Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Supporter
May 28, 2018
13,006
5,622
68
Pennsylvania
✟780,938.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
We both need someone who really understands Molinism, because I did not get from the OP what you are saying.

As far as Romans 9 goes:

Paul uses two teaching methods throughout Romans even secular philosophy classes will use Romans as the best example of these methods. Paul does an excellent job of building one premise on the previous premises to develop his final conclusions. Paul uses an ancient form of rhetoric known as diatribe (imaginary debate) asking questions and most of the time giving a strong “By no means” and then goes on to explain “why not”. Paul’s method goes beyond just a general diatribe and follows closely to the diatribes used in the individual laments in the Psalms and throughout the Old Testament, which the Jewish Christians would have known extensively. These “questions or comments” are given by an “imaginary” student making it more a dialog with the readers (students) and not just a “sermon”.

The main topic repeated extensively in Romans is the division in the Christian house churches in Rome between the Jews and Gentile Christians. You can just look up how many times Jews and gentiles are referred to see this as a huge issue.

The main question (a diatribe question) in Romans 9 Paul addresses is God being fair or just Rms. 9: 14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all!

This will take some explaining, since just prior in Romans 9, Paul went over some history of God’s dealings with the Israelites that sounds very “unjust” like “loving Jacob and hating Esau” before they were born, but remember in all of Paul’s diatribes he begins before, just after or before and just after with strong support for the wrong answer (this makes it more of a debate and giving the opposition the first shot as done in all diatribes).

Some “Christians” do not seem to understand How Paul uses diatribes and think since he just showed God being “unjust” and saying God is “not unjust” that God has a special God definition of “just”, making God “just” by His standard and appearing totally unjust by human standards. God is not a hypocrite and does not redefine what He told us to be true.

Who in Rome would be having a “problem” with God choosing to work with Isaac and Jacob instead of Ishmael and Esau? Would the Jewish Christian have a problem with this or would it be the Gentile Christians?

If God treaded you as privileged and special would you have a problem or would you have a problem if you were treated seemingly as common and others were treated with honor for no apparent reason?

This is the issue and Paul will explain over the rest of Romans 9-11.

Paul is specific with the issue Rms. 9: 19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?”

The Jews were created in a special honorable position that would bring forth the Messiah and everyone else was common in comparison (the Gentiles).

How do we know Paul is specifically addressing the Jew/Gentile issue? Rms. 9: 30 What then shall we say? That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; 31 but the people of Israel, who pursued the law as the way of righteousness, have not attained their goal. 32 Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone.

Paul is showing from the position of being made “common” vessels by God the Gentiles had an advantage over the Israelites (vessels of honor) that had the Law, since the Law became a stumbling stone to them. They both needed faith to rely on God’s Love to forgive them.

Without going into the details of Romans 9-11 we conclude with this diatribe question: Romans 11: 11 Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious. 12 But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their full inclusion bring!

The common vessels (gentiles) and the vessels of honor (Jews) are equal individually in what is really significant when it comes to salvation, so God is not being unjust or unfair with either group.

If there is still a question about who is being addressed in this section of Rms. 9-11, Paul tells us: Rms. 11: 13 I am talking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch as I am the apostle to the Gentiles, I take pride in my ministry 14 in the hope that I may somehow arouse my own people to envy and save some of them.

Rm 9:22 What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction?

This verse is not saying all the “vessels” created for a “common purpose” were created for destruction (they were not made from the start by the Potter “clay pigeons”). Everything that leaves the potter’s shop is of great quality. Those vessels for destruction can come from either the common group or the honor group, but God is being patient with them that will eventually be destroyed. The vessels God does develop great wrath against, will be readied for destruction, but how did they become worthy of destruction since they left the potter’s shop with his mark on them? Any vessel (honorable or common) that becomes damaged is not worthy of the potters signature and He would want it destroyed.

To understand this as Common vessels and special vessels look at the same idea using the same Greek words of Paul in 2 Tim 2: 20. There Paul even points out the common can become the honored vessel.

Just because Paul uses a Potter as being God in his analogy and Jerimiah uses a Potter as being God in his analogy, does not mean the analogies are conveying the exact same analogy. Jerimiah is talking about clay on the potter’s wheel being change while still being malleable clay (which fits the changing of Israel), but Paul is talking about two pots (vessels) so they cannot both be Israel, the clay is the same for both and the clay is not changing the outcome of the pot. The two pots (vessels) are completed and a person is asking “Why did you make me like this”, so it is about “how a person is made (born)” and not a nation.

Since Jerimiah talks only about one pot on the wheel changing and Paul is talking about two kinds of completed pots (vessels), who are the two different pots?


Paul is saying in 2 Tim 2: 21 even after leaving the shop the common vessels can cleanse themselves and thus become instruments for a special purpose. So, who is the common vessel and who is the special vessel in this analogy?

That is a short explanation, since you really need to study all of Romans especially chapters 9, 10 and 11. Also please look at individual laments in the Psalms and diatribes in general, I really cut those short.

This is not the first time you have gone to the trouble to tell us this about Romans 9 for similar purpose. Most of what you say is self-evident, and there is little I dispute about it, besides your need to imply that it therefore somehow excludes what Reformed Theology teaches by use of it.

I could more easily use the Acts 16:31 'believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved', perhaps evangelism's favorite phrase for at least the last 65 years I have been alive, showing contextually that it was said to the Philippian jailer who was in fear for his physical life, and the well-being of his family, and thus to imply that therefore it had nothing to do with spiritual salvation. (No, I'm not saying it has nothing to do with spiritual salvation —it is just an example of what you are doing.)
 
Upvote 0

Rapture Bound

Active Member
Supporter
Jun 30, 2021
342
67
64
Massachusetts
✟178,545.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Mark Quayle said," To me it makes no sense to say that something is possible if it will not actually happen. To me, 'possibility' is like 'chance' —only our consideration. But I don't mind if people treat it as actual possibility. When God talks of possibility it makes no sense to say it will happen, so he must be 'talking down' to us, or something of that sort, which he does many other times and ways, even to the point of using anthropomorphisms."

It would be contradictory to say, "You can lose your salvation, but you cannot." It is not contradictory to say, "You can lose your salvation but you will not."

I agree with Evan Minton when he stated, "The Bible seems to affirm two mutually exclusive positions. How is this possible? Does The Bible contradict itself? Does it teach that a Christian both can and cannot lose their salvation? Does it teach that it’s possible to lose your salvation and it’s impossible to lose your salvation? How do we reconcile these two seemingly contradictory sets of scriptures?

The above questions are actually worded wrongly. It would indeed be a contradiction to say “You can and cannot lose your salvation” or “Salvation loss is possible and yet impossible”. But that is not the position I take. I take that while it is possible for one to lose their salvation, this possibility will never become actualized. You can lose your salvation, you just won’t.

It is contradictory to say “You can lose your salvation, but you can't." It is not contradictory to say “You can lose your salvation, but you won't." The former statement makes two mutually exclusive modal statements, while the latter makes a modal statement followed by a de facto statement".

We need to be careful not to conflate modality with actuality. Can a Christian fall away? That is a modal question, a question of what can or cannot happen. Will the elect fall away? That is a de facto question, what will or will not happen. Yes, losing your salvation is possible. No, it won’t actually happen......

Just because something is possible doesn't mean that it will happen.
Being trampled by a herd of elephants is something that could happen to me in my lifetime. That does not mean that it will, in fact, happen to me. And should I never actually get trampled by a herd of elephants during my lifetime, that fact in no way negates the possibility that I could have done otherwise (it was certainly within my ability or capacity to have done so). Many mistakenly believe that that a middle knowledge approach to Providence entails determinism, which I used to think myself but eventually saw that it did not. This view is a Molinist view. One does not need to adopt this apostasy/security model in order to be a Molinist, but one needs to be a Molinist in order to adopt this model.

Prior to creating this world God knew (via his middle knowledge) the exact conditions (like the time they would be born, the place they would grow up in, the family they would be born into, the school they would attend, the job they would work, the group of friends they would surround themselves with, etc.) to put an individual in that would result in that person freely choosing to follow Jesus (although He also foreseen that there would be others that would never choose to follow Jesus no matter what favorable conditions they would be placed in). God also knew (via his middle knowledge) the exact conditions to put that same individual in so that they would freely choose to follow Jesus their entire life, never falling away.

The Molinist would say that among the many conditions that God would have to put that individual, one of those conditions is exposure to warnings of the fate he or she would suffer if they denied Christ. On this understanding, the warning passages of scripture are a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for Christians to freely persevere. So, the Molinist contends that God knew he needed to give these warnings in scripture or else at least some people would not freely persevere. And since God desires that all true believers would persevere he uses the warnings as a means to that end.

We are given an exceedingly precious (de facto) promise in Phil.1:6, "being confident of this very thing, that He who has begun a good work in you will complete it until the day of Jesus Christ;" And if that "good work" is a reference to the believer's salvation, which I believe the context of Philippians bears out, just how does God go about accomplishing it? What are the means that He employs in addition to the warning passages throughout the scriptures in order to fulfill His promise?

There are so many gifts (means/conditions) that God bestows upon each of His true followers during their earthly pilgrimage in order to their freely persevering!....the convicting presence and enabling power over sin provided by the indwelling Holy Spirit, the rod of God's chastening, fellowship with other believers, fasting, prayer, worship/song, study/understanding of His Word, the exhortations and precious promises scattered throughout the scriptures, the strengthening of a believer's waning faith,... to name just some of His provisions.

But God doesn't stop there, because He knows each of His sheep so very intimately, He knows just when and how to specifically bless and preserve them! Every blessing is "tailor made" and is distributed in innumerable ways. To one it could be the encouragement of a friend during a time of utter despair; to another, the comfort of a pet in their time of loneliness. The countless testimonies of His perfect timing and provision spoken forth by His precious children could no doubt fill volumes.

James 1:17,"Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows."

Jude 1;24-25,"Jude, a bondservant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James, To those who are called, sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ".. "Now to Him who is able to keep you from stumbling, And to present you faultless Before the presence of His glory with exceeding joy, To God our Savior, Who alone is wise, Be glory and majesty, Dominion and power, Both now and forever. Amen.
 
Upvote 0

Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Supporter
May 28, 2018
13,006
5,622
68
Pennsylvania
✟780,938.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
It would be contradictory to say, "You can lose your salvation, but you cannot." It is not contradictory to say, "You can lose your salvation but you will not."
In your first, which you call contradictory: Not if in the one case, the Christian, member of the local church and presumed member of the true church, is in fact not after all regenerated, while the other is regenerated. The statement does not assume the person is saved, but that (apparently) he thinks he is. So we are admonished to work out our salvation. Thus we can speak as though one is elect, believing that he is, even, but not knowing if he is.

In your second which you say is not contradictory, I agree, but not with your reasons how it is so.

We need to be careful not to conflate modality with actuality. Can a Christian fall away? That is a modal question, a question of what can or cannot happen. Will the elect fall away? That is a de facto question, what will or will not happen. Yes, losing your salvation is possible. No, it won’t actually happen......

I see no need to go to molinism to agree with that paragraph in essence. I refer to the question of free will: there are some who want to say that free will is not only in those the Son of Man has made free, but in the lost. The Bible says the lost will not submit —indeed they cannot. It, to my mind, anyway, implies they cannot because they will not. Their will is unable to seek God. This doesn't mean they have no choice: They ALWAYS choose willingly, against God.

There is no need for Molinism in a structure where God uses means to accomplish his ends. The warnings, and the choices, are means.
 
Upvote 0

Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Supporter
May 28, 2018
13,006
5,622
68
Pennsylvania
✟780,938.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
Prior to creating this world God knew (via his middle knowledge) the exact conditions (like the time they would be born, the place they would grow up in, the family they would be born into, the school they would attend, the job they would work, the group of friends they would surround themselves with, etc.) to put an individual in that would result in that person freely choosing to follow Jesus (although He also foreseen that there would be others that would never choose to follow Jesus no matter what favorable conditions they would be placed in). God also knew (via his middle knowledge) the exact conditions to put that same individual in so that they would freely choose to follow Jesus their entire life, never falling away.
Would you claim it less accurate to say that God CAUSED the exact conditions (like the time they would be born, the place they would grow up in, the family they would be born into, the school they would attend, the job they would work, the group of friends they would surround themselves with, etc.) that would result in the individual choosing what he does? After all, you do say he PUT that same individual into the exact conditions.

But my real question is why you must say, "freely choose". What do you really mean by that?
 
Upvote 0

Rapture Bound

Active Member
Supporter
Jun 30, 2021
342
67
64
Massachusetts
✟178,545.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
There is no need for Molinism in a structure where God uses means to accomplish his ends. The warnings, and the choices, are means."

Quite the opposite. Problem is, the vast majority (in fact all those that I have ever read) in the Reformed camp believe the warning passages are not addressed to true believers - just "professing but not actually possessing" believers. So how can these passages serve as a means to an end for them?...they simply cannot.
Even the most prominent Reformed (Calvinist) scholars such as John Owen and Charles Spurgeon fall into this category and deny there is even one passage in the N.T. that says a genuine believer can forfeit their salvation.

Don't get me wrong, I have read much of the works of John Owen for instance, and agree with much of what he has written, certainly a gifted theologian. I agree with much of what Reformed theologians hold to, especially in areas such as justification, sanctification, and imputed righteousness ; but in the subject of predestination I disagree, especially with the 5-point Calvinist version of it.
 
Upvote 0

Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Supporter
May 28, 2018
13,006
5,622
68
Pennsylvania
✟780,938.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
There is no need for Molinism in a structure where God uses means to accomplish his ends. The warnings, and the choices, are means."

Quite the opposite. Problem is, the vast majority (in fact all those that I have ever read) in the Reformed camp believe the warning passages are not addressed to true believers - just "professing but not actually possessing" believers. So how can these passages serve as a means to an end for them?...they simply cannot.
Even the most prominent Reformed (Calvinist) scholars such as John Owen and Charles Spurgeon fall into this category and deny there is even one passage in the N.T. that says a genuine believer can forfeit their salvation.

Don't get me wrong, I have read much of the works of John Owen for instance, and agree with much of what he has written, certainly a gifted theologian. I agree with much of what Reformed theologians hold to, especially in areas such as justification, sanctification, and imputed righteousness ; but in the subject of predestination I disagree, especially with the 5-point Calvinist version of it.

So now I think I know, finally, what you mean by saying that they deny the warnings are for the elect, i.e. that the elect need not heed the warnings. You don't hear them actually saying that —it is simply your logical extraction from what they do say, that the salvation of the elect is secure. Like I do, they say that if one of the supposed elect is to fall away, fail to repent or obey as apostasy, they are not elect. Thus, logically, it is not possible for the elect to do what will cause their non-election. The warnings ARE for the elect to heed. But there is no possibility of their completely falling away.

I have heard that some say that OSAS means that it is all automatic, and no need to obey. But I have never heard it myself, that I can remember, from any Reformed believer.

"Even though we speak like this, beloved, we are convinced of better things in your case—things that accompany salvation." Hebrews 6:9
 
Upvote 0

bling

Regular Member
Supporter
Feb 27, 2008
16,163
1,805
✟794,962.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
M
Prior to creating this world God knew (via his middle knowledge) the exact conditions (like the time they would be born, the place they would grow up in, the family they would be born into, the school they would attend, the job they would work, the group of friends they would surround themselves with, etc.) to put an individual in that would result in that person freely choosing to follow Jesus (although He also foreseen that there would be others that would never choose to follow Jesus no matter what favorable conditions they would be placed in). God also knew (via his middle knowledge) the exact conditions to put that same individual in so that they would freely choose to follow Jesus their entire life, never falling away.

The Molinist would say that among the many conditions that God would have to put that individual, one of those conditions is exposure to warnings of the fate he or she would suffer if they denied Christ. On this understanding, the warning passages of scripture are a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for Christians to freely persevere. So, the Molinist contends that God knew he needed to give these warnings in scripture or else at least some people would not freely persevere. And since God desires that all true believers would persevere he uses the warnings as a means to that end.

We are given an exceedingly precious (de facto) promise in Phil.1:6, "being confident of this very thing, that He who has begun a good work in you will complete it until the day of Jesus Christ;" And if that "good work" is a reference to the believer's salvation, which I believe the context of Philippians bears out, just how does God go about accomplishing it? What are the means that He employs in addition to the warning passages throughout the scriptures in order to fulfill His promise?

There are so many gifts (means/conditions) that God bestows upon each of His true followers during their earthly pilgrimage in order to their freely persevering!....the convicting presence and enabling power over sin provided by the indwelling Holy Spirit, the rod of God's chastening, fellowship with other believers, fasting, prayer, worship/song, study/understanding of His Word, the exhortations and precious promises scattered throughout the scriptures, the strengthening of a believer's waning faith,... to name just some of His provisions.

But God doesn't stop there, because He knows each of His sheep so very intimately, He knows just when and how to specifically bless and preserve them! Every blessing is "tailor made" and is distributed in innumerable ways. To one it could be the encouragement of a friend during a time of utter despair; to another, the comfort of a pet in their time of loneliness. The countless testimonies of His perfect timing and provision spoken forth by His precious children could no doubt fill volumes.

James 1:17,"Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows."

Jude 1;24-25,"Jude, a bondservant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James, To those who are called, sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ".. "Now to Him who is able to keep you from stumbling, And to present you faultless Before the presence of His glory with exceeding joy, To God our Savior, Who alone is wise, Be glory and majesty, Dominion and power, Both now and forever. Amen.
You said: “Many mistakenly believe that that a middle knowledge approach to Providence entails determinism, which I used to think myself but eventually saw that it did not.”

I am one who believes, “a middle knowledge approach to Providence entails determinism”, and after reading all you have written and listening to all William Lane Craig said, I still believe, “a middle knowledge approach to Providence entails determinism”.

Here is what you said: “to put an individual in that would result in that person freely choosing to follow Jesus (although He also foreseen that there would be others that would never choose to follow Jesus no matter what favorable conditions they would be placed in)

What is left out of the discussion: the determining of the individual’s disposition prior to creation is determining the saved or lost. It is not the free will choice of the individual but the predetermined disposition of the individual. Most importunately the disposition is one God can work with or a disposition God cannot work with, which determines saved or lost.

The alternative: is to have everyone, who becomes a mature adult, born with a spectrum of dispositions all of which God can work with, to result in everyone of these individual’s being saved, but some, of their own free will, chose to never accept God’s help (charity as charity) and are thus lost (this is totally fair/just and not foreordained). The system of salvation is foreordained (accepting or rejecting help.)
 
Upvote 0

Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Supporter
May 28, 2018
13,006
5,622
68
Pennsylvania
✟780,938.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
What is left out of the discussion: the determining of the individual’s disposition prior to creation is determining the saved or lost. It is not the free will choice of the individual but the predetermined disposition of the individual. Most importunately the disposition is one God can work with or a disposition God cannot work with, which determines saved or lost.

I don't see these two choosings as mutually exclusive, logically. As naturalism (without God) would have it, all our choices are still caused, yet they are still our choices. No roboticism. If, then, God at the head of the chain of causation determines our choices, (causing them through the use of that chain of causation), how is that suddenly robotic? Please answer. I haven't heard an answer to that yet —just restatements of the premise: that if God determines, there is no actual choice on our part.
 
Upvote 0

bling

Regular Member
Supporter
Feb 27, 2008
16,163
1,805
✟794,962.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I don't see these two choosings as mutually exclusive, logically. As naturalism (without God) would have it, all our choices are still caused, yet they are still our choices. No roboticism. If, then, God at the head of the chain of causation determines our choices, (causing them through the use of that chain of causation), how is that suddenly robotic? Please answer. I haven't heard an answer to that yet —just restatements of the premise: that if God determines, there is no actual choice on our part.
I do not know about all naturalist, but some espouse the idea: “there is only one first cause and everything other “action” is the effect of that first cause” so not any other first causes. I might agree with that conclusion, if there was no God or if there was just a God that wound the clock up and let it play out without His further involvement.

Christians believe God is around making constant changes as a first causer of many actions that would not be part of the first cause.

I also believe God has the power and Love to allow at least some humans to make some very limited first causes in their life that is not just the product of God’s first actions or even prior actions.
 
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Sorry guys about the multiple "nm" posts (= never mind). The moderators informed me that we cannot delete our posts completely, but instead to write "nm". My problems began when I added my avatar pic incorrectly and tried fixing the problem, but only made it worse. Sure hope I don't mess things up again.

When I want to remove what I have written, I just put three periods or dots and then, I select them with the font color of white (Which can be found in the tools box above). This makes it look like my post is entirely blank.

Hope this helps, and may God bless you.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

fhansen

Oldbie
Sep 3, 2011
13,887
3,526
✟320,837.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
"Can a genuine, blood-bought, regenerated believer forfeit their salvation?" Right here is where the unique contribution of Molinism is perhaps best demonstrated and utilized - via the Molinist model of perseverance.

Many Bible students have been frustrated to the point of giving up on their pursuit of arriving at a intellectually satisfying and scriptural based answer. Tragically, they have come to the point where they simply write it off as "mystery".

On one side of the debate a litany of scriptures are recited as evidence that a genuinely regenerated believer can forfeit their salvation, while the other side says they cannot.

The great distinction that those who hold to the Molinist model of perseverance (like myself) is seen in the fact that they do not deny that there are certain verses or portions of scripture (warning passages) that do in fact say that a regenerate believer can forfeit their salvation (such as 2 Peter 2:20).

This perspective clearly differs from the widely accepted position amongst those who believe a genuine believer will not ever lose that salvation that was gifted them at the point of their new birth. This camp claims that all of those warning passages are directed to those who are merely professing, but not possessing believers.

Tragically, many have either not been exposed to the principles of Molinism, or reject them because they have not studied them sufficiently ; and as in most things, the tendency is to reject the minority viewpoint. But keep in mind that the eternal security of the believer is a subject that contains many components to it that are very complex and therefore need to be addressed on both a scriptural and philosophical plane (which Molinism provides). 2 Peter 3:16 tells us," as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures."

The following excerpts come from an article entitled, "Eternal Security? a Molinist Perspective (part 4)" - by hampton45

The Molinist view would make three basic claims.

(1) The two sets of texts are actually in two different logical categories, and therefore are not contradictory.
(2) God has actualized a possible world where all true born-again believers will freely persevere to the end, though it is possible for them to choose otherwise.
(3) God uses the warning passages, as just one of many means to keep true born-again believers from falling away.

First, we must recognize that the two sets of texts are not contradictory because they occupy two separate logical categories. One set is modal (what can happen, referring to possibilities), while the other set is what philosophers call de facto (what will happen, referring to actualities). Just because something is possible, does not mean that it will be actualized. Just because something can happen, doesn’t mean that it will happen. Here’s an illustration. It is possible that I wreck my car tomorrow, but that does not mean that I will wreck my car tomorrow. Similarly, it is possible for me to choose to stop writing right now, since it is past my bedtime, but that does not mean that I will stop writing. I am having too much fun. We would indeed have a contradiction if we affirmed that one stream of texts says that a believer can lose their salvation, and the other stream of texts says that a believer cannot lose their salvation. But that is not what the Molinist affirms. Rather, the Molinist says that one stream of texts teaches that a believer can lose their salvation, and the other stream of texts teaches that a believer will not lose their salvation. This is why Eric Minton calls this Molinist model of perseverance the “Can/Won’t” model.

Therefore, we must keep the two questions distinct in our mind.

(1) Can a true believer fall away?
(2) Will a true believer fall away?

We can take these questions to the biblical text and see if they are answered differently. I contend that they are. The warning passages cited by the advocate of conditional security make it clear that a true believer can in principle forfeit his salvation. However, the promise passages cited by the advocate of unconditional security make it clear that a true believer will in fact never forfeit his salvation. The warning passages either explicitly use the language “if” or imply it, noting only possibilities. The promise passages either explicitly use the language “will” or imply it, noting actualities. See the table below for some examples.

(1) Modal Statements on Eternal Security (what can happen/possibilities) = (A)
(2) De Facto Statements about Eternal Security (what will happen/actualities) = (B)

(A) if indeed you remain grounded and steadfast in the faith and are not shifted away from the hope of the gospel that you heard. (Col 1:23)
(B) I give them eternal life, and they will never never perish. (John 10:28)

(A) if we hold firmly until the end the reality that we had at the start. (Heb.3:14)
(B) I am sure of this, that he who started a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Jesus Christ. (Phil 1:6)

(A) For if having escaped the world's impurity through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in these things and defeated, the last state is worse for them than the first. (2 Pet 2:20)
(B) ...as you wait for the revealing of our Lord Jesus Christ, who will sustain you to the end, guiltless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. (1 Cor 1:7b - 8)

(A) ...if you remain in his kindness. Otherwise you too will be cut off (Rom 11:22)
(b) The Lord will rescue me from every evil attack and will bring me safely to his heavenly kingdom. To him be glory forever and ever. Amen. (2 Tim 4:18)

Having distinguished these logical categories, one can better understand the second claim of the Molinist- namely that God has actualized a possible world where all true believers can freely reject Christ but will not. Those terms may be new to some. I am assuming in this article that one has a good grasp of Molinism. But I will give a very brief overview here.

God’s omniscience consists of three types of knowledge. He has natural knowledge- he knows everything that could happen. That is to say he knows everything that is logically possible. God also has foreknowledge- he knows everything that will happen in the future. But God also possesses a third type of knowledge that logically proceeds his natural knowledge and precedes his foreknowledge. Because it lies between these two types, it has been named middle knowledge. It is with this type of knowledge that God knows everything that would happen in any given set of circumstances. In a more philosophically rigorous sense, through middle knowledge God knows the truth value of all counterfactual propositions. So, for example, God knows whether the following counterfactual proposition is true or false- “if Jordan Hampton was the Roman prefect at the time of Christ, he would have condemned Jesus to crucifixion.” In God’s natural knowledge this is a logically possible scenario. However, there are other logically possible scenarios as well. I’m thinking of the possibility that I would not have condemned Jesus to crucifixion. So, God knows what could happen. Since I never was the Roman prefect though, God could not have known the truth or falsity of that counterfactual proposition through his foreknowledge. His foreknowledge only includes knowledge of the things that actually will happen. But it never did happen that I was the Roman prefect. So, God knows the truth of this counterfactual proposition through his middle knowledge, what I would have freely chosen to do under those circumstances.

So with that very brief introduction to Molinism, now you can begin to imagine how this would apply to the topic of eternal security. Through God’s middle knowledge, he knows the exact set of circumstances in which I would freely accept his offer of salvation, but later freely reject him and fall away. God also knows the exact circumstances in which I would freely accept his offer of salvation and persevere to the end. My contention is that God has actualized a world in which all true believers are put in circumstances under which they will freely persevere to the end though they still possess the freedom to do otherwise. This is only possible through God’s middle knowledge though. God is able to guarantee my perseverance, while leaving me the possibility of forfeiting my salvation. God can do this because he knows precisely what I would do with my freedom under any set of circumstances, and he knows what circumstances to place me in such that I will not use my freedom to forfeit my faith in Christ.

Having defended the second contention of the Molinist view of eternal security, I will move to the third and final claim- God uses the warning passages as just one of many means to keep true born-again believers from falling away. The reason I include this final claim in my Molinistic argument for eternal security is that someone may object to my argument at this point and say that the warning passages are meaningless or purposeless if a true believer will not fall away. Why would God need to warn them if he already knows that they will not fall? The Molinist response is that if God did not give the warnings, then some true believers would fall away. Notice how I said that. That is a counterfactual about which God knows the truth value via his middle knowledge. If that is difficult to grasp, let me briefly describe it another way. Here goes...

Prior to God creating the world, he had a range of possible worlds he could create, each unique in the people who who make it up, and the affairs they would engage in. So God chose to create a world in which the maximal number of people are saved and the fewest are lost based on the their own free choices. For every single person in that world, God chose a meticulous set of conditions for their entire life. Conditions like the time they would be born, the place they would grow up in, the family they would be born into, the school they would attend, the job they would work, the group of friends they would surround themselves with, etc. Now prior to creating this world God knew (via his middle knowledge) the exact conditions to put an individual in that would result in that person freely choosing to follow Jesus. God also knew (via his middle knowledge) the exact conditions to put that same individual in so that they would freely choose to follow Jesus their entire life, never falling away. The Molinist would say that among the many conditions that God would have to put that individual, one of those conditions is exposure to warnings of the fate he or she would suffer if they denied Christ. On this understanding, the warning passages of scripture are a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for Christians to freely persevere. So, the Molinist contends that God knew he needed to give these warnings in scripture or else at least some people would not freely persevere. And since God desires that all true believers would persevere he uses the warnings as a means to that end.

An analogy would be like a mother telling her child not to touch the hot iron or the child will be severely burned. Had the warning not been given, the child would have touched the hot iron. But the warning gives the child the motivation necessary to freely choose not to touch the hot iron. The mother used the warning as a means to protect the child. Similarly, God uses the warnings of punishment for apostasy to protect us from it. Now, I do not want to suggest that the warning passages are the only means that God can use to help someone persevere. I am contending that every single minute event in their life is ultimately aimed at them persevering to the end. Worshipping God in song, regularly meeting with and being encouraged by believers at church, prayer, fasting, studying God’s word are all examples of the means he uses to help us persevere. For me, God has used apologetics to help me persevere through significant challenges to my faith. And on this Molinist view, God also uses the promise passages to help encourage us that we will persevere.

So in summary, I contend that the traditional positions of the POS, OSAS, and CS make sense of only part but not all of the biblical data with regard to eternal security. Each side has what I consider an unnatural or forced interpretation that does not fit well at certain points. However, I hope to have persuaded you that Molinism can make good sense of both streams of texts. The key is that we see each set of passages in separate logical categories, which the text itself seems to do. Then we can affirm that a true believer can fall away, but a true believer never will. God has actualized a possible world in which they will have all the means necessary to freely persevere. He uses warnings as well as promises, and many other features of our lives to do so. The only question now that could lead one to fear that they will not persevere is if they are not sure that they are truly born-again. If you know that you are in fact a child of God then you can rest knowing that you will persevere. As Dr. Kenneth Keathley said “perseverance should be viewed more as a promise than a requirement.”

Note : "POS" = perseverance of the saints : "OSAS" = once saved, always saved ; "CS" = conditional security. God Bless!
The bottom line is that we must live this life walking in faith, hope, and love. We must live as if the “if” verses apply to us. Because the one truth is that, while God knows everything, including all counterfactuals and their potential outcomes, and simply whose names are written in the Book of life and whose are not, from our side of the fence we do not have that knowledge with any degree of absolute, perfect certainty.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
"Can a genuine, blood-bought, regenerated believer forfeit their salvation?" Right here is where the unique contribution of Molinism is perhaps best demonstrated and utilized - via the Molinist model of perseverance.

Many Bible students have been frustrated to the point of giving up on their pursuit of arriving at a intellectually satisfying and scriptural based answer. Tragically, they have come to the point where they simply write it off as "mystery".

On one side of the debate a litany of scriptures are recited as evidence that a genuinely regenerated believer can forfeit their salvation, while the other side says they cannot.

The great distinction that those who hold to the Molinist model of perseverance (like myself) is seen in the fact that they do not deny that there are certain verses or portions of scripture (warning passages) that do in fact say that a regenerate believer can forfeit their salvation (such as 2 Peter 2:20).

This perspective clearly differs from the widely accepted position amongst those who believe a genuine believer will not ever lose that salvation that was gifted them at the point of their new birth. This camp claims that all of those warning passages are directed to those who are merely professing, but not possessing believers.

Tragically, many have either not been exposed to the principles of Molinism, or reject them because they have not studied them sufficiently ; and as in most things, the tendency is to reject the minority viewpoint. But keep in mind that the eternal security of the believer is a subject that contains many components to it that are very complex and therefore need to be addressed on both a scriptural and philosophical plane (which Molinism provides). 2 Peter 3:16 tells us," as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures."

The following excerpts come from an article entitled, "Eternal Security? a Molinist Perspective (part 4)" - by hampton45

The Molinist view would make three basic claims.

(1) The two sets of texts are actually in two different logical categories, and therefore are not contradictory.
(2) God has actualized a possible world where all true born-again believers will freely persevere to the end, though it is possible for them to choose otherwise.
(3) God uses the warning passages, as just one of many means to keep true born-again believers from falling away.

First, we must recognize that the two sets of texts are not contradictory because they occupy two separate logical categories. One set is modal (what can happen, referring to possibilities), while the other set is what philosophers call de facto (what will happen, referring to actualities). Just because something is possible, does not mean that it will be actualized. Just because something can happen, doesn’t mean that it will happen. Here’s an illustration. It is possible that I wreck my car tomorrow, but that does not mean that I will wreck my car tomorrow. Similarly, it is possible for me to choose to stop writing right now, since it is past my bedtime, but that does not mean that I will stop writing. I am having too much fun. We would indeed have a contradiction if we affirmed that one stream of texts says that a believer can lose their salvation, and the other stream of texts says that a believer cannot lose their salvation. But that is not what the Molinist affirms. Rather, the Molinist says that one stream of texts teaches that a believer can lose their salvation, and the other stream of texts teaches that a believer will not lose their salvation. This is why Eric Minton calls this Molinist model of perseverance the “Can/Won’t” model.

Therefore, we must keep the two questions distinct in our mind.

(1) Can a true believer fall away?
(2) Will a true believer fall away?

We can take these questions to the biblical text and see if they are answered differently. I contend that they are. The warning passages cited by the advocate of conditional security make it clear that a true believer can in principle forfeit his salvation. However, the promise passages cited by the advocate of unconditional security make it clear that a true believer will in fact never forfeit his salvation. The warning passages either explicitly use the language “if” or imply it, noting only possibilities. The promise passages either explicitly use the language “will” or imply it, noting actualities. See the table below for some examples.

(1) Modal Statements on Eternal Security (what can happen/possibilities) = (A)
(2) De Facto Statements about Eternal Security (what will happen/actualities) = (B)

(A) if indeed you remain grounded and steadfast in the faith and are not shifted away from the hope of the gospel that you heard. (Col 1:23)
(B) I give them eternal life, and they will never never perish. (John 10:28)

(A) if we hold firmly until the end the reality that we had at the start. (Heb.3:14)
(B) I am sure of this, that he who started a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Jesus Christ. (Phil 1:6)

(A) For if having escaped the world's impurity through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in these things and defeated, the last state is worse for them than the first. (2 Pet 2:20)
(B) ...as you wait for the revealing of our Lord Jesus Christ, who will sustain you to the end, guiltless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. (1 Cor 1:7b - 8)

(A) ...if you remain in his kindness. Otherwise you too will be cut off (Rom 11:22)
(b) The Lord will rescue me from every evil attack and will bring me safely to his heavenly kingdom. To him be glory forever and ever. Amen. (2 Tim 4:18)

Having distinguished these logical categories, one can better understand the second claim of the Molinist- namely that God has actualized a possible world where all true believers can freely reject Christ but will not. Those terms may be new to some. I am assuming in this article that one has a good grasp of Molinism. But I will give a very brief overview here.

God’s omniscience consists of three types of knowledge. He has natural knowledge- he knows everything that could happen. That is to say he knows everything that is logically possible. God also has foreknowledge- he knows everything that will happen in the future. But God also possesses a third type of knowledge that logically proceeds his natural knowledge and precedes his foreknowledge. Because it lies between these two types, it has been named middle knowledge. It is with this type of knowledge that God knows everything that would happen in any given set of circumstances. In a more philosophically rigorous sense, through middle knowledge God knows the truth value of all counterfactual propositions. So, for example, God knows whether the following counterfactual proposition is true or false- “if Jordan Hampton was the Roman prefect at the time of Christ, he would have condemned Jesus to crucifixion.” In God’s natural knowledge this is a logically possible scenario. However, there are other logically possible scenarios as well. I’m thinking of the possibility that I would not have condemned Jesus to crucifixion. So, God knows what could happen. Since I never was the Roman prefect though, God could not have known the truth or falsity of that counterfactual proposition through his foreknowledge. His foreknowledge only includes knowledge of the things that actually will happen. But it never did happen that I was the Roman prefect. So, God knows the truth of this counterfactual proposition through his middle knowledge, what I would have freely chosen to do under those circumstances.

So with that very brief introduction to Molinism, now you can begin to imagine how this would apply to the topic of eternal security. Through God’s middle knowledge, he knows the exact set of circumstances in which I would freely accept his offer of salvation, but later freely reject him and fall away. God also knows the exact circumstances in which I would freely accept his offer of salvation and persevere to the end. My contention is that God has actualized a world in which all true believers are put in circumstances under which they will freely persevere to the end though they still possess the freedom to do otherwise. This is only possible through God’s middle knowledge though. God is able to guarantee my perseverance, while leaving me the possibility of forfeiting my salvation. God can do this because he knows precisely what I would do with my freedom under any set of circumstances, and he knows what circumstances to place me in such that I will not use my freedom to forfeit my faith in Christ.

Having defended the second contention of the Molinist view of eternal security, I will move to the third and final claim- God uses the warning passages as just one of many means to keep true born-again believers from falling away. The reason I include this final claim in my Molinistic argument for eternal security is that someone may object to my argument at this point and say that the warning passages are meaningless or purposeless if a true believer will not fall away. Why would God need to warn them if he already knows that they will not fall? The Molinist response is that if God did not give the warnings, then some true believers would fall away. Notice how I said that. That is a counterfactual about which God knows the truth value via his middle knowledge. If that is difficult to grasp, let me briefly describe it another way. Here goes...

Prior to God creating the world, he had a range of possible worlds he could create, each unique in the people who who make it up, and the affairs they would engage in. So God chose to create a world in which the maximal number of people are saved and the fewest are lost based on the their own free choices. For every single person in that world, God chose a meticulous set of conditions for their entire life. Conditions like the time they would be born, the place they would grow up in, the family they would be born into, the school they would attend, the job they would work, the group of friends they would surround themselves with, etc. Now prior to creating this world God knew (via his middle knowledge) the exact conditions to put an individual in that would result in that person freely choosing to follow Jesus. God also knew (via his middle knowledge) the exact conditions to put that same individual in so that they would freely choose to follow Jesus their entire life, never falling away. The Molinist would say that among the many conditions that God would have to put that individual, one of those conditions is exposure to warnings of the fate he or she would suffer if they denied Christ. On this understanding, the warning passages of scripture are a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for Christians to freely persevere. So, the Molinist contends that God knew he needed to give these warnings in scripture or else at least some people would not freely persevere. And since God desires that all true believers would persevere he uses the warnings as a means to that end.

An analogy would be like a mother telling her child not to touch the hot iron or the child will be severely burned. Had the warning not been given, the child would have touched the hot iron. But the warning gives the child the motivation necessary to freely choose not to touch the hot iron. The mother used the warning as a means to protect the child. Similarly, God uses the warnings of punishment for apostasy to protect us from it. Now, I do not want to suggest that the warning passages are the only means that God can use to help someone persevere. I am contending that every single minute event in their life is ultimately aimed at them persevering to the end. Worshipping God in song, regularly meeting with and being encouraged by believers at church, prayer, fasting, studying God’s word are all examples of the means he uses to help us persevere. For me, God has used apologetics to help me persevere through significant challenges to my faith. And on this Molinist view, God also uses the promise passages to help encourage us that we will persevere.

So in summary, I contend that the traditional positions of the POS, OSAS, and CS make sense of only part but not all of the biblical data with regard to eternal security. Each side has what I consider an unnatural or forced interpretation that does not fit well at certain points. However, I hope to have persuaded you that Molinism can make good sense of both streams of texts. The key is that we see each set of passages in separate logical categories, which the text itself seems to do. Then we can affirm that a true believer can fall away, but a true believer never will. God has actualized a possible world in which they will have all the means necessary to freely persevere. He uses warnings as well as promises, and many other features of our lives to do so. The only question now that could lead one to fear that they will not persevere is if they are not sure that they are truly born-again. If you know that you are in fact a child of God then you can rest knowing that you will persevere. As Dr. Kenneth Keathley said “perseverance should be viewed more as a promise than a requirement.”

Note : "POS" = perseverance of the saints : "OSAS" = once saved, always saved ; "CS" = conditional security. God Bless!

While the Lord Jesus was aware of the possibility (or possible world) of Tyre and Sidon repenting if they seen the miraculous works done through the disciples of Jesus (Matthew 11:21, Luke 10:1-15), I believe the Lord did not allow that possible world to exist whereby Tyre and Sidon would have repented is because most likely their repentance would not last. For 2 Peter 3:9 says that God is not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance. So it is in God's best interest that all repent. But I think repent here is that God wants a lasting repentance men's life even though that does not always happen even in the events of this world that plays out now that God chooses for us today.

While I believe God desires the best possible conditions for His saints to repent, and to be faithful to Him, I do not think God is a respecter of persons, either. God gives freely the offer of salvation to all men whereby they are without excuse (See: 2 Thessalonians 2:10, Romans 1:20).

In addition, we are told:

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

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

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

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).

These sayings would not make any sense if they were just false scare tactics to get the saint to obey. They have to be genuine in what they say.

We are also given warnings about the potential fallen believer, too:

The Servant Who is Not Looking For Him (Luke 12:45-46)

Recent Convert Who is a Potential Spiritual Leader (1 Timothy 3:6)

The Unforgiving in Heart (Matthew 6:14-15)

Luke Warm Unrepentant Believer (Revelation 3:14-22)

Fruitless Christians (John 15:1-10) (Matthew 25:14-30)

Widows That Live in Pleasure (1 Timothy 5:5-6)

Believers Whose Seed Fell Upon the Rocks (Luke 8:13)

Believers Whose Seed Was Choked by Thorns (Matthew 13:22)

Gentile Believer Who Did Not Have on a Wedding Garment (Matthew 22:1-14) (Revelation 19:7-8)

The Potential Fellow Believer Who Erred From the Truth & Was Converted Back
(James 5:19-20).​

These possibilities would not exist if God chose a world (the one we live in now) whereby Once Saved Always Saved was true for us or whereby God would ensure our Eternal Security in not allowing us to fall in any way. Again, God is not a respecter of persons. Once Saved Always Saved is unbiblical. God forcing others to be a certain way is unbiblical. James 4:8 says we are to draw near to God and He will draw near to us. We have to decide and choose and God is not going to force us against what our free will choice is. We have to choose every day in whom we will serve and not just in some one decision in choosing Jesus. Yes, I believe God can help us to walk in His good ways, but we have to want that help. We have to seek after that help desperately. We have to fight the good fight of faith and lay hold on eternal life (1 Timothy 6:12). Yes, God sets up the best possible world for us to make our relationship possible, but we have to choose to accept Him, and endure with Him always. It's not all God pulling the strings when it comes to our relationship with the Lord. While God has set the proper stage, or set the favorable conditions for our relationship: We have to make that relationship work by doing our part, and then God will do His part.
 
Upvote 0

Rapture Bound

Active Member
Supporter
Jun 30, 2021
342
67
64
Massachusetts
✟178,545.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
fhansen, let me reply to your statement in two parts:

"The bottom line is that we must live this life walking in faith, hope, and love. We must live as if the “if” verses apply to us. Because the one truth is that, while God knows everything, including all counterfactuals and their potential outcome, and simply whose names are written in the Book of life and whose are not"

Yes, and as one of many means of securing a believer's "walk of faith", God uses the warning passages to preserve us, but preserve us He will. Rom.8:5-8, " For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. 6 For to be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. 7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. 8 So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God."......

Now watch this... Rom.8:9-11, "But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His. 10 And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is life because of righteousness. 11 But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you."

If a person has genuinely been regenerated by the Holy Spirit, they will not live according to the flesh. They have been given eternal life and received, as a result of their new birth, an eternal implantation of that life by that life-giving seed of God (God the Holy Spirit) as clearly revealed in the following scripture :

1 John 3:9, "Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God."

(1) that the germ or seed of the Holy Spirit implanted in the soul abides there as a constant, vital principle, so that he who is born of God cannot become habitually a sinner; and,

(2) that it will so continue to live there that he will not fall away and perish. The idea is clearly that the germ or principle of piety so permanently abides in the soul, that he who is renewed never can become again characteristically a sinner.

And he cannot sin - Not merely he will not, but he cannot; that is, in the sense referred to. This cannot mean that one who is renewed has not physical ability to do wrong, for every moral agent has; nor can it mean that no one who is a true Christian never does, in fact, do wrong in thought, word, or deed, for no one could seriously maintain that: but it must mean that there is somehow a certainty as absolute "as if" it were physically impossible, that those who are born of God will not be characteristically and habitually sinners; that they will not sin in such a sense as to lose their faith and be numbered with transgressors; that they will not fall away and perish.

Part 2 : " from our side of the fence we do not have that knowledge with any degree of absolute, perfect certainty."

Well, here you bring up a very important component of salvation indeed!...the assurance of our salvation (by way of the blotting out of all of our sins).
Speaking of the hope of an unregenerated person.. Hebrews 2:14-15," Inasmuch then as the children have partaken of flesh and blood, He Himself likewise shared in the same, that through death He might destroy him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, 15 and release those who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.

How can a person not possess the fear of death without knowing with certainty where they are going when they die?

It is the unregenerated by the Holy Spirit that have never received assurance that their sins were forgiven, the fear of death lingers within them (whether or not they vocalize that reality). It is only those renewed by the power of the Holy Spirit that can confidently say that they no longer fear physical death...Rom.8:11,"But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you.

The scriptures clearly teach that those who are genuine, blood-bought, Holy Spirit regenerate followers of Jesus can and will have assurance of their acceptance before God, and that all their sins have been blotted out through Christ's atoning work.

Subjectively speaking, this "knowing" or assurance is seen in Romans 8:16, "The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God,"
The objective truth is found in 1 John 5:12-13, " He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life. 13 These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God."

How incredibly priceless are these dual realities! Associated with this is [a very critical question to ponder], a question that is derived from a Molinist perspective : "If any genuinely regenerated (and therefore justified) person will ever fall away and lose their salvation or "place in Heaven" one day, then how can any individual ever be certain that they will not be counted among those who will lose out on Heaven being their eternal abode at some point subsequent to their new birth experience?"

It surely appears to me that any person who believes that there will be some (or even one regenerate person) who will lose out on Heaven cannot claim that they will enter Heaven ... assurance for them becomes a logical fallacy.

And in light of this strong evidence, I believe that when a person has been justified before God, he or she was not simply placed into a position of "possibly" or "potentially" gaining a future entrance into Heaven; in the eyes of God it was a "done deal" - past tense! - Praise you Elohim! Our future inheritance was made actual and realized the moment we placed our trust in Christ as the substitute for our sins. This is why 2 Cor.5:21 has been called "The Great Exchange" -- "For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him." One drop of Christ's precious blood was, and is, sufficient to "seal the deal" as far as a future entrance into Heaven is concerned to those who have truly placed their faith in His atoning sacrifice!

This is the Gospel truth, and although it sounds too good to be true to some, it is truly the Good News that the Loving Creator of the Universe freely offers to all!
 
Upvote 0

Rapture Bound

Active Member
Supporter
Jun 30, 2021
342
67
64
Massachusetts
✟178,545.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Further Clarification of Molinism and Libertarian Freedom :

The following statements are Tim Stratton's of "Free Thinking Ministries" < https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjoJHrgHyjBgOiSTxFT0Dag >. For deeper insight to these issues, view the following video entitled, "Molinism with Tim Stratton" (Soteriology 101 - Feb.6,2020). <
>.


What is "Mere Molinism"? Here are the two essential "pillars" or principles of "Mere Molinism":

(1) Logically prior to God's decision to create the world, He knew every possible scenario in the world that He could create or actualize. And if that is true, then God has "middle knowledge".

(2) As beings created in the image of God, humans, like God, possess libertarian freedom. An agent possesses libertarian freedom if this agent is not always casually determined to think and act, and has the ability to choose between a range of options each compatible with one's nature.

Therefore, God possesses middle knowledge and humans possess libertarian freedom.

A person can move beyond "Mere Molinism" and apply these two essentials to soteriological issues. One can become a "Soteriological Molinist" if they affirm the two essential points and add the following point : "God is a maximally Great and Loving Being who loves and desires the best for all people".

I have found these two pillars of Molinism to be tremendously helpful in the area of the eternal security of the believer. They contribute compelling evidence to the validity of the statement concerning those who have been genuinely regenerated by the Holy Spirit.. "once justified, always justified".
 
Upvote 0

Rapture Bound

Active Member
Supporter
Jun 30, 2021
342
67
64
Massachusetts
✟178,545.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The Genuineness of your Faith:

1 Peter 1:6-7,"In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while, if need be, you
have been grieved by various trials, that the genuineness of your faith, being much more
precious than gold that perishes, though it is tested by fire, may be found to praise,
honor, and glory at the revelation of Jesus Christ,"

If a person has truly trusted in Christ's substitutionary death and subsequent
resurrection from the grave for the forgiveness of their sins, they have experienced saving faith (and have received eternal life by virtue of having been placed into union with Christ - the embodiment of eternal life).

"In this you greatly rejoice" (v.6):

The critical question that needs to be pondered here is: "If any genuine follower of
Christ will ever fail these trials to the destruction of their souls (the forfeiture of
their salvation), then how could the possibility of rejoicing in them even exist? After all,
the eternal destiny of their souls are yet to be determined, that is, if any one will
actually fail the test.

It is so very important to understand this vital aspect of the believer's eternal security.
Here is what I perceive to be a common misconception of this issue among those who embrace the conditional eternal security of the believer:

The assertion is that the believer is placed into some type of probationary period in which they may or may not successfully complete. That is, if they remain faithful enough, then they will ultimately secure for themselves a future entrance into heaven.

However, I believe the scriptural evidence supports the claim that God will preserve the
faith of all genuine believers, He will successfully keep and lead them to their heavenly
inheritance. This is precisely what was stated in the prior verses :

1 Peter 1:3-5, "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy has begotten us again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled and that does not fade away, reserved in heaven for you, who are kept by the power of God through faith for salvation ready to be revealed in the last time."

"who are kept by the power of God" (v.5):

The Greek word for "kept" is actually a military term speaking of a sentinel guarding a king or a fortress. It is the perfect picture of God's guarding over a believer's soul.

5432 phrouréo (from phrousos, "a sentinel, guard") – properly, to guard (keep watch) like a military sentinel; (figuratively) to actively display whatever defensive and offensive means are necessary to guard.
phroureó: to guard
Original Word: f??????
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: phroureó
Phonetic Spelling: (froo-reh'-o)
Definition: to guard
Usage: I guard, keep, as by a military guard.

The military of God would be the angelic host and the Holy Spirit Himself. God will guard His own against everything in creation that will come against their faith and cause them to depart from the faith.

The Greek word that we translate as "grace" in English is composed of two letters - "Chet" and "nun." when we combine the meaning of their word pictures, we discover the following truth claims :

(1) God produces life in us, and then puts a fence or wall of protection around that life so that it may not be destroyed or removed.

(2) The new birth that God graciously initiates in every believer delivers us from the
bondage of sin, and by God's Holy Spirit produces eternal life.

To view the above information and more on the subject, watch the following two minute
YouTube video,"Grace in ancient Hebrew" (RockIslandBooks) <
>

I trust in Elohim's might and power with the ultimate protection and preservation of my
soul. My God is mighty in battle, He will not fail in His militaristic pursuits, He will
successfully secure an entrance into heaven for all who have (past tense) experienced the new birth! (John 3:3-8).

Ephesians 1:13-14,"In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory."

It is God the Holy Spirit that "seals the deal." In 1 Peter 1:4, the Apostle had been
speaking about an inheritance "incorruptible and undefiled and that does not fade away,
reserved in heaven for you." So then, we see that God's power is working on both sides of the veil, preserving the inheritance for the heirs, and preserving the heirs for the
inheritance. He will not fail to preserve them, and they will not miss out on their
inheritance; what a precious dual promise!!.. how can I not overflow with love and
everlasting gratitude toward my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ??!!

2 Cor.13:5,"Examine yourselves as to whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Do you not know yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?—unless indeed you are disqualified."

"unless indeed you are disqualified.":

The Greek word for "disqualified" is adókimos (Strongs # G96)
Strong's Definition - From G1 (as a negative particle) and G1384; unapproved, that is,
rejected; by implication worthless (literally or morally): - castaway, rejected, reprobate.

Thayer's Definition - 1. not standing the test, not approved a. properly used of metals and coins. 2. that which does not prove itself such as it ought a. unfit for, unproved,
spurious, reprobate.

The word adókimos is derived from the testing of metals, and the casting aside of those that are spurious or counterfeit.

There is no allusion here to the sense of failing the test as a genuine believer
subsequent to regeneration, but rather to an individual's sincere introspection and evaluation as to whether or not they qualify as the genuine article (i.e. subject themselves to the scrutiny of their own consciences).

"whether you are in the faith" - whether you are true Christians, whether you possess true faith in the gospel.

If a person is an authentic follower of Christ, then they will not fail the test. It only logically follows, if a person is a genuine believer, it is not possible that they fail the test as being a genuine believer.

"Examine yourselves as to whether you are in the faith."

My friends, here is where "the pedal hits the metal (pun intended)," This is where we are
heading full speed into a reality check that brings with it eternal implications. All who
profess to be followers of Christ must subject themselves to a sincere evaluation of their
spiritual condition.

What is the test of genuineness?... in other words, What is the evidence that a person is a true believer (that they have truly been born again - John 3:3-8)? The following is
certainly not a comprehensive listing, but a brief overview of the critical characteristics
that true followers of Christ possess :

(1) A love for, and longing to be with other believers. (1 John 4:7-8,20).

(2) A hunger for, and ability to understand the Bible. (John 6:33-35; Matt.5:6; Ps.119;
1 Cor.2:14-16).

(3) A desire to see others receive Jesus as their Lord and Savior (and rescued from eternal destruction). (Rom.9:1-3; Jude 1:23).

(4) A repulsion or abhorrence towards sinful behavior. (Ps.45:7; 97:10; Proverb 8:13;
Heb.1:9).

(5) A supreme love for God (Matt.22:37-38; 1 John 4:19), and desire to please and obey Him. (1 John 2:15; 1 John 2:5; John 14:21-25; Ps.119:47-48).

(6) An assurance of being a child of God, and experiencing a future reception of the
heavenly inheritance. (John 5:24; 6:40; 10:28; Rom.8:16,38-39; 2 Cor.5:4-5; Eph.4:30;
Phil.1:6; 1 Pet.1:23; 1 John 3:14,19,24; 5:11-13).
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

fhansen

Oldbie
Sep 3, 2011
13,887
3,526
✟320,837.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
If a person has genuinely been regenerated by the Holy Spirit, they will not live according to the flesh. They have been given eternal life and received, as a result of their new birth, an eternal implantation of that life by that life-giving seed of God (God the Holy Spirit) as clearly revealed in the following scripture :
This is the issue. A truly, fully regenerated person would be one who totally loves God- with their whole, heart, soul, mind, and strength, and their neighbor as themselves. This would make that person perfect, and sin would be excluded automatically and authentically. And God will ultimately accomplish that in us, if we remain in Him, even if not fully completed until the next life. And to the extent that it's not being accomplished in us, then we're not remaining in Him regardless of what we may believe or profess to be true about ourselves.

So Scripture tells us that we must persevere, because of the very real possibility of our not persevering. Scripture tells us that we must remain in Him, for the same reason. So if we read further in Rom 8 we'll find:
"So then, brothers and sisters, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh— for if you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live." Rom 8:12-13

The elect are the elect, but only He knows with perfect, 100% certainty whose names are written in the Book of life. Not all who presume to be, will be. At the end of the day we'll be judged on our love, as the church teaches.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Rapture Bound

Active Member
Supporter
Jun 30, 2021
342
67
64
Massachusetts
✟178,545.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
fhansen replied, "The elect are the elect, but only He knows with perfect, 100% certainty whose names are written in the Book of life. Not all who presume to be, will be. At the end of the day we'll be judged on our love, as the church teaches."

I would agree that not all who presume to be genuine believers are genuine believers; but I would add that all those who are genuine believers do indeed possess assurance of their future heavenly inheritance.

The elect know that their names are written in the Book of Life, but they can only possess this assurance as it pertains to themselves (subjectively). They cannot know with certainty if any other person actually possesses this assurance.

"Romans 8:16,"The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we (are) children of God."

God the Holy Spirit provides this knowledge to us directly and personally, but the scriptures do not say that He will bear witness to our spirits as to other's actual possession of it. We may witness compelling evidence for or against another's person's possession of it; but ultimately, only God can make that judgment call, we cannot possess it with certitude.

It is our calling as genuine children of God to contend for the truths set forth in the scriptures. We are simply messengers bringing forth these gospel truths to those with ears to hear. How a person responds to those truths is a personal matter between that individual and God.

The scriptures make it abundantly clear that a true follower of Christ will possess this wonderful knowledge. Point (6) of my previous post was only a short list providing undeniable, overwhelming evidence to this precious gospel promise :

"(6) An assurance of being a child of God, and experiencing a future reception of the
heavenly inheritance. (John 5:24; 6:40; 10:28; Rom.8:16,38-39; 2 Cor.5:4-5; Eph.4:30;
Phil.1:6; 1 Pet.1:23; 1 John 3:14,19,24; 5:11-13)."
 
Upvote 0

Rapture Bound

Active Member
Supporter
Jun 30, 2021
342
67
64
Massachusetts
✟178,545.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Here is a recent comment that I received, along with my reply:

"The warnings found in the New Testament-What are we to do with them? We need to take them seriously, as well as all the excerpts of the Holy Scripture."

Absolutely!... The warning passages are there to "light a fire beneath us", so that we do not become antinomian in spirit and deed. They are one of the necessary means that God uses to assure a genuine believer's entrance into heaven.
 
Upvote 0

Blade

Veteran
Supporter
Dec 29, 2002
8,165
3,989
USA
✟629,996.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Thank you.. written better than I ever could lol. We know molinism is hard to back up with the word. I am not going to even TRY to touch on what God knows lol. There are just things written we can't answer like why God didn't tell Adam&Eve about Satan and the lie he was about to tell them or why God that knows all asks "where are you, who told you, did you eat of the tree I told you not to". Or how God had to come down to see if the cries He was hearing were true and if so He would know "I will go down now and see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry against it that has come to Me; and if not, I will know.”

No body said "a...your God don't you already know?" :) Not saying He didnt just things I think about. As to falling way I know for fact there at those that have walked away.. yet truly lost I can not say. For me my thinking is one would have to KNOW I mean KNOW GOD like Satan did angels do... to then walk away. I don't know of anyone that knew God like that and left other then Satan and those that went with him. We like to think like man haha since we are that like every thing else we can just THINK "I'm out of here". But with God we truly don't know Him.. how many know that love He has..who has truly felt it.. nothing in life would match it.. anyway ..

No writer so forgive me. Oh the prodigal son..was he ever lost
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Rapture Bound

Active Member
Supporter
Jun 30, 2021
342
67
64
Massachusetts
✟178,545.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Blade - Thank you for your kind words. Although I have implemented some of the principles contained within Molinism to the issue of the believer's eternal security, my primary focus was never intended to be on Molinism. But since I've carried it over to the issue, it became necessary to expound upon it. A person can hold to the scriptural doctrine of the preservation of the saints (such as myself) without even being a "mere Molinist."

There is enough compelling evidence concerning the scriptural truths contained within "the preservation of the saints" perspective without utilizing principles from Molinism; however, it will be a much more difficult task without them since many of the working components involved here are anything but simplistic.

To complicate the issue even further, there are varying perspectives among those who believe a genuine believer will never ultimately depart from the faith and face everlasting destruction. For example, there are those in the "Free Grace" camp that believe that there are genuine believers who will backslide to the degree of totally renouncing Christ in a permanent state, but will yet enter heaven as a result of their initial "regeneration" (I am not of that camp).

Keep in mind that the same holds true for those who hold to the teaching that that there are some genuine believers who will actually depart from the faith (resulting in their eternal destruction). For instance, Weslyan Arminianism states that a person can genuinely be saved more than once (while at the same time always having their eternal destiny in the balance); while Classical Arminianism claims that when a genuine believer forfeits their salvation, it is impossible for them to regain it.

From what you have written, it is hard for me to ascertain what position concerning the eternal security of the believer you have taken...do you have one?
 
Upvote 0