Are you saved or delusional?

St_Worm2 said:

Hello Bible Highlighter, actually, I believe that you've missed the point of the passage, and thereby, the principle problem.

Yes, the Lord tells us that they "worked iniquity and sin"/"practiced lawlessness", but that's all that a non-believer is capable of doing (cf 1 Corinthians 2:14). That is, therefore, all that these folks were capable of too, since we know that they were ~never~ Christians (as the Lord made perfectly clear when He said to them, "I ~NEVER~ knew you", no matter what their "claims" to Him in the Judgment are ).

John 17
3 This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.
​

Also, this passage has nothing to do with OSAS. Even proponents of the OSAS doctrine fully admit that for someone to be, "Always Saved", they must be "Once Saved" first (so to speak), and we know that the folks in v22 ~never~ were.

--David

Matthew 7
22 Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’
23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I NEVER knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.’
.​

Click to expand...

Okay, let's consider the possibility that Jesus is referring to those who justified sin in Matthew 7:23. Let's say George Sodini (Who is a real person who did evil in the name of Eternal Security) as an example. This was a man who believed Eternal Security full heartedly and yet he thought his future sins of murder, and the taking of his own life would not affect his salvation status because he truly believed that Jesus would save him based on faith and not of works. He wrote this in his own suicide letter. He is a real person. He actually did kill real people, and he did take his own real life. He was friends with those at his church, and a fellow Deacon friend of his at the church had said that George was saved in a local newspaper article. Now, is it safe to say that Jesus would say to George Sodini, "I never knew you, depart from me you that work iniquity." ?

If so, then what makes George any different from those who justify sin on a smaller level? Meaning, what if God's way of righteousness was so narrow that we cannot justify even one grievous sin (like lying, hate, lusting, etc.) on occasion with the thinking we are saved and we DO actually have to confess and forsake sin to have mercy as per Proverbs 28:13? Because if salvation is not conditional and we have a safety net to sin in some way (because we believe future sin is forgiven us), then such a message can easily lead other brethren to turn God's grace into a license for immorality. Will not those who teach such a belief that teaches that one can sin and still be saved be held accountable? Now, let's say things are different involving George's life. What if George heard you preach about how future sin is forgiven him? What if it was your sermon on how "future sin being forgiven us and how we are not saved by works" that convinced him to kill others and to take his own life? If a belief leads a person to become the next George Sodini, how can that belief be innocent or good? See, the truth should not be so easily misunderstood like that. The truth should always lead a person in the right direction and not the wrong direction.

What if Jesus is not talking about those who have fallen away, but to those who had a wrong view of salvation to begin with (like with George Sodini and or others who justify grievous sins)?

St_Worm2 said:

Hello @redleghunter, yes, that is very sad news indeed about Joshua Harris, and a sad reminder of why we all need to pray often for our pastors and priests, who so often find themselves in the cross hairs of the enemy.

As I see he said (on social media, unfortunately w/o elaboration), "many people tell me that there is a different way to practice faith and I want to remain open to this", and if he actually tried to practice his faith/live a holy life (the kind of life that he wrote about in his articles and books) apart from being (as you just said), "anchored on the Joy of Christ and the Righteousness of God", then a shipwreck of his faith would not only seem possible, but probable

Great points and things to consider! Thank you for those

--David
p.s. - "Anchored on the Joy of Christ and the Righteousness of God" reminds me of the wonderful words to a couple of our hymns, Rock of Ages and My Hope Is Built On Nothing Less (the Solid Rock). Here they are for anyone who cares to remember them, or to read them for the first time. Sadly, hymns like these are no longer a part of worship in many of our churches today.

​

1 Rock of Ages, cleft for me,
Let me hide myself in Thee;
Let the water and the blood,
From Thy wounded side which flowed,
Be of sin the double cure,
Save from wrath and make me pure.

2 Not the labors of my hands
Can fulfill Thy law’s demands;
These for sin could not atone;
Thou must save, and Thou alone:
In my hand no price I bring,
Simply to Thy cross I cling.

3 While I draw this fleeting breath,
When mine eyes shall close in death,
When I rise to worlds unknown,
And behold Thee on Thy throne,
Rock of ages cleft for me,
Let me hide myself in Thee.

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

1 My hope is built on nothing less
Than Jesus’ blood and righteousness;
I dare not trust the sweetest frame,
But wholly lean on Jesus’ name.

Chorus ...... On Christ, the Solid Rock, I stand;
All other ground is sinking sand,
All other ground is sinking sand.

2 When darkness veils His lovely face,
I rest on His unchanging grace;
In ev’ry high and stormy gale,
My anchor holds within the veil.

3 His oath, His covenant, and His blood,
Support me in the whelming flood;
When all around my soul gives way,
He then is all my hope and stay.

4 When He shall come with trumpet sound,
O may I then in Him be found,
Dressed in His righteousness alone,
Faultless to stand before the throne.
​

Click to expand...

But see, if he was able to shipwreck his faith, then Calvinism is not biblical because Calvinism teaches POTS (Perseverance of the Saints).

redleghunter said:

What’s interesting are the threads preaching living pure lives like Pharisees based on human efforts. It’s great to preach purity, the Apostles did a lot of that but it was always anchored on the Joy in Christ and the Righteousness of God.

For example, there’s another thread on a Christian pastor who developed his own list of purity traditions. Down to purity rings and oaths. He just recently denied the faith, said he was wrong, left his wife and says he is no longer a Christian. Even going so far as to deny clear Biblical morals and embracing LGBTQ.

Article:

Joshua Harris’ former church responds to news of him leaving wife, Christianity

Thread:
Joshua Harris’ former church responds to news of him leaving wife, Christianity

Click to expand...

Joshua Harris comes from a Belief Alone-ism type church and not a church like Christ's Sanctified Holy Church (that exists on the Eastern seaboard). For they are the only (significant in size) Trinitarian Sola Scriptura church that believes salvation is by "God's Grace through Faith + Sanctification or God directed works done through the believer." In other words, look at the fruit of that church, and not at the fruit of the church of those who believe in Belief Alone-ism. It was not morals that destroyed his thinking. He did not have a right view of salvation to begin with, and as a result, when he tried to teach morality, it failed. One needs to have a right view of salvation in order to properly apply righteous instruction according to God's Word. If one believes they can sin and still be saved on some level, their righteous instruction can easily backfire.

1 Timothy 6:3-4 says if any man does not agree with the words of Jesus Christ and the doctrine according to godliness, he is proud and he knows nothing.

I would say Joshua Harris did not know anything if he taught that the words of Jesus (like his warnings on sin - Matthew 5:28-30, Matthew 6:15, etc.) did not apply today (like so many teach today).

Joshua Harris created his own set of morals that was not in line with God's Word. It has nothing to do with how salvation is by: God's grace through faith + Works of Faith as taught in the Bible. He did his own thing under the roof of Belief Alone-ism (Which I do not believe is even remotely biblical).

aiki said:

Please think for a moment: Does Jesus ever say what he means by "few"? Ten? Five hundred? A million? There have been many billions of people just over the last two millenia who have gone on to a lost eternity. Even a billion people saved from among the estimated 108 billion people who have lived throughout human history is a relatively small number. That would be .9% of the total number of people who have lived! But is this what Jesus meant by "few"? Or was the number much more radically small? Only in the tens of thousands, maybe? That would be extremely few out of the billions who have lived! This, though, is what it sounds like you might believe: that only a microscopic handful of people will make it into God's kingdom. I can't reconcile that small a number to the loving, gracious, merciful God of Scripture. In fact, if that is what Christ meant by "few," it would be obscene and monstrous. No, I think the number of people who hold to OSAS come no where close to exceeding what Jesus meant by "few." In any case, on the basis of what Jesus said about the number who find the narrow gate and way, an argument can't be made for or against OSAS. We just have no clear idea what "few" meant.

Click to expand...

When Jesus spoke, "narrow is the way" in Matthew 7:14, He said this as a part of His New Covenant (New Testament) teachings He was giving us at the "Sermon on the Mount." Many of His NC or NT teachings that He was giving us at this sermon were filled along with righteous instruction on how to live, and how certain grievous sins can lead to spiritual death or destruction of our souls. The odd thing is that when I talked with others in the Eternal Security camp, they are willing to accept "narrow is the way," but when I mention verses like Matthew 5:28-30, Matthew 6:15, Matthew 12:37, Matthew 25:31-46, Luke 10:25-28, and Matthew 19:17-19, they magically do not mean what they say plainly. These verses must be changed or distorted, or ignored in order to make their view on "Belief Alone-ism," or a "Sin (on some level) and Still Be Saved" type belief work. I have heard all the silly excuses that are not biblical that attempt to undo the plain words of Jesus. In one instance, an Eternal Security Proponent told me that Jesus was speaking metaphorically in Matthew 5:28-30. In another instance, another Eternal Security Proponent told me that Jesus was teaching Old Covenant in Luke 10:25-28 and not New Covenant. But John 12:48 says if we do not receive the words of Jesus, those very words will judge us on the last day. Paul says, if any man does not agree with the words of Jesus Christ, and the doctrine according to godliness, he is proud, and he knows nothing (1 Timothy 6:3-4).

You said:

The OSAS crowd are in the Narrow Way because the Narrow Way is a Person not a system of behaviour (John 10:9; 1 John 5:11-12), a Redeemer and Friend, not a divine scale balancing good works and bad. The OSAS crowd are in the Narrow Way because they are perfectly justified, sanctified, redeemed, regenerated, adopted, and reconciled by and in Christ (1 Corinthians 1:30; Ephesians 1:7; Colossians 1:20-21; Romans 8:15; Titus 3:5), not by anything they do. It is in him - and ONLY in him - that anyone gains acceptance with God (Ephesians 1:6; Acts 4:12). And that is because, unlike us, Jesus is absolutely holy and perfect. No man can do good works sufficient to find acceptance with God. God's standard is perfection and no man can live well enough to meet that standard - not before they are saved or after. And so, God has made Christ the basis upon which He accepts us. And because Jesus' perfection never alters, those who are in him by the Spirit never cease to be accepted by God the Father.

Click to expand...

You cannot rip the "Sermon on the Mount" out of context. When I read the Sermon on the Mount, I do not get the impression of OSAS. Nobody can. You have look to other verses in the Bible that appear to teach OSAS (When they really don't) in order to defend the "narrow way" that Jesus talked about. But you cannot use the context of the "Sermon on the Mount" because it refutes your belief system.

The problem I have with Eternal Security is that it is not only unbiblical, but it seeks to serve one's own sin on some level. If that is the case, then wouldn't God have to agree with our idea that we can sin and still be saved? But can GOD agree with sin? Surely not. GOD is holy. Also, Eternal Security attempts to minimize sin by giving believers a safety net to sin on some level. Would God want us to minimize sin? Surely not. So yeah, I just do not see how you believe what you do. It does not seem remotely biblical, and even moral. But you are free to believe as you wish (of course). For if Eternal Security was true, I would simply go back to the world, and live as I wished. There would be no true incentive to do good. Evil being punished fairly would not exist if the Eternal Security belief was true.

But I am glad it is not that way.

For grace reigns (rules) through righteousness (righteous living) (Romans 5:21).

Note: 1 John 3:7 says he that does righteousness is righteous. We are told not to be deceived on this matter.

aiki said:

See, this is exactly what I was talking about when I said you "Throw the Elephant." Most - if not all - of the verses/passages you've cited above don't actually support your case. But who's going to spend the enormous amount of time necessary to explain why? And this is why people use the "Throw the Elephant" tactic. It stifles opposition under a mountain of words.

Click to expand...

Truth should never intimidate us. I have replied to long lists of verses before several times. If you don't want to take the time to address all of the verses, then take a few of the verses and explain them.

Also, you have to think that if my belief was not biblical, then why are there so many verses that appear to say the same thing?

Also, it is not wrong to post a long list of verses to prove a belief. In post #215, You provided several lists of verses to prove Eternal Security, right? So you cannot judge me for the same thing that you have done. For you have posted a long list of verses to prove your belief before. In other words, that would be like the kettle calling the pot black. It doesn't seem fair that you can provide a list of verses to prove your belief, and I cannot do so?

Please take note that I am going to seek to explain the verses you presented in those so called proof texts you provided for Eternal Security.

aiki said:

So, here is the basic structure of my OSAS presupposition:

1. No man comes to God on his own.

Every man is "dead in trespasses and sins" (Ephesians 2:1) and "alienated and an enemy in his mind" toward God by his wicked works (Colossians 1:21). In this condition, no man ever naturally desires to know and walk with God. And so, God must initiate the process leading to a person's salvation, entirely apart from, and in contradiction to, their natural inclination. This means that our desire to be saved has nothing to do with whether or not God saves us. He is not governed by our wants or wishes in bringing us into relationship with Himself. And it stands to reason, then, that our desire toward Him after salvation, strong or weak, does not dictate whether or not He continues to relate to us as our Heavenly Father.

Click to expand...

I believe Prevenient Grace is the best way to harmonize what Scripture says as a whole on this topic. Prevenient Grace is the belief that God draws men at certain times to see and understand the gospel so as to choose it or reject it of their own free will. Without this illumination or drawing by God, a person cannot understand the gospel. For in the Parable in the Sower, we learn that the first seed did not even understand the gospel message. The devil stole the seed out of their heart before they could understand it. So there are times where a person can hear the gospel and not understand it because they have not been drawn by God yet. But God will draw all men unto Him in His timing, though.

Prevenient Grace Verses:

John 1:9 says,
“That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.”

John 12:32 says,
“And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.”

John 16:8-11 says,
8 “And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:
9 Of sin, because they believe not on me;
10 Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more;
11 Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.”

Romans 2:4 says,
“Or despise you the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leads you to repentance?”

Titus 2:11 says,
“For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,”

1 Timothy 2:3-4 says,
3 “For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

John 3:16 says,
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”

2 Peter 3:9 which states that God “is not willing that any should perish, but for all to come to repentance.”

1 John 2:2 says,
“[Jesus] is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.” (Also see John 1:29 - the Lamb of God takes away the sins of the world).

Hebrews 2:9 essentially says,
"Jesus tasted death for everyone."

Matthew 13:15 says,
"For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.”

Matthew 23:37 (NLT) says,
"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones God's messengers! How often I have wanted to gather your children together as a hen protects her chicks beneath her wings, but you wouldn't let me.”

Deuteronomy 30:19 says,
“I call heaven and earth as witness this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both you and your descendants may live”.

Acts of the Apostles 17:27 says, “he be not far from every one of us”

Acts of the Apostles 16:14 says,
“And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, which worshipped God, heard us: whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul.” (Note: This was an opening of the heart to listen and it was not a change of heart to be instantly saved and regenerated).

aiki said:

So, here is the basic structure of my OSAS presupposition:

1. No man comes to God on his own.

Every man is "dead in trespasses and sins" (Ephesians 2:1) and "alienated and an enemy in his mind" toward God by his wicked works (Colossians 1:21). In this condition, no man ever naturally desires to know and walk with God. And so, God must initiate the process leading to a person's salvation, entirely apart from, and in contradiction to, their natural inclination. This means that our desire to be saved has nothing to do with whether or not God saves us. He is not governed by our wants or wishes in bringing us into relationship with Himself. And it stands to reason, then, that our desire toward Him after salvation, strong or weak, does not dictate whether or not He continues to relate to us as our Heavenly Father.

Click to expand...

Ephesians 2:1 and Colossians 1:21 have to be read in balance with other verses in Scripture. In Matthew 23:27: Jesus desired for Jerusalem to be gathered together like a hen gathers and protects its chicks underneath her wings, but Jerusalem would not allow Jesus to do so.

"Matthew 23:37 (NLT) says,
"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones God's messengers! How often I have wanted to gather your children together as a hen protects her chicks beneath her wings, but you wouldn't let me.”

This means God's will is being thwarted here. God is not forcing them to be saved. He desires them to be saved, but they rejected Him of their own free will. Jesus desired to gather them, but they wouldn't let him.

Also, nothing is said in Ephesians 2:1, and Colossians 1:21 that man is incapable of coming to God and or choosing the Lord of their own free will once God has drawn them at a certain point in their life. You would need a verse or passage that says that GOD chooses men to be saved and it is not of their own will or choosing. But no such Scripture verse or passage says that.

In addition, the Judgment would be a farce or a joke. If God elected some to damnation and not salvation and the person had no control over their own situation to change in desiring to choose God and His good ways, then how can God judge and punish them? That would be like a guy who kicks his dog across the room because it has an uncontrollable pooping problem (When he knows that the poor animal has such a problem). The animal cannot help but to poop. But the master does not care. He will just kick the poor animal even when it cannot control its own bodily functions.

aiki said:

2. God saves us; we don't save ourselves.

God is responsible for drawing us to Christ (John 6:44), for illuminating our minds to His truth and causing repentance (2 Timothy 2:25), and for spiritually regenerating us by His Spirit who places the believer in Christ. (Romans 8:9-11; Titus 3:5). God also justifies, and sanctifies the born-again believer (1 Corinthians 1:30-31), giving him both the desire and the ability to do His will (Philippians 2:13). At every turn, it is God acting upon and for the believer, bringing them on into deeper fellowship with Himself. Salvation, then, is a work of God, not a work of Man. Apart from God, no man has the power to do anything for God - certainly not to bear the responsibility for his own salvation. God has done it all. It remains only for the believer to receive His saving work, not labour to create and sustain his own salvation.

Click to expand...

It is true that God illuminates our minds to the truth, but that does not mean we are going to accept that truth, once it is given to us. A person can willfully sin after they receive the knowledge of the truth. If they do so, there remains no more sacrifice for sin (See: Hebrews 10:26).

As for 2 Timothy 2:25:

Well, the Good News Translation says,

"who is gentle as you correct your opponents, for it may be that God will give them the opportunity to repent and come to know the truth." (2 Timothy 2:25) (GNT).

Now, while I believe the KJV to be the divinely inspired Word of God, it was written in 1600's English (Which influenced other Modern Translations). Although the KJV is correct (it is speaking in a way that we are not familiar with). I believe the Good News Translation conveys the proper truth more clearly here.

How so?

Well, God commands all men everywhere to repent in Acts of the Apostles 17:30.

"but now commandeth all men every where to repent" (Acts of the Apostles 17:30).

Also, Jesus talks about how the Ninevites will rise up in Judgment against this generation because they repented at the preaching of Jonah in Matthew 12:41. How can they rise up and judge this generation for something that was out of the control of this generation to do? It makes no sense.

As for God giving us the desire to do His will in Philippians 2:13:

While God does give us a new heart with new desires, this is not forced upon us. We did choose of our own free will the Lord under God's drawing. For example, Stephen said,


How can they resist the Holy Ghost if you believe that is something that is forced upon a person? That makes no sense.

Philippians 2:13 says,
"For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure."

Again, God working in us to have a desire for God does not mean that He forced us to initially have a desire for God from the beginning. We have a desire for God because He lives inside of us. But nowhere does Scripture say that God gives us this desire apart from own desire from the beginning of our faith (once we were confronted with the gospel under the drawing of God). In fact, we know this is not the case because a person resist the Holy Ghost as per Acts of the Apostles 7:51.

St_Worm2 said:

Hello @redleghunter, yes, that is very sad news indeed about Joshua Harris, and a sad reminder of why we all need to pray often for our pastors and priests, who so often find themselves in the cross hairs of the enemy.

As I see he said (on social media, unfortunately w/o elaboration), "many people tell me that there is a different way to practice faith and I want to remain open to this", and if he actually tried to practice his faith/live a holy life (the kind of life that he wrote about in his articles and books) apart from being (as you just said), "anchored on the Joy of Christ and the Righteousness of God", then a shipwreck of his faith would not only seem possible, but probable

Great points and things to consider! Thank you for those

--David
p.s. - "Anchored on the Joy of Christ and the Righteousness of God" reminds me of the wonderful words to a couple of our hymns, Rock of Ages and My Hope Is Built On Nothing Less (the Solid Rock). Here they are for anyone who cares to remember them, or to read them for the first time. Sadly, hymns like these are no longer a part of worship in many of our churches today.

​

1 Rock of Ages, cleft for me,
Let me hide myself in Thee;
Let the water and the blood,
From Thy wounded side which flowed,
Be of sin the double cure,
Save from wrath and make me pure.

2 Not the labors of my hands
Can fulfill Thy law’s demands;
These for sin could not atone;
Thou must save, and Thou alone:
In my hand no price I bring,
Simply to Thy cross I cling.

3 While I draw this fleeting breath,
When mine eyes shall close in death,
When I rise to worlds unknown,
And behold Thee on Thy throne,
Rock of ages cleft for me,
Let me hide myself in Thee.

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

1 My hope is built on nothing less
Than Jesus’ blood and righteousness;
I dare not trust the sweetest frame,
But wholly lean on Jesus’ name.

Chorus ...... On Christ, the Solid Rock, I stand;
All other ground is sinking sand,
All other ground is sinking sand.

2 When darkness veils His lovely face,
I rest on His unchanging grace;
In ev’ry high and stormy gale,
My anchor holds within the veil.

3 His oath, His covenant, and His blood,
Support me in the whelming flood;
When all around my soul gives way,
He then is all my hope and stay.

4 When He shall come with trumpet sound,
O may I then in Him be found,
Dressed in His righteousness alone,
Faultless to stand before the throne.
​

Click to expand...

He failed because religious pretension can not win. No matter how well you have perfected your message to please the ears of others who also want to hear such a thing done well... But, not Truth!


A reminder from Paul...



Many who wish to lead in the church today do so with a message that they know some people will WANT/LIKE to hear.

Its a message of not what Christians NEED to hear, but what others WANT/LIKE to believe.

Living a Hollywood, feel-good script type of Christianity will fall flat when it was Truth that was needed. Sound doctrine is essential to remain standing after the battle should be over. Many instead, live a make believe Christianity based upon not sound doctrine. Its true. It will be argued against. But, its TRUTH.

Mr Harris failed. Failed because he was living a fine sounding lie that he knew others wanted to hear. A lie based upon espousing some virtues of the Christian life, but without having the real building blocks required to make them unmovable. For the Spirit only gives power to the Truth, not fine sounding words and good intentions.

Good intentions and fine sounding words failed again. Showing us that devotional teachings can not save if that's all you hear.

Bible Highlighter said:

However, you add no conditions to the continuation of the keeping of the gift. If a child is being abusive with their gift that got at Christmas, the parents (if they are responsible and loving parents who care about the well being of their fellow neighbors and the well being of their own child) will take away their gift if that gift was used to harm others in some way. In short, there is a difference between trading hours for dollars like at a job, vs. works of responsibility in owning a free gift. For example: Rick can receive a car as a free gift, but if he runs red lights, hits pedestrians, drives drunk, and constantly texts on the road all the time, there is a good chance that he will destroy his gift, and or lose it.

Click to expand...

Well, this is interesting and thoughtful. I think your point about destroying a gift or losing it is true. But, does the nature of the gift make any difference to your point? Certainly, if Rick drives his car recklessly, he may damage it beyond repair and lose the car entirely. Little Sally in my analogy may hit her doll one too many times on the cat and break the doll beyond repair. But what if the gift isn't an inanimate physical object but a Person? What if the gift is a relationship with someone? And what if that Someone offers himself as a gift to those who don't deserve it? What if he offers himself knowing that he does so to weak, wayward, selfish people who will inevitably violate the relationship?

Jesus "came unto his own and his own received him not"; he moved toward us in love and mercy when we were bound under the power of the World, our own flesh, and the devil (Ephesians 2:1-3); he acted to bring us into relationship with himself when we were alienated from him and enemies in our minds toward him by our wicked works (Colossians 1:21). We didn't deserve him but he stood at the door of our hearts and knocked anyway, waiting for an invitation from us to enter and commune together. (Revelation 3:20) So, how does a Friend who acts toward us with such persistence and love, who is not at all put off by our sin in pursuing a relationship with us, suddenly grow entirely intolerant of our weakness and sinfulness after we've come into relationship with him, cutting us off from himself when we stray into wickedness?

Scripture tells me that my fellowship with Christ (1 Corinthians 1:9; 1 John 1:3) is totally Christ-dependent, not me-dependent. He saved me; I did not save myself; he forged a relationship with me that I could not have forged on my own. And so my relationship with Christ is as secure as the faithfulness and love that moved Christ to save me and make me one of his own is perfect and unchanging. So, no matter how badly I abuse the gift Christ has offered to me in himself, no matter how recklessly I "drive" as a born-again Christian, my relationship to him always remains intact. My sin did not put him off when he moved to offer himself to me as a gift, and it does not put him off after I have accepted his gift, either.

Can I abuse my relationship with Christ with impunity? No. Because Christ loves me, because he is the Good Shepherd, when I stray, he moves to retrieve me from the danger and destruction of the wilderness of sin. I come under his chastisement when I wander. (Hebrews 12:5-11) But a good shepherd never beats his sheep. He does not hit them when they wander off, striking them with his staff until they return to the flock. If he does, they will not follow but will flee from him. Instead, the Good Shepherd lets his sheep taste the bitter consequences of their wandering. He may let them struggle a bit in the thorn bush of their sin, its nettles stabbing and pricking painfully and its branches tangling them horribly before he frees them. But, in the end, he does free them; he doesn't stalk off in anger, casting away his wayward sheep.

More than God's discipline - far more - I am motivated toward God and a holy life because I love my Saviour and desire to show that love in my obedience to, and emulation of, him. I have tried to live under the threat of lost salvation, motivated by Self-preservation and fear, in my walk with God. It just doesn't work. Fear cannot do in my relationship with God what God intends love should do. Oh, fear can motivate all right; but negatively, selfishly, legalistically and hypocritically. And love cannot flourish in an environment of fear. I found I could not love God as He called me to do when I was afraid of Him, terrified of His rejection, wrath and punishment. And this is exactly what the apostle John said would be the case:

1 John 4:18
18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves torment. But he who fears has not been made perfect in love.

Anyway, I've wandered off a bit here...I can do that rather easily. More so as I age.

aiki said:

Well, this is interesting and thoughtful. I think your point about destroying a gift or losing it is true. But, does the nature of the gift make any difference to your point? Certainly, if Rick drives his car recklessly, he may damage it beyond repair and lose the car entirely. Little Sally in my analogy may hit her doll one too many times on the cat and break the doll beyond repair. But what if the gift isn't an inanimate physical object but a Person? What if the gift is a relationship with someone? And what if that Someone offers himself as a gift to those who don't deserve it? What if he offers himself knowing that he does so to weak, wayward, selfish people who will inevitably violate the relationship?

Click to expand...

Question... I God truly omniscient? Is He? Or, is He not?

If the Father must give to His Son those whom will come to Him?

Why would the Father who loves His Son? Give His Son a gift that later on must be taken away?

That is NOT love!




What kind of gift would it be from the Father to give Jesus a gift that will turn bad and must later be thrown out? The Father wants to break his Son's heart??

To say we can lose our salvation is to say the Father is both cruel and incompetent! That the Father is not omniscient and could not foresee what would happen to the gift He gave to His beloved Son.

Can we lose our salvation? Some people conceive of a cheapened God who lacks character and integrity. Who is not omniscient. That perception makes God into a liar.

We perceive Truth no better than we perceive the nature and character of God. To the pure, they see.

Bible Highlighter said:

Joshua Harris comes from a Belief Alone-ism type church and not a church like Christ's Sanctified Holy Church (that exists on the Eastern seaboard). For they are the only (significant in size) Trinitarian Sola Scriptura church that believes salvation is by "God's Grace through Faith + Sanctification or God directed works done through the believer." In other words, look at the fruit of that church, and not at the fruit of the church of those who believe in Belief Alone-ism. It was not morals that destroyed his thinking. He did not have a right view of salvation to begin with, and as a result, when he tried to teach morality, it failed. One needs to have a right view of salvation in order to properly apply righteous instruction according to God's Word. If one believes they can sin and still be saved on some level, their righteous instruction can easily backfire.

1 Timothy 6:3-4 says if any man does not agree with the words of Jesus Christ and the doctrine according to godliness, he is proud and he knows nothing.

I would say Joshua Harris did not know anything if he taught that the words of Jesus (like his warnings on sin - Matthew 5:28-30, Matthew 6:15, etc.) did not apply today (like so many teach today).

Joshua Harris created his own set of morals that was not in line with God's Word. It has nothing to do with how salvation is by: God's grace through faith + Works of Faith as taught in the Bible. He did his own thing under the roof of Belief Alone-ism (Which I do not believe is even remotely biblical).

Click to expand...

I'm not seeing a "belief aloneism" in his theology if he created a purity movement with oaths, steps and church events surrounding it. He and his wife promoted the "sexual prosperity gospel."

Joshua Harris and the sexual prosperity gospel - Religion News Service

redleghunter said:

I'm not seeing a "belief aloneism" in his theology if he created a purity movement with oaths, steps and church events surrounding it. He and his wife promoted the "sexual prosperity gospel."

Joshua Harris and the sexual prosperity gospel - Religion News Service

Click to expand...

There is a huge difference between trying to be pure on your own terms, versus trying to be pure on God's terms (i.e. According to His Word).

He came from a church that taught Belief Alone-ism. So yeah, error was bound to happen in some way. George Sodini thought he could kill a bunch of people and take his own life and be saved because all future sin was forgiven him. There are different degrees of error obviously. Some are not so bad because folks do not act upon their strange thoughts. The point here is that they went outside the Bible and belief alone-ism did not help. There was no true ground for the truth that sexual sin can lead to a loss of salvation according to the Bible. They did not set the rules according to God's Word. They did their own thing. But again, they started off with a wrong foundation. Belief Alone-ism. This is not to say that a person who has not had the truth cannot falter or even fall away from the faith. The point here is that he and his wife both believed in a kind of faith that was not taught in the Bible and it led them farther away from God by their own strange ideas. Strange ideas (Belief Alone-ism) leads to even more strange ideas.

When a person believes in Belief Alone-ism their understanding is skewed to allow for a person to sin and still be saved on some level. If a person violates morality in this way, they can potentially go down deeper down the rabbit hole of error when it comes to basic morality or the goodness of God. For a person has to make things up in the text that are not there in the Bible in order to make Belief Alone-ism work. One example is 1 John 1:9. Eternal Security Proponents will say that this sins are dealing with a loss of fellowship and not a loss of salvation. But nowhere does John's epistle clarify this point in any way. If all future sin is paid for a believer, it would be impossible for them to confess of any sin. That is just one of the many reasons why Belief Alone-ism is not in the Bible. Harris latched on to the idea that you can add to the Bible in this way, and he continued to do so with his own man made purity movement.

aiki said:

More than God's discipline - far more - I am motivated toward God and a holy life because I love my Saviour and desire to show that love in my obedience to, and emulation of, him.

Click to expand...

And the above is what is lost in translation often on these threads. Which you put in the proper perspective.

aiki said:

I have tried to live under the threat of lost salvation, motivated by Self-preservation and fear, in my walk with God. It just doesn't work.

Click to expand...

There is more to be said about not resting in the Joy of Christ in our relationship with Him than being in constant fear. Constant fear denotes a lack of trust. Knowing that the Joy that is in Christ is directly related to the promise of eternal life and the love of God which is beyond our perceptions in this life.

aiki said:

Oh, fear can motivate all right; but negatively, selfishly, legalistically and hypocritically. And love cannot flourish in an environment of fear.

Click to expand...

That's an important point. Absent the Joy that is in Christ Jesus, we would fear and move to make with our hands molded items (idols) in our hearts in the form of what we think would allay the wrath and fear. The Israelites did this. They worshiped YHWH but thought He was unapproachable so worshiped the gods of the nations around them as they were more 'comfortable' and appeasing.

aiki said:

1 John 4:18
18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves torment. But he who fears has not been made perfect in love.

Click to expand...

Amen!

redleghunter said:

And the above is what is lost in translation often on these threads. Which you put in the proper perspective.


There is more to be said about not resting in the Joy of Christ in our relationship with Him than being in constant fear. Constant fear denotes a lack of trust. Knowing that the Joy that is in Christ is directly related to the promise of eternal life and the love of God which is beyond our perceptions in this life.


That's an important point. Absent the Joy that is in Christ Jesus, we would fear and move to make with our hands molded items (idols) in our hearts in the form of what we think would allay the wrath and fear. The Israelites did this. They worshiped YHWH but thought He was unapproachable so worshiped the gods of the nations around them as they were more 'comfortable' and appeasing.

Amen!

Click to expand...

Then why are we told work out our salvation with fear and trembling? (See Philippians 2:12). Why all the trembling if it is not talking about fear?

2 Corinthians 7:1 is another verse most Eternal Security Proponents I have encountered do no believe. It says, "let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God." (2 Corinthians 7:1). Do you believe you can cleanse yourself from all filthiness of he flesh and spirit and perfect holiness in the FEAR of God?

Bible Highlighter said:

There is a huge difference between trying to be pure on your own terms, versus trying to be pure on God's terms (i.e. According to His Word).

Click to expand...

So then this pastor was preaching Gospel plus human works. Don't see how that is "belief only."

Bible Highlighter said:

He came from a church that taught Belief Alone-ism.

Click to expand...

I looked at the church's statement of beliefs. I did not see belief Alone-ism.

Bible Highlighter said:

George Sodini thought he could kill a bunch of people and take his own life and be saved because all future sin was forgiven him.

Click to expand...

Yes there is error and there are errors of degree. A little leaven leavens the whole lump. There is a lot to say about the Ordo Salutis and if these folks who live a lifetime of "Christianity" and then denounce said faith have truly been converted by the Holy Spirit. We would probably agree only God knows His Sheep. And Jesus did say: "they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand."

Sounds like a promise people can "what if" all day long, nonetheless a Promise from God.

aiki said:

Well, this is interesting and thoughtful. I think your point about destroying a gift or losing it is true. But, does the nature of the gift make any difference to your point? Certainly, if Rick drives his car recklessly, he may damage it beyond repair and lose the car entirely. Little Sally in my analogy may hit her doll one too many times on the cat and break the doll beyond repair. But what if the gift isn't an inanimate physical object but a Person? What if the gift is a relationship with someone? And what if that Someone offers himself as a gift to those who don't deserve it?

Click to expand...

Well, the same is true if a man considers his wife as a gift from the Lord (that he has prayed for). Does that mean that the man can cheat on his wife (who he regards as a free gift from God) with him expecting her to stay with him? No. The man has to put forth works of responsibility in showing that he is faithful and loving towards her to maintain that relationship (Which is a gift from God).

You said:

What if he offers himself knowing that he does so to weak, wayward, selfish people who will inevitably violate the relationship?

Click to expand...

God is going to honor any true genuine approach towards Him (regardless of what they may do later). Otherwise the Bible would not teach that a believer can fall away from the faith.

1. We can fall from grace (Galatians 5:4).
   
   
2. We can be moved away from the hope (Colossians 1:23).
   
   
3. We can be a castaway (1 Corinthians 9:27).
   
   
4. We can be cut off just like the Jews if we do not continue in God’s goodness (Romans 11:20-22).
   
   
5. We can sow to the flesh and reap corruption instead of sowing to the Spirit which reaps everlasting life. (Galatians 6:8).
   
   
6. We can deny God by a lack of good works (Titus 1:16).
   
   
7. We can shipwreck our faith (1 Timothy 1:19).
   
   
8. We can deny the faith and be worse than an infidel if we do not provide for our own household (1 Timothy 5:8).
   
   
9. We can err from the faith and pierce ourselves thru with many sorrows if we love and covet after money (1 Timothy 6:10).
   
   
10. Hymnenaeus and Philetus have overthrown the faith of some (2 Timothy 2:18).

You said:

Jesus "came unto his own and his own received him not"; he moved toward us in love and mercy when we were bound under the power of the World, our own flesh, and the devil (Ephesians 2:1-3); he acted to bring us into relationship with himself when we were alienated from him and enemies in our minds toward him by our wicked works (Colossians 1:21). We didn't deserve him but he stood at the door of our hearts and knocked anyway, waiting for an invitation from us to enter and commune together. (Revelation 3:20) So, how does a Friend who acts toward us with such persistence and love, who is not at all put off by our sin in pursuing a relationship with us, suddenly grow entirely intolerant of our weakness and sinfulness after we've come into relationship with him, cutting us off from himself when we stray into wickedness?

Click to expand...

God is merciful and He can forgive us if we confess and forsake sin. But if we think future sin is forgiven us, there is no real need to treat sin in this way. There is no real need to confess and forsake sin on the true correct way. If Proverbs 28:13 is true in what it says (and it is) when it says that he that confesses and forsakes sin shall have mercy, then the idea of the Eternal Security Proponent saying you don't have to confess and forsake sin to have mercy (salvation), they are promoting something that is not actually biblical in regards to Soteriology.

You said:

Scripture tells me that my fellowship with Christ (1 Corinthians 1:9; 1 John 1:3) is totally Christ-dependent, not me-dependent. He saved me; I did not save myself; he forged a relationship with me that I could not have forged on my own. And so my relationship with Christ is as secure as the faithfulness and love that moved Christ to save me and make me one of his own is perfect and unchanging. So, no matter how badly I abuse the gift Christ has offered to me in himself, no matter how recklessly I "drive" as a born-again Christian, my relationship to him always remains intact. My sin did not put him off when he moved to offer himself to me as a gift, and it does not put him off after I have accepted his gift, either.

Can I abuse my relationship with Christ with impunity? No. Because Christ loves me, because he is the Good Shepherd, when I stray, he moves to retrieve me from the danger and destruction of the wilderness of sin. I come under his chastisement when I wander. (Hebrews 12:5-11) But a good shepherd never beats his sheep. He does not hit them when they wander off, striking them with his staff until they return to the flock. If he does, they will not follow but will flee from him. Instead, the Good Shepherd lets his sheep taste the bitter consequences of their wandering. He may let them struggle a bit in the thorn bush of their sin, its nettles stabbing and pricking painfully and its branches tangling them horribly before he frees them. But, in the end, he does free them; he doesn't stalk off in anger, casting away his wayward sheep.

More than God's discipline - far more - I am motivated toward God and a holy life because I love my Saviour and desire to show that love in my obedience to, and emulation of, him. I have tried to live under the threat of lost salvation, motivated by Self-preservation and fear, in my walk with God. It just doesn't work. Fear cannot do in my relationship with God what God intends love should do. Oh, fear can motivate all right; but negatively, selfishly, legalistically and hypocritically. And love cannot flourish in an environment of fear. I found I could not love God as He called me to do when I was afraid of Him, terrified of His rejection, wrath and punishment. And this is exactly what the apostle John said would be the case:

Click to expand...

You are only seeing those verses you prefer to see. You have to read such verses in balance with these other verses:

“...We are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end.” (Hebrews 3:13-14).

"Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life,...” (James 1:12).

“...He that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.” (Matthew 24:13).

"...be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life." (Revelation 2:10).

“To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life,...” (Revelation 2:7).

"...He that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second death." (Revelation 2:11).

"He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life,...” (Revelation 3:5).

"Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life." (Jude 1:21).

We are told to:

1. Continue in the grace of God (Acts of the Apostles 13:43).
   
   
2. Continue in the faith (Acts of the Apostles 14:22) (Colossians 1:23).
   
   
3. Continue in his goodness, otherwise we can be cut off (just like the Jews were cut off) (Romans 11:21-22).

Such statements in the Bible would be meaningless if things are as you say. Yes, God can chastise us, but this is for the purpose for the believer to overcome their grievous sin and not to stay down in the mud. This is for the believer who does not justify sin on any level and or for the believer who cannot potentially lead others to think they can sin and still in bad way be saved by their message (that is no so clear in regards to sin).

You said:

1 John 4:18
18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves torment. But he who fears has not been made perfect in love.

Click to expand...

How do you perfect the love of God?

"But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him." (1 John 2:5).

John says to perfect the love of God, we have to keep His Word. That is how perfect love casts out fear. We have to keep His commandments (cf. 1 John 2:3-4). Ecclesiastes 12:13 says, "Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man."

Also, fear is meaningless if nothing could ever happen to us. If there was no danger to our own souls, then there would be no fear at all of God.

Bible Highlighter said:

When Jesus spoke, "narrow is the way" in Matthew 7:14, He said this as a part of His New Covenant (New Testament) teachings He was giving us at the "Sermon on the Mount." Many of His NC or NT teachings that He was giving us at this sermon were filled along with righteous instruction on how to live, and how certain grievous sins can lead to spiritual death or destruction of our souls. The odd thing is that when I talked with others in the Eternal Security camp, they are willing to accept "narrow is the way," but when I mention verses like Matthew 5:28-30, Matthew 6:15, Matthew 12:37, Matthew 25:31-46, Luke 10:25-28, and Matthew 19:17-19, they magically do not mean what they say plainly. These verses must be changed or distorted, or ignored in order to make their view on "Belief Alone-ism," or a "Sin (on some level) and Still Be Saved" type belief work. I have heard all the silly excuses that are not biblical that attempt to undo the plain words of Jesus. In one instance, an Eternal Security Proponent told me that Jesus was speaking metaphorically in Matthew 5:28-30. In another instance, another Eternal Security Proponent told me that Jesus was teaching Old Covenant in Luke 10:25-28 and not New Covenant. But John 12:48 says if we do not receive the words of Jesus, those very words will judge us on the last day. Paul says, if any man does not agree with the words of Jesus Christ, and the doctrine according to godliness, he is proud, and he knows nothing (1 Timothy 6:3-4).

Click to expand...

All of this is talking completely past my point which was about using numbers to argue for the truth or falsity of a belief. You totally ignored what I wrote, going off on a tangent about the Sermon on the Mount. Why is this? Why do you so often deflect this way? It makes you seem dismissive and thoughtless about your responses, just replying according to your own points of interest rather than to what the person you're responding to has said. Is it that you don't want to admit I'm right? Is it that you see your argument from numbers is faulty and don't want to have to say so? This is certainly what it seems like to me...

Jesus had not yet made the New Covenant through his shed blood at Calvary (Hebrews 13:20; Matthew 26:28) when he preached the first Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5. Was he talking in this sermon about how to live within the New Covenant? No. He was, though, teaching his audience that the OT standard of righteousness was insufficient to allow anyone to enter into God's kingdom. In other words, the most "righteous" among them, the faithful keepers of the law, the Pharisees, weren't righteous enough.

Matthew 5:20
20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.

Who, then, could enter God's kingdom? If the Pharisees weren't getting in, no one was. And this was exactly Christ's point: No one relying upon their own good works, relying upon their success in keeping the rules, will ever be good enough to enter the kingdom of heaven. Jesus, then, wasn't prescribing a manner of living so much as he was setting an impossible standard that could only be met in himself.

Bible Highlighter said:

The odd thing is that when I talked with others in the Eternal Security camp, they are willing to accept "narrow is the way," but when I mention verses like Matthew 5:28-30, Matthew 6:15, Matthew 12:37, Matthew 25:31-46, Luke 10:25-28, and Matthew 19:17-19, they magically do not mean what they say plainly.

Click to expand...

I very much doubt those you were speaking to about these verses appealed to "magic" as justification for their views. But this characterization of their arguments indicates that what I've said about you reducing opposing views to Strawmen, to cartoons of your opponents arguments, is true. You aren't really listening to what they are saying and accurately representing their views to others (or to yourself, I suspect). You're just being dismissive and off-hand (and derogatory) about what they think - which is exactly what you've been doing in this thread, too. Why should people continue to engage you when you respond this way?

The verses you place together in the quotation above do not all make the same point, or argue for the same thing. That you cannot see this explains why you are having problems with understanding correct doctrine.

Bible Highlighter said:

These verses must be changed or distorted, or ignored in order to make their view on "Belief Alone-ism," or a "Sin (on some level) and Still Be Saved" type belief work.

Click to expand...

And I say that you have done the very same thing on your side. I've shown how in a number of instances now in this very thread.

Bible Highlighter said:

You cannot rip the "Sermon on the Mount" out of context.

Click to expand...

Yes, I know. Which is why I haven't. What, though, does this have to do with the quotation of my comments to which you appear to be responding? I don't mention the Sermon on the Mount even once in the quotation. Clearly, you couldn't care less about the points I'm making; you simply want to make your own points, even if they have nothing to do with my own. Yikes.

Bible Highlighter said:

When I read the Sermon on the Mount, I do not get the impression of OSAS.

Click to expand...

And what OSAS proponent suggests that you should? I certainly didn't in the quotation associated with your comment here. As I did in an earlier post in this thread, I ask you again: why are you trying to make a sermon to unregenerate people still living under the OT covenant prescriptive for the spiritually-regenerate under the New Covenant?

Bible Highlighter said:

You have look to other verses in the Bible that appear to teach OSAS

Click to expand...

They don't merely "appear" to teach it; the actually DO teach it!

Bible Highlighter said:

But you cannot use the context of the "Sermon on the Mount" because it refutes your belief system.

Click to expand...

No, because it was delivered to pre-Calvary, unregenerate people living under the OT covenant, not to born-again believers.

Bible Highlighter said:

The problem I have with Eternal Security is that it is not only unbiblical, but it seeks to serve one's own sin on some level.

Click to expand...

Actually, the view that serves sin is your own. It is at its core entirely Self-serving. And this is why it always ends up producing legalism, self-righteousness and hypocrisy and corrupting love for God and others.

Bible Highlighter said:

But can GOD agree with sin? Surely not. GOD is holy.

Click to expand...

I don't ask God to agree with sin. That's not part of OSAS doctrine. I thought you knew what OSAS folk believed. Oh, but maybe this is just another of your dismissive cartoons of what they believe...

Bible Highlighter said:

Also, Eternal Security attempts to minimize sin by giving believers a safety net to sin on some level.

Click to expand...

No, it simply recognizes that a believer's acceptance with God has nothing to do with them and everything to do with Christ.

Bible Highlighter said:

So yeah, I just do not see how you believe what you do.

Click to expand...

And this is, evidently, because you've never really stopped to carefully consider what I believe. You're far too busy blindly lobbing counter-arguments to do so.

Bible Highlighter said:

For if Eternal Security was true, I would simply go back to the world, and live as I wished.

Click to expand...

Then you don't really understand the Gospel or OSAS.

Bible Highlighter said:

There would be no true incentive to do good.

Click to expand...

??? Are you kidding me?! Goodness! What a thing to say! You really don't understand the Gospel. The incentive - the only incentive - God intends we should have for our obedience to Him, and the only motive for our obedience He accepts, is LOVE.

Matthew 22:35-38
35 Then one of them, a lawyer, asked Him a question, testing Him, and saying,
36 “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law?”
37 Jesus said to him, ‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’
38 This is the first and great commandment.

1 Corinthians 13:1-3
1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I have become sounding brass or a clanging cymbal.
2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.
3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and give my body to be burned, but have not love, it profits me nothing.

1 John 4:16
16 And we have known and believed the love that God has for us. God is love, and he who abides in love abides in God, and God in him.

1 John 4:18-19
18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves torment. But he who fears has not been made perfect in love.
19 We love Him because He first loved us.

If it isn't love that is at the heart of your relationship with God, that fuels your walk with Him at every point, then I wonder greatly about your claim to be born-again.

redleghunter said:

So then this pastor was preaching Gospel plus human works. Don't see how that is "belief only."

Click to expand...

Was he saying the human works he was promoting were for salvation? Even if this was the case, (no offense, but) he would have taken this tactic of adding to the Bible from Belief Alone-ism as his application guide. Again, Belief Alone Proponents say that future sin is forgiven us. But 1 John 1:9 mentions how we must confess sin in order to be forgiven of sin, and there is no mention in the Bible clearly about any kind of sin that is merely a loss of fellowship and not a loss of salvation. If Belief Alone-ism adds to Scripture (and I believe it does), then this would lay the groundwork for Harris to continue to do so in some new kind of belief that he wanted to run with on his own.

You said:

I looked at the church's statement of beliefs. I did not see belief Alone-ism.

Yes there is error and there are errors of degree. A little leaven leavens the whole lump. There is a lot to say about the Ordo Salutis and if these folks who live a lifetime of "Christianity" and then denounce said faith have truly been converted by the Holy Spirit.

Click to expand...

They believe in Luther's Justification by faith alone.

Martin Luther and Justification by Grace Alone

This is Sola Fide or Belief Alone-ism.

They say the following,

"“…to believe the gospel is not only to accept the awesome truths that 1) God is holy, 2) we are hopeless sinners, "

Beliefs

Wow. They believe they are hopeless sinners? That means no Sanctification or holy living for them. They can sin and still be saved because of their belief on Jesus. This is the same sad ole tune I hear time and time again.

We would probably agree only God knows His Sheep. And Jesus did say: "they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand."

Click to expand...

As I have already said in this thread before: Again, you have to read that portion of Scripture with verse 27 that says that the kind of sheep that cannot be snatched out of his hand are the kind of sheep that FOLLOW Jesus. This is not talking about lazy and sinful rebellious sheep here.

Bible Highlighter said:

Then why are we told work out our salvation with fear and trembling? (See Philippians 2:12). Why all the trembling if it is not talking about fear?

Click to expand...

Is the fear the wrath of God in Philippians chapter 2? Loss of the Gift of Salvation through Christ Jesus?


Verse 13 pretty much answers this. I mean answers the question if we are orphans alone in trying to figure things out, or somehow "your salvation" means we earned it or start to keep it as such belonging to us. The 'work out' here is to continually work to bring something to completion. And if we pay attention to the 'epistle of Joy' which is Philippians this is directly related to being partners in the Gospel and spreading the Gospel (see chapter 1). So no, our faith is not comatose. We are not working on it, we are in partnership with other believers to continually do the will and purpose of God---To bring it about.

Fear and trembling is not "will God pull out the carpet from under me, and I'm not saved anymore?" No, it must be healthy fear of offending God and a righteous awe and respect for Him. Kind of like how we should fear our dads. Knowing our dads main mission is to raise us in the faith. If we stray from dads rules we get the belt, paddle, hand etc. If we stray from the Father He will love us by chastising us. In the OT it was called chastised with rods. That can be very painful and yes we should fear this tough love.

Bible Highlighter said:

2 Corinthians 7:1 is another verse most Eternal Security Proponents I have encountered do no believe. It says, "let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God." (2 Corinthians 7:1). Do you believe you can cleanse yourself from all filthiness of he flesh and spirit and perfect holiness in the FEAR of God?

Click to expand...

Only through the Holy Spirit. That's the point.

But it seems you believe we can "cleanse ourselves" in the way that Christ cleanses us? I hope not. Paul is most likely alluding to the OT calls to put away idols and refrain from the practices of the world. Why did he say that? You left out the most important part of the verse:



Notice "having these promises" is the mindset, the knowledge that God keeps His promises that we should have such an attitude and practice to keep ourselves from defilement of the flesh and spirit. And perfection is the example of Jesus Christ Who we must emulate.

That's a far cry from the continual straw man presented in these threads of "are you really saved" of a person who supposedly prays the sinner's prayer (which is a revivalist Finneyism) and then goes about their lives with no change. It is God Who takes the heart of stone and replaces it with a heart of flesh. It is God Who converts us in which the heart He gave us repents and calls upon the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ. It is not some human process of "I said the words, got baptized, now have to follow the rules." That's the world's false gospel which was preached widespread in revivalist tents in the late 19th century.

This is the sobering Truth:



Sobering and concrete.