here of the constancy of men, but of God, whose election must be ratified. He does not then, without reason declare, that where the calling of God is effectual, perseverance would be certain. He, in short, means that they who fall away had never been thoroughly imbued with the knowledge of Christ, but had only a light and a transient taste of it. (Commentary 1 John 2:19)

I hope you have found these examples useful. OSAS is in imposter. I will stick with Calvin and the great Reformed Creeds and Confessions on this issue and not with my (dear) modern, non-Calvinistic, Baptist brethren who teach OSAS instead of perseverance.

In Christ,
Kenith

AndOne · Jan 9, 2006

I'm guessing this post was made for my benefit - and I appreciate it (though I am not baptist).

I think it is important to understand - specifically what is meant by OSAS (at least what I mean by it anyway). I am not saying that we are given free reign to sin and live as we want. And I'm surely not saying that there will be no consequences for the elected believer who does sin. What I am saying is that the consequence of this sin of the elect will not result in eternal punishment in hell. If it is - then we have a clear doctrinal problem - because if sin already pardoned at the cross can put us in hell - then the crucifiction was a failure. If one believes that the sin of the justified believer will or can put him in hell - then we have crossed the line into works-based salvation.

Quite frankly this is a line that I don't believe Calvin intended to cross - and most of the quotes above do not indicate that hell is the result of the believer who falls into sin or sins. The quote that seems to indicate it the most is the commentary related to Matthew 24:13 when Calvin says that Jesus repeats the statement: "that no man can be saved..." which is clearly referring to someone who is not "saved" not to the person who is saved.

And if you look down to the commentary on 1 John 2:19 you see that Calvin himself makes my point for me. Namely that the person who falls away was never saved to begin with!

Also - in regards to perseverence - I believe that the true power to persevere comes solely through the strength of the Holy Spirit. How this is done I honestly can't say - but His work will be evident through our own progress in the faith and in our lives. Calvin also aludes to this in the comment on Col 1:23. It certainly doesn't mean that we become perfect or that we go to Hell if we sin.

Cajun Huguenot · Jan 9, 2006

Behe's Boy said:
I'm guessing this post was made for my benefit - and I appreciate it (though I am not baptist).

Hey buddy,

Thanks for the post. I actually did this a long time ago but just brought it forward because the subject is being discussed.

I do not doubt that if we were able to talk in person it would be easy to see that we agree completely on what the Scriptures teach on this subject.

I think the Reformers were wise to use the term "perseverance" and not OSAS. I agree that the nugget of the statement is true. Those elect unto eternal life can not become unelect and in the end go to hell. We agree that that is not possible.

The problem (for me) is with the phrase OSAS. I was once a Southern Baptist (Arminian). I meet more than a few people who thought that since they had once walked the aisle and prayed a sinners prayer they, therefore, had a get out of hell free card, and could live as they liked. Even as a Southern Baptist I knew better than that, but there are many people who have defended that view. Many people understand OSAS in that way.

Perseverance is a hedge against such thinking (i.e. easy believeism and antinomianism) that can follow in the wake of OSAS.

I would like to see Reformed Christians keep close to the heritage (which I believe is biblical). We in the South live in mostly Southern Baptist evangelical culture. OSAS there and OSAS in Reformed thought is different, therefore we should stick the the phrase we get from Dort --Perseverance of the Saints.

I hope I'm being clear, because I don't think this is hair splitting.

In Christ,
Kenith

GrinningDwarf · Jan 9, 2006

I have to agree with Cajun about the differences between 'OSAS' and 'Perseverance'.

Before I got Reformed, I was an Arminian who believed that we could indeed lose our salvation. Seemed to me that if our decision was the main factor in whether we were saved or not, He wouldn't take that decision away once we embraced Him. We could throw proof-texts at each other all day, and while I would have agreed that nothing can force us from God's hand, I could point to Scriptures indicating that we very well could walk away of our own free will. I spent a lot of time debating this with OSAS folks. We both agreed on the begining of salvation...that our decision was paramount in whether we were saved or not...but the OSAS folks I talked to were confident that when we made that choice once it was never our choice to make again.

It wasn't until I was directed back to the real starting place (effects of the fall on man's will) that I came to understand that TULIP is actually the most acurate model of the way salvation works (even though the phrasing of the TULIP points can be very misleading). OSAS, as commonly taught in America today, rests upon an Arminian base with the last part twisted. Check out the Five Points of Arminanism. I found them in Steele and Thomas' The Five Points of Calvinism, and you will see that mainstream evangelical Christianity in America is essentially Arminian. Perseverance of the saints, however, rests solidy on Reformed soteriology.

Proeliator · Jan 10, 2006

Cajun Huguenot said:
He does not speak here of the constancy of men, but of God, whose election must be ratified. He does not then, without reason declare, that where the calling of God is effectual, perseverance would be certain. He, in short, means that they who fall away had never been thoroughly imbued with the knowledge of Christ, but had only a light and a transient taste of it. (Commentary 1 John 2:19)

Now, what of those of us that were first saved by that sinners prayer, thinking that was all we needed? Is that the light and transient taste, and coming to learn and believe and study reformed doctrine and serious scripture, is that the ratification?

Cajun Huguenot · Jan 10, 2006

shadrach_ said:
Now, what of those of us that were first saved by that sinners prayer, thinking that was all we needed? Is that the light and transient taste, and coming to learn and believe and study reformed doctrine and serious scripture, is that the ratification?

I was baptised a Roman Catholic and years later, during an invitation, I walked down the aisle of a Southern Baptist Church and prayed the sinners prayer.

God truly saved me at some point in there. I don't know when, but I do know that I wanted to know Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour. I walked the aisle in that church because I loved Jesus Christ. I loved the Lord, because at some point before my heart had been changed by the Holy Spirit.

There are countless Christians who have affirmed they are saved by walking and aisle and praying a prayer. But doing that saves no one. It is the work of the Holy Spirit.

The walk down the aisle motif of modern evangelical Christianity is based on misguided, revivalist thinking. But many Christians today associate it with salvation. However, it is an invention of 19th century revivalism, that has (IMHO) serious theological problems. Still God has used it despite its theological flaws. Of course such flaws, though used by God, also bring error in thier wake as well.

It is like early Medieval monasticism. It is not biblical and has some theological problems as well, but God used this flawed thing to convert Europe to the Gospel and to preserve the Scripture for us today. This monasticism did great good and on the other hand, was the breeding ground for great error.

Remember, even in our errors and sins, God will accomplish His will. We are responsible before Him for our errors, but thankfully He is God and none of our frailties (or sins) can thwart His plan and all of them are used to accomplish all His most Holy Will.

Coram Deo,
Kenith

Catholic Dude · Feb 9, 2006

I was sent here from another page and decided to look things over:

We see too many of this class in our own day, who eagerly embrace the Gospel, and shortly afterwards fall off; for they have not the lively affection that is necessary to give them firmness and perseverance. Let every one then examine himself thoroughly, that the alacrity which gives out a bright flame may not quickly go out, as the saying is, like a fire of tow; for if the word does not fully penetrate the whole heart, and strike its roots deep, faith will want the supply of moisture that is necessary for perseverance. (Commentary Matt. 13:20)

Although, then, the charity of many, overwhelmed by the mass of iniquities, should give way, Christ warns believers that they must surmount this obstacle, lest, overcome by bad examples, they apostatize. And therefore he repeats the statement, that no man can be saved, unless he strive lawfully, so as to persevere to the end. (Commentary Matt. 24:13)

So far I agree, which also goes to show that those who dont "persevere to the end" must have thrown away their salvation through sins.

But the general instruction of the parable consists in this, that it is not enough to have been once ready and prepared for the discharge of duty, if we do not persevere to the end. (Commentary Matt. 25:1)

I totally agree. Ready and prepared can be lost in the future.

Here Christ warns them, in the first place, that it is not enough for any one to have begun well, if their progress to the end do not correspond to it; and for this reason he exhorts to perseverance in the faith those who have tasted of his doctrine... He distinguishes his followers from hypocrites by this mark, that they who falsely boasted of faith give way as soon as they have entered into the course, or at least in the middle of it; but believers persevere constantly to the end. If, therefore, we wish that Christ should reckon us to be his disciples, we must endeavor to persevere. (Commentary John 8:31)

I agree here as well. The man should consider before he starts the project if its worth the time and energy, else he will end up lost and with nothing.

But as he governs those whom he has elected, all the engines which Satan can employ will not prevent them from persevering to the end with unshaken firmness. And not only does he ascribe to election their perseverance, but likewise the commencement of their piety. (Commentary John 13:18)

I dont agree with this, for it makes persevering a given before actually persevering.

He again lays before them the punishment of ingratitude, and, by doing so, excites and urges them to perseverance. It is indeed the gift of God, but the exhortation to fear is not uncalled for, lest our flesh, through too great indulgence, should root us out. (Commentary John 15:6)

I agree with this as well, a person can fail to make it and throw it all away.

In like manner, when Christ exhorts us, in this passage, to perseverance, we must; not rely on our own strength and industry, but we ought to pray to him who commands us, that he would confirm us in his love. (Commentary John 15:9)

We must not rely on our own strength apart from Him, but with His help by ingrafting us in, the passage says we are called to bear good fruit and keep the commandments remembering that "apart from me you can do nothing"

He has laid down the doctrine, and now, with the view of impressing it upon the minds of the Corinthians, he adds an exhortation. He states briefly, that what they had hitherto attained was nothing, unless they steadfastly persevered, inasmuch as it is not enough to have once entered on the Lords way, if they do not strive until they reach the goal, agreeably to that declaration of Christ He that shall endure unto the end, etc. (Commentary 1 Cor 9:24)

Very true.

Here we have an exhortation to perseverance, by which he admonishes them that all the grace that had been conferred upon them hitherto would be vain, unless they persevered in the purity of the gospel. And thus he intimates, that they are still only making progress, and have not yet reached the goal. (Commentary Col. 1:23)

I agree again, "the grace that had conferred would be in vain unless..."

He commends them for having begun well; but lest, under the pretext of the grace which they had obtained, they should indulge themselves in carnal security, he says that there was need of perseverance; for many having only tasted the Gospel, do not think of any progress as though they had reached the summit. Thus it is that they not only stop in the middle of their race, yea, nigh the starting-posts, but turn another wayBut if he is possessed by faith, we must persevere in it, so that he may be our perpetual possession. Christ then has given himself to be enjoyed by us on this condition, that by the same faith by which we have been admitted into a participation of him, we are to preserve so great a blessing even to death. (Commentary Heb. 3:14)

As far as I can understand this I agree.

And, indeed, we see that under the Papacy a diabolical opinion prevails, that we ought to doubt our final perseverance, because we are uncertain whether we shall be tomorrow in the same state of grace. But Peter did not thus leave us in suspense; for he testifies that we stand by the power of God, lest any doubt arising from a consciousness of our own infirmity, should disquiet us. (Commentary 1 Pet. 1:5)

The CC denies so called "final perseverance" because if its a sure thing the the warnings to "persevere" are instead guarantees and not warnings. Unless a human has infallible foreknowledge they cant claim the will persevere for certain.
Is anyone 100% sure they wont commit grave sin the next day? Does anyone know when they will die? If no then they cant claim "final perseverance".
The passage he is citing goes onto say:

6 In this you rejoice, though now for a little while you may have to suffer various trials, 7 so that the genuineness of your faith, more precious than gold which though perishable is tested by fire, may redound to praise and glory and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ. 8 Without having seen him you love him; though you do not now see him you believe in him and rejoice with unutterable and exalted joy. 9 As the outcome of your faith you obtain the salvation of your souls.

He explains thier faith will be tested to see if its worthy, and the end of the road the "outcome" is salvation.

He does not speak here of the constancy of men, but of God, whose election must be ratified. He does not then, without reason declare, that where the calling of God is effectual, perseverance would be certain. He, in short, means that they who fall away had never been thoroughly imbued with the knowledge of Christ, but had only a light and a transient taste of it. (Commentary 1 John 2:19)

This passage is totally out of context, the subject is the antichrist. The same chapter says:

3 And by this we may be sure that we know him, if we keep his commandments. 4 He who says "I know him" but disobeys his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him

The one who "disobeys the commandments" is not called an "antichrist", that title is applied to specific individuals later in the chapter.

I hope you have found these examples useful. OSAS is in imposter. I will stick with Calvin and the great Reformed Creeds and Confessions on this issue and not with my (dear) modern, non-Calvinistic, Baptist brethren who teach OSAS instead of perseverance.

I see OSAS in both camps but stated a bit differently. In this case you believe you will persevere, that means even if you go off on a rampage next week it would simlpy be a temporary setback on your road of serving Christ. Thats the same situation for all who believe in final perseverance, even if they should fall to the lowest levels of sin later in life they will make it in the end.

Cajun Huguenot · Feb 11, 2006

Catholic Dude,

Thanks for your response. I originally posted this in response to my OSAS friends, because I believe that position to be unbiblical and not part of the historic Reformed position.

I think OSAS is a theological ditch that Christians should avoid, the ditch on the opposite side of the road that says you can never have assurance of salvation. I believe both positions are false and believers should be able to have biblical assurance without presumption.

The Scriptures have many warnings against falling away and not persevering, but it also has a fait number of verses that teach assurance and the fact that God in His providence will loose none of those ordained to eternal life.

Which set of verses are we to believe? Can we pick sides? The obvious answer to both questions is "no."

I believe the OSAS position supports only one set of these verses of Scripture and those who deny assurance take up the opposite set and the two sides play memory verse table tennis with them.

Our theology need take both sets serious needs to make since of both sets of verses. I believe the Reformed doctrine of Perseverance of the saints is the only one (that I know of) that takes both sets very seriously, tries to use them in context.

The OSAS folks have to ignore or explain away a bunch of Scriptures, as do the folks who deny we can ever have any security in our ultimate salvation. Both sides have to ignore a whole series of Scriptures teachings.

All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. (Jn 6:37-39)

My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. (Jn 10:27-29)

They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us. (I Jn 2:19)

The examples above are only a three but there are more. These are some verses that certainly teach some measure of security. Do they contradict the fall away or perseverance verses?

If we simply but them side by side they would seem to contradict, but we know that Gods Word does not contradict, so our understanding must be able to incorporate both sets. We cannot concentrate on one side and ignore the other (which is what I believe most folks do). He has to make sense off all that God says on every subject.

I believe the Covenantal vantage point is the only one that makes sense of both sets of proof texts without compromising either. All Gods covenant people (His Church) are in Christ by baptism. The Scriptures are addressed to these people. Are all those in Christ ordained to eternal life? No.

The people in the church are made up of wheat and tares. The warnings and the promises are made to them. Both are real.

In Christ,
Kenith

WilliamRoper · Feb 11, 2006

I posted a thread that dealt with the topic of the Perseverance of the Saints in GT:

http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=21695016#post21695016

Responses are welcome.

The examples above are only a three but there are more. These are some verses that certainly teach some measure of security. Do they contradict the “fall away” or perseverance verses?

If we simply but them side by side they would seem to contradict, but we know that God’s Word does not contradict, so our understanding must be able to incorporate both sets.

Cajun,

I believe that all the verses of the Bible should be harmonized with each other. I agree that the Scriptures teach some level of security, but not the ontologically necessary kind of security that Calvinism teaches. I believe that the possibility always remains for a person to fall away, even if it is very small. I do not believe that the Perseverance of the Saints can be harmonized with the verses that I quoted in the thread I posted in GT.

Why don't some of you come over there to discuss these verses with me?

Cajun Huguenot · Feb 11, 2006

WilliamRoper said:
I posted a thread that dealt with the topic of the Perseverance of the Saints in GT:

http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=21695016#post21695016

Responses are welcome.

Cajun,

I believe that all the verses of the Bible should be harmonized with each other. I agree that the Scriptures teach some level of security, but not the ontologically necessary kind of security that Calvinism teaches. I believe that the possibility always remains for a person to fall away, even if it is very small. I do not believe that the Perseverance of the Saints can be harmonized with the verses that I quoted in the thread I posted in GT.

Why don't some of you come over there to discuss these verses with me?

Hello WR,

Thanks for the comments.

I'm more than happy to discuss this subject with you, but GT is not to my liking. It is too bloody and there are too many folks jumping in to the discussion.

Like I say above, I think the Reformed/Covenantal position is the only one that I know of that I believe takes both the warnings and the statements of security seriously, but I am always willing to hear what someone olse has to say on this topic.

I have no problem if you were to post your views here, if it is ok with the powers that be.

In Christ,
KEnith

WilliamRoper · Feb 11, 2006

If you would like, we could do a formal debate on the verses I quoted (with yourself or anybody else who could champion the Reformed position). I agree that GT is way too bloody; I hardly got a cogent response at all when I posted my thread there.

Catholic Dude · Feb 11, 2006

Cajun Huguenot-

I think OSAS is a theological ditch that Christians should avoid, the ditch on the opposite side of the road that says you can never have assurance of salvation. I believe both positions are false and believers should be able to have biblical assurance without presumption.

The main idea that I have been trying to get across is that there are not two sides of the road, but instead two sides of the same coin, both groups believe that salvation is secure. The difference is on emphasis on different aspects, one might say "you can do literally what every you want, though as a Christian we should strive to imitate Jesus", the other would say "we condemn sin and should avoid it, but if you gave in and did whatever you want you can rest assure you will be reconciled". Its the same idea for both sides.

The Scriptures have many warnings against falling away and not persevering, but it also has a fait number of verses that teach assurance and the fact that God in His providence will loose none of those ordained to eternal life.

A warning is just that a warning of danger. As for the verses that teach "assurance", the CC teaches we have a degree of assurance but not absolute assurance.

Which set of verses are we to believe? Can we pick sides? The obvious answer to both questions is "no."

The answer is no because as you point out the Bible is not divided against itself.

I believe the OSAS position supports only one set of these verses of Scripture and those who deny assurance take up the opposite set and the two sides play memory verse table tennis with them.

Our theology need take both sets serious needs to make since of both sets of verses. I believe the Reformed doctrine of Perseverance of the saints is the only one (that I know of) that takes both sets very seriously, tries to use them in context.

I would agree that both sets of verses have to be understood properly. What I fail to see though in my analysis of the issue is how the Reformed view is not simply the other side of the OSAS coin.

The OSAS folks have to ignore or explain away a bunch of Scriptures, as do the folks who deny we can ever have any security in our ultimate salvation. Both sides have to ignore a whole series of Scriptures teachings.

This is an important distinction. Nobody has assurance of their "ultimate salvation" because that is the hight of presumption. We can and do have a degree of security but in no way is it untimate. That is where the CC stands and avoids the OSAS coin.

All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. (Jn 6:37-39)

There is a lot that can be said about this passage. First of all it should not be understood to mean we are NOT passive robots in this ordeal, in this same passage Jesus says:

53 So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; 54 he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. 56 He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.

So a response is required on our side, and as you know Catholics believe this to be the Eucharist. Also the timeframe is an issue, when and how does something "come to Him"? Note that this passage does not explain the details of the delivery, also it makes no mention of the individual's failings during this time either.

My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. (Jn 10:27-29)

This is concerning external forces separating us from Christ, this is NOT talking about the individual's failings which is clear in the NT "those who do these sins shall not inherit the kingdom". Also the most important note about this passage is Jesus is talking specifically to the Jews who are at the end of the line in God's plan, they had their chance and now a new sheriff is in town, what Jesus is doing here is revolutionary.

They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us. (I Jn 2:19)

I have gone over this a bunch of times the context is talking about specific individuals. Notably ones who openly leave the church. This has nothing to do with a person who sins in their personal life and fails to abide in Christ.

The examples above are only a three but there are more. These are some verses that certainly teach some measure of security. Do they contradict the fall away or perseverance verses?

If we simply but them side by side they would seem to contradict, but we know that Gods Word does not contradict, so our understanding must be able to incorporate both sets. We cannot concentrate on one side and ignore the other (which is what I believe most folks do). He has to make sense off all that God says on every subject.

I believe the Covenantal vantage point is the only one that makes sense of both sets of proof texts without compromising either. All Gods covenant people (His Church) are in Christ by baptism. The Scriptures are addressed to these people. Are all those in Christ ordained to eternal life? No.

I agree we have to look at both sets of verses, but as I have said I dont believe any of those verses teach ultimate security. As for Baptism, that is an interesting issue, we are born anew through it and become a member of the Body but that doesnt guarantee Heaven.

The people in the church are made up of wheat and tares. The warnings and the promises are made to them. Both are real.

In Christ,
Kenith

I agree there are wheat and tares in the same field and how we respond to obeying Christ determines which one we are at the harvest.

Cajun Huguenot · Feb 11, 2006

Hey Catholic Dude,

I am sorry that we still disagree, but while we may always disagree on the particulars I think we do agree that there should be a degree of assurance in those who are trusting in Christ and living a Godly life and there should be no assurance to those living an ungodly life.

I think we can also agree that we can have false assurance (I also believe those secure in Christ can have lack assurance that they should possess).

In John’s writings we see that believers warnings and knowledge and even security in Christ. This security is not based on feeling or walking and aisle but upon the Word of God and the objective reality that we desire and also life according to the Word of God.

My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth. And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before him. For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things. Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, then have we confidence toward God. And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight. And this is his commandment, that we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment. And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us. (I Jn. 3:18-24)

Remembering without ceasing your work of faith, and labour of love, and patience of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ, in the sight of God and our Father; Knowing, brethren beloved, your election of God. For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance; as ye know what manner of men we were among you for your sake. And ye became followers of us, and of the Lord, having received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Ghost: So that ye were ensamples to all that believe in Macedonia and Achaia... And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come. (1Th 1:3-7)

For I would that ye knew what great conflict I have for you, and [for] them at Laodicea, and [for] as many as have not seen my face in the flesh; That their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgement of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ; In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. And this I say, lest any man should beguile you with enticing words. (Col 2:1-4)

But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak. For God [is] not unrighteous to forget your work and labour of love, which ye have shewed toward his name, in that ye have ministered to the saints, and do minister. And we desire that every one of you do shew the same diligence to the full assurance of hope unto the end: That ye be not slothful, but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises. (Hbr 6:9-12)

Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh; And [having] an high priest over the house of God; Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water. Let us hold fast the profession of [our] faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised; ) And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works: (Hbr 10:19-23)

Heb. 10 combines warnings and declarations of assurance. We are warned about falling away and still are told to have confidence in Christ our Lord because His promise is real. This assurance should be ours so long as we walk in Christ.

We Calvinist believe, as did St. Augustine, that the Lord has elected some to eternal salvation from before the Creation of the World. All those elected by God to eternal salvation will persevere, but this is not license to presumption. God alone knows whom he has elected, but so long as we are baptized into Christ, are trusting in Him and desire to do His holy will should have security in our salvation. Because we are to have that assurance because Paul John and the writer of Hebrews writes that this should be so.

Remember John said in his first Epistle “These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God. And this is the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask any thing according to his will, he heareth us: And if we know that he hear us, whatsoever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we desired of him.” (I Jn 5: 13-15)

Confidence in Christ's Word is not presumption. The writers of Scripture call on us to have assurance in salvation, but not presumption. We are give the promises of Christ and if we see the work of the Spirit in our lives we should have assurance. So long as we are baptized into Christ, are trusting in Him and desire to do His holy will, we should have assurance in our salvation, but we should fear if we lack any of these things. No one who has fallen into a sinful lifestyle or does not desire to live according to the Word of God should have comfort, but should be fearful.

Both OSAS and a total lack of assurance are ditches that we should avoid. Both are not Scriptural and the Scriptures address both issues. It addresses presumption and a total lack of faith. The Reformed Faith takes both sides of that coin seriously and sees them in light of God's covenant Word to His Covenant people.

On a side note: I agree with Calvin that the Supper (Eucharist) is a means of Grace and that in it we truly partake of Christ (by faith).

Coram Deo,
Kenith

michaelmonfre · Feb 12, 2006

I myself believe osas and perseverance of the saints are two different things. osas is antinomiasm or non-lordship salvation. this is why people embrace arminiasm. It is possible to be a carnal christian devoid of works in the osas system.

true saints persevere.

Catholic Dude · Feb 12, 2006

[/FONT said:
Cajun Huguenot]I think we can also agree that we can have false assurance (I also believe those secure in Christ can have lack assurance that they should possess).

Im not quite sure how you understand "false assurance".
I dont really believe in a false assurance unless it is an assurance that is based on a gospel apart from what the CC teaches the Gospel to be.

In Johns writings we see that believers warnings and knowledge and even security in Christ. This security is not based on feeling or walking and aisle but upon the Word of God and the objective reality that we desire and also life according to the Word of God.

I agree. The "objective reality" means we dont put the cart before the horse and assume eternal security before our life is over. In otherwords we cant say for 100% sure we wont do something in the future because we are not God so we dont know.

The main issue of debate is not whether I believe in assurance or not because I do, rather the issue is whether I belive in an infallible assurance.

17 [But if any one has the world's goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him, how does God's love abide in him?]

My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth. And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before him. For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things. Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, then have we confidence toward God. And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight. And this is his commandment, that we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment. And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us. (I Jn. 3:18-24)

(I included v17) This confidence and assurance is based on the individual seeing before their very eyes that they are keeping His commandments. As v17 also explains turning to evil later in life is not only possible but puts one's soul in jeopardy.

Remembering without ceasing your work of faith, and labour of love, and patience of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ, in the sight of God and our Father; Knowing, brethren beloved, your election of God. For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance; as ye know what manner of men we were among you for your sake. And ye became followers of us, and of the Lord, having received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Ghost: So that ye were ensamples to all that believe in Macedonia and Achaia... And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come. (1Th 1:3-7)

Here Paul is explaining that the fact that they answered the call of the Gospel is a sign of God's favor on them, that does not mean absolute assurance because not all who answer the call remain faithful.
Later in the book in Ch3 Paul says:

5 For this reason, when I could bear it no longer, I sent that I might know your faith, for fear that somehow the tempter had tempted you and that our labor would be in vain. 6 But now that Timothy has come to us from you, and has brought us the good news of your faith and love and reported that you always remember us kindly and long to see us

Right we come to more fully understand the opening of this book. Paul knows these guys have a good reputation, he was assured of this AFTER Timothy came and reported to him. He says he sent Timothy in the first place to check on them "for fear the tempter had tempted you that our labor would be in vain". That doesnt sound like Paul was preaching a gospel that included infallible assurance. In the next chapter Paul says:

3 For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you abstain from unchastity; 4 that each one of you know how to take a wife for himself in holiness and honor, 5 not in the passion of lust like heathen who do not know God; 6 that no man transgress, and wrong his brother in this matter, because the Lord is an avenger in all these things, as we solemnly forewarned you. 7 For God has not called us for uncleanness, but in holiness. 8 Therefore whoever disregards this, disregards not man but God, who gives his Holy Spirit to you.

It is very very clear that outward actions are needed in the salvation process and that nobody is 100% certain that they will remain on task.
(cont)

Catholic Dude · Feb 12, 2006

For I would that ye knew what great conflict I have for you, and [for] them at Laodicea, and [for] as many as have not seen my face in the flesh; That their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgement of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ; In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. And this I say, lest any man should beguile you with enticing words. (Col 2:1-4)

All this is talking about is the assurance that God has shown favor on them because they responded to the Gospel in the first place.
Back in Ch1 it says:

21 And you, who once were estranged and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds, 22 he has now reconciled in his body of flesh by his death, in order to present you holy and blameless and irreproachable before him, 23 provided that you continue in the faith, stable and steadfast, not shifting from the hope of the gospel which you heard

This is a conditional teaching, he says "provided that", in otherwords its not a guarantee. In Ch3 he does the same list of no-no's that are in many of his letters:

5 Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: fornication, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry. 6 On account of these the wrath of God is coming. 7 In these you once walked, when you lived in them. 8 But now put them all away: anger, wrath, malice, slander, and foul talk from your mouth. 9 Do not lie to one another, seeing that you have put off the old nature with its practices 10 and have put on the new nature, which is being renewed in knowledge after the image of its creator.

It cant be more clear when Paul brings up this list time after time, "take care lest we fall".

But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak. For God [is] not unrighteous to forget your work and labour of love, which ye have shewed toward his name, in that ye have ministered to the saints, and do minister. And we desire that every one of you do shew the same diligence to the full assurance of hope unto the end: That ye be not slothful, but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises. (Hbr 6:9-12)

I dont get what your proving here, it clearly says "show this same diligence of the full assurance of HOPE...UNTO THE END" The full assurance of hope is what all Christains should keep in mind...that we be found worthy when "Thy Kingdom Come" The "unto the end" means it must be maintained, not guaranteed to be maintained.

Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh; And [having] an high priest over the house of God; Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water. Let us hold fast the profession of [our] faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised; ) And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works: (Hbr 10:19-23)

Again you are misunderstanding this "full assurance" stuff. It doesnt mean infallible assurance. Full assurance of faith means we put it all on the line believing that faith will not disappoint.
In the context it says "let us hold fast to the profession of faith without wavering".

Heb. 10 combines warnings and declarations of assurance. We are warned about falling away and still are told to have confidence in Christ our Lord because His promise is real. This assurance should be ours so long as we walk in Christ.

I agree with the last line. The assurance is conditional because our salvation is conditional. There are a couple of Heb passages out there that have been presented elsewhere that clearly show people can lose salvation.

We Calvinist believe, as did St. Augustine, that the Lord has elected some to eternal salvation from before the Creation of the World.

All Christians believe God "elected" before the world was created. The problem is way more complex than that and has its own stuff to deal with. For example "election" has to be defined, which there are many theories out there. Also that there are different elections and elect doesnt mean a guarantee of Heaven.
Another note is that Calvinists dont believe the same exact thing(s) as Augustine and even more importantly they dont believe in many of the things as the collective views of the ECFs.

Catholic Dude · Feb 12, 2006

(cont)

All those elected by God to eternal salvation will persevere, but this is not license to presumption. God alone knows whom he has elected,

I agree, this is a key point and the CC teaches that nobody is to claim election to eternal salvation. God alone knows who all is elected and who all will make it.

With your comment that God alone knows, how can you remain holding those views?

but so long as we are baptized into Christ, are trusting in Him and desire to do His holy will should have security in our salvation.

I agree. The ECF's (including some powerful quotes by Augustine) explicitly teach the regeneration and other saving effects of Baptism.

Because we are to have that assurance because Paul John and the writer of Hebrews writes that this should be so.

Yes, there is such a thing as assurance and comfort in the realm of Christianity.

Remember John said in his first Epistle These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God. And this is the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask any thing according to his will, he heareth us: And if we know that he hear us, whatsoever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we desired of him. (I Jn 5: 13-15)

I dont disagree with this passage.
The next verse says:

16 If any one sees his brother committing what is not a mortal sin, he will ask, and God will give him life for those whose sin is not mortal. There is sin which is mortal; I do not say that one is to pray for that. 17 All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin which is not mortal.

There is such a thing as mortal sin (ie a sin unto spiritual death) and it is possible for all to commit them. This is kind of a different issue so I will wait for another thread to go off on this topic.

Confidence in Christ's Word is not presumption. The writers of Scripture call on us to have assurance in salvation, but not presumption. We are give the promises of Christ and if we see the work of the Spirit in our lives we should have assurance.

I agree, when we see the work then assurance is built up.

So long as we are baptized into Christ, are trusting in Him and desire to do His holy will, we should have assurance in our salvation, but we should fear if we lack any of these things. No one who has fallen into a sinful lifestyle or does not desire to live according to the Word of God should have comfort, but should be fearful.

I agree.

Both OSAS and a total lack of assurance are ditches that we should avoid. Both are not Scriptural and the Scriptures address both issues. It addresses presumption and a total lack of faith. The Reformed Faith takes both sides of that coin seriously and sees them in light of God's covenant Word to His Covenant people.

The Catholic Church avoids both ditches. When I said both sides of the coin I meant osas told in two different ways, I didnt mean one side is osas and the other is no-confidence.

On a side note: I agree with Calvin that the Supper (Eucharist) is a means of Grace and that in it we truly partake of Christ (by faith).

I would take it one step more to what St Ignatius of Antioch said in his letter to those in Smyrna:

Let that Eucharist be held valid which is offered by the bishop or by the one to whom the bishop has committed this charge. Wherever the bishop appears, there let the people be; as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.

AndOne · Feb 12, 2006

WilliamRoper said:
If you would like, we could do a formal debate on the verses I quoted (with yourself or anybody else who could champion the Reformed position). I agree that GT is way too bloody; I hardly got a cogent response at all when I posted my thread there.

I took a quick look at the verses you posted - they all support the Calvinist position that if a person falls away they were never saved to begin with. Fruit and works are a result of true saving faith - not a means to. Hence the fundamental dfference between us (protestants and catholics).

I appreciate you posting the verses though - I am going to address each verse in detail in my blog - I'll try to have it up in a week or so...

WilliamRoper · Feb 12, 2006

I took a quick look at the verses you posted - they all support the Calvinist position that if a person falls away they were never saved to begin with.

Galatians 5:4 says that the Galatians "fell from grace." 1 Peter 2:1,15-16 clearly states that those who fell away have rejected "the Master who bought them." Hebrews 6:5-6 states that some people will fall away from grace after they "have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come." Romans 12:20-21 implies that it is possible for a real believer to fall away. John 15 says that some of those who have been grafted onto the true vine (Christ) will fall away.

I can't see anything in these verses that imply that any of these people who have or might fall away are false believers. But, since you haven't given any in-depth interpretations of them yet, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you really see something in these passages that I missed.

I appreciate you posting the verses though - I am going to address each verse in detail in my blog - I'll try to have it up in a week or so...

I can't wait to see how you will respond to them.

WilliamRoper · Feb 12, 2006

Many times Calvinists ask me how I am sure that I will persevere to the end, because I don't believe in the Perseverance of the Saints. They think that non-Calvinists are always worrying about whether they will fall away, so they try to prove their doctrine from the Bible. But really, nobody except a Calvinist would ever really worry about a thing like perseverance. Its just not something that we think about very much- its not on our radar screen. We just recognize that a person will be saved if they persevere in Christ to the end. If there never was a Calvinist on the earth, nobody would ever have worried about Perseverance.

Thats just my perspective on this issue.

Calvin's Commentarys and Perseverance

Cajun's for Christ

Deliver me oh Lord, from evil men

Cajun's for Christ

Just a humble servant

broken is a good state

Cajun's for Christ

.

Cajun's for Christ

I AM NOT AN ARMINIAN. STOP ASSUMING.

Cajun's for Christ

I AM NOT AN ARMINIAN. STOP ASSUMING.

.

Cajun's for Christ

Active Member

.

.

.

Deliver me oh Lord, from evil men

I AM NOT AN ARMINIAN. STOP ASSUMING.

I AM NOT AN ARMINIAN. STOP ASSUMING.

Similar threads