Hey brother, yes, I emphasized one side of the equation more than the other to make the point I was trying to make in that post. I didn't include my complete understanding of perseverance/eternal security, I only hinted at, like this:
).
Hey brother, yes, I emphasized one side of the equation more than the other to make the point I was trying to make in that post. I didn't include my complete understanding of perseverance/eternal security, I only hinted at, like this:
...true saints of God will persevere in their faith (albeit imperfectly)...The qualifying phrase (in bold) was actually my own, cryptic reference to this far more complete thought on the matter from the Westminster Confession of Faith (which I could have easily referenced in my last post but unfortunately failed to do):
Chapter XVII. Of the Perseverance of the Saints
Section I.–They whom God hath accepted in his Beloved, effectually called and sanctified by his Spirit, can neither totally nor finally fall away from the state of grace; but shall certainly persevere therein to the end, and be eternally saved.
Section II.–This perseverance of the saints depends, not upon their own freewill, but upon the immutability of the decree of election, flowing from the free and unchangeable love of God the Father; upon the efficacy of the merit and intercession of Jesus Christ; the abiding of the Spirit and of the seed of God within them; and the nature of the covenant of grace; from all which ariseth also the certainty and infallibility thereof.
Section III.–Nevertheless they may, through the temptations of Satan and of the world, the prevalence of corruption remaining in them, and the neglect of the means of their perseverance, fall into grievous sins; and for a time continue therein: whereby they incur God's displeasure, and grieve his Holy Spirit; come to be deprived of some measure of their graces and comforts; have their hearts hardened, and their consciences wounded; hurt and scandalise others, and bring temporal judgments upon themselves.
I'm very sorry if what I said was upsetting to you (and I can understand from your POV why it probably was). I'll try my best to be a little clearer (and less cryptic) next time, but please don't hesitate to point these kind of mistakes out to me again whenever you see me making them (I truly appreciate the fact that you took the time to do so
God bless you! (1 Thessalonians 5:23-24)
--David
Perhaps this will prove useful to you. Here is the original text (Westminster Confession of Faith) of 1646, from the manuscript of Cornelius Burges, with the Assembly’s proof texts, as published in the modern critical edition of 1937 by S. W. Carruthers.
Yes, it's always best to avoid those who are able to reveal false teaching and defend the truth.
Where in the world would you or anyone else get this nonsense idea from?
Yes, I agree. His conclusion regarding my views are totally unbelievable, since I absolutely reject annihilationism.
How come Calvinists cannot understand 1 Tim 4:1 or Luke 8:13?
It is important to discern between positional and progressive sanctification. If one cannot do that, they cannot grasp the truth about sanctification. Being sealed IN Christ means the believer is positionally sanctified. However, progressive sanctification depends on the believer growing up in respect to his salvation (1 Pet 2:2).
If they actually did believe in Jesus Christ for salvation, they ARE saved and ARE never going to perish. But they will not have a pleasant life on earth, due to God's painful discipline (Heb 12:11) and will lose eternal rewards, given only to faithful believers.
I know you took BCSenior's advice to ignore me, but for everyone else, if you really do "care more about the truth than your feelings", why have you so blatantly rejected the clear words of Jesus in John 10:28. That recipients of eternal life shall never perish.
Except John 10:28, for example. Or 1 Pet 1:23. Or many more verses.
Wow. John 10:28 and 1 Pet 1:23 couldn't be any more clear.
Hey, thanks for this link. What I read from the WCF is not "perseverance" in the sense of continuing in the faith, or continuing to believe, but eternal security, which is certainly biblical.
They will exist eternally, but, since they aren't in a free or forgiven state, calling it "life" would be a misnomer. Rather, call it a constant state of being born and dying in every age to come; "destruction" would be a better word for it.
Okay, David, this is very impressive ...
Perhaps THIS above is the most sound theology so far.
Are you serious??!!
Re: the Westminster Confession of Faith ...
No offence but that sounds kinda like something mankind made up. But good to know that death and the grave live on in the Lake. I was worried the Kingdom had eliminated the need for them.
