A few questions for Protestants

[YeshuaFan]

I don't disagree...I also don't believe we are forced to remain in Christ... Just too many verses saying otherwise.

We will have the new nature desiring to stay in him!

 

[YeshuaFan]

If you lose your faith does that mean you were not forever justified? Paul said it's God that justifies, who can condemn? No one!
These are promises for believers. Not for those who once believed. If you become a apostate, that's not because God let go of you, it's because you willingly chose to reject his justification.
No one and nothing on this earth can remove us from Christ's love, except for ourselves.

Jesus stated that NONE can take us out of the father's Hand, and Jesus stated will be losing NONE will get lost once saved by Him!

 

[renniks]

Jesus stated that NONE can take us out of the father's Hand, and Jesus stated will be losing NONE will get lost once saved by Him!

Context matters.

 

[YeshuaFan]

Context matters.

He meant all and none!

 

[Clare73]

Context matters.

Indeed. . .and what is the context and its affect here?

 

[renniks]

Indeed. . .and what is the context and its affect here?

Jesus was speaking to Jews whose hearts are not right with God. They are not faithful Jews and do not know the Father.
Since they are not willing to do the Father’s will they could not discern the truth of Christ’s words (John 7:17). Those who know the Father will recognize the truth of Christ’s words and be “drawn” to Him (6:44, 45, cf. John 3:21). They will be given to the Son and come to faith in Him as a result (6:37). To them alone has the Father granted access to the Son (6:65).
The passage has to do with the Father giving the faithful Jews to their long-awaited Messiah.
The promise given is only for those who are presently and continually “eating”, “drinking”, “believing”, “coming”, “listening”, “following”, and “beholding.”
There is no promise here for those who stop believing and no guarantee that those who begin to believe will inevitably remain in the faith. The “all that” in verse 39 is the sum total of believers.

 

[rockytopva]

I believe the church underwent transformations...

The mystery of the seven stars which thou sawest in my right hand, and the seven golden candlesticks. The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches: and the seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven churches. Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write; These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks; - Revelation 1:20 - Revelation 2:1

Ephesus - Messianic - Beginning with the Apostle to the Circumcision, Peter
Smyrna - Martyr - Beginning with the Apostle to the Un-Circumcision, Paul
Pergamos - Orthodoxy formed in this time... Pergos is a tower... Needed in the dark ages
Thyatira - Catholicism formed in this time - The spirit of Jezebel is to control and to dominate.
Sardis - Protestantism formed in this time- A sardius is a gem - elegant yet hard and rigid
Philadelphia - Wesleyism formed in this time - To be sanctioned is to acquire it with love.
Laodicea - Charismatic movement formed in this time - Beginning with DL Moody, the first to make money off of ministry

Candlesticks - Seven church congregations
Stars - Individuals within the congregations, all held in the right hand of Christ
Seals - The seven seals sealed each congregation within the lambs book of life

And I wept much, because no man was found worthy to open and to read the book, neither to look thereon. - Revelation 5:4

So there is much variety within the Christian church. I do not believe just because a minister is within a certain denomination necessary means you can put confidence in him. He may be a good man… He may not! There may be issues that come along requiring prayer and consideration. Ministers that are faithful to the calling are stars in the right hand of Christ!

 

[Clare73]

Jesus was speaking to Jews whose hearts are not right with God. They are not faithful Jews and do not know the Father.
Since they are not willing to do the Father’s will they could not discern the truth of Christ’s words (John 7:17). Those who know the Father will recognize the truth of Christ’s words and be “drawn” to Him (6:44, 45, cf. John 3:21).

Jesus explains precisely who those are in
John 6:65: "No one can come to me unless the Father has enabled him."

They will be given to the Son and come to faith in Him as a result (6:37).

They are given to the Son and come as the result of being enabled (6:65)

To them alone has the Father granted access to the Son (6:65).

Jesus states it as to them alone who have been enabled to come to the Son.

The passage has to do with the Father giving the faithful Jews to their long-awaited Messiah.

The passage deals with those who believe and come only because they are enabled to do so. (John 6:65)
The rest of the Jews whom he did not enable rejected him and the gospel.

The promise given

There is no promise given here, there is only statement of spiritual fact: only those he enables can come.

is only for those who are presently and continually “eating”, “drinking”, “believing”, “coming”, “listening”, “following”, and “beholding.”
There is no promise here for those who stop believing and no guarantee that those who begin to believe will inevitably remain in the faith.

There is no promise here of anything, there is only statement of spiritual fact.
And that fact is that he will lose none of those whom the Father has enabled and given to him.
(John 6:39)

The “all that” in verse 39 is the sum total of believers.

The "all" are those whom he has enabled and will come--without exception, and none of the all shall he lose (John 6:39)
And that turned out to be a few Jews (the rest having rejected him and being cut off the one olive tree of God's people--Romans 11:17-19) and a whole lot of Gentiles.

 

[The Liturgist]

A verse from a chapter where many people quit following Jesus.

"And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all those he has given me, but raise them up at the last day."

For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.”

These are promises for those who believe not ones who used to believe.

Well to be fair, while I do not subscribe to OSAS (I wish I could, but I don’t see enough scriptural or Patristic support), of those who left, the traditional belief is those were largely comprised of the Seventy, who later returned, which makes sense.

 

[The Liturgist]

Calvin didn’t teach OSAS as it is usually taught. He believed that God chose people, and would not go back on that. But he was aware that we don’t know for sure who is chosen, though he thought people should generally feel assurance.

I think OSAS implies that if you show the usual evidence of salvation and fall away, you will still end up accepted. Calvin did not agree. He knew that some people fell away for real. He thought that those people weren’t chosen by God, since God would make sure that his people persevered.

Thank you @hedrick for once again setting the record straight about Calvin and his doctrines.

 

[rockytopva]

1 Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.
2 And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.
3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,
4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?
6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.
7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more. - John 8:1-11

In the Protestant Reformation we have fingers pointed at the Catholics... However, at times, the reformation became worse than the Catholic times before them. The Protestants would think that because they arrived at some doctrinal truth they were superior to others,. Martin Luther and John Calvin turned out to be terrible men in their old age. And to quote...

"Pure devilry is urging on the peasants. Therefore let all who are able, mow them down, slaughter and stab them, openly or in secret, and remember that there is nothing more poisonous, noxious and utterly devilish than a rebel. You must kill him as you would a mad dog…" -Martin Luther

"Whoever shall maintain that wrong is done to heretics and blasphemers in punishing them makes himself an accomplice in their crime and guilty as they are. There is no question here of man's authority; it is God who speaks, and clear it is what law he will have kept in the church, even to the end of the world. Wherefore does he demand of us a so extreme severity, if not to show us that due honor is not paid him, so long as we set not his service above every human consideration, so that we spare not kin, nor blood of any, and forget all humanity when the matter is to combat for His glory." - John Calvin, after the toasting of Michael Servetus

In which, yes, things like the Catholic inquisition were bad, however, at times, Protestants were no better. This... Though... Is not to down denominations such as the Lutherans. My dad goes to a Lutheran church and the preacher there is an old guy, chaplain at a university, and very saintly in his life. Whenever I visit dad's Lutheran church I take time to thank the guy for his good service in the community. And this is not to say my denomination is any better as our preachers can be just as bad. I went to a Methodist camp meeting and asked an old timer what denomination he was, and he sneered at me and said, "Methodist, what else is there?"

The salvation of the old Saint of the Wilderness Robert Sheffey came at a revival meeting at an old store building. There were drunks there who would pelt the preacher with corn cobs, but Robert and a few others went up front to make their profession of faith in Christ. Robert wanted to defend the meeting, but the preacher would not hear to it, and maintained the furtherance of the gospel must be non-violent. Which was the correct thing to do!

"I will certainly do my best to see that no rowdy crowd comes up here again and bothers you even if I have to knock them down the stairs with this poker." - Robert Sheffey

"That is not the way of the Savior, my young brother. You do want to be more like Him?" -asked the preacher

"Yes." - Replied Robert

"Then he who would be more like the Christ must study the Bible and learn of His life and works. Imitate Him in all your thoughts and deeds. You are not so foolish as to think that that will come easy?"- The preacher from the readings of "The Saint of the Wilderness" by Jess Carr

And Robert Sheffey would keep his non-violent humility with him all his days...

 

[The Liturgist]

1 Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.
2 And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.
3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,
4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?
6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.
7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more. - John 8:1-11

In the Protestant Reformation we have fingers pointed at the Catholics... However, at times, the reformation became worse than the Catholic times before them. The Protestants would think that because they arrived at some doctrinal truth they were superior to others,. Martin Luther and John Calvin turned out to be terrible men in their old age. And to quote...

"Pure devilry is urging on the peasants. Therefore let all who are able, mow them down, slaughter and stab them, openly or in secret, and remember that there is nothing more poisonous, noxious and utterly devilish than a rebel. You must kill him as you would a mad dog…" -Martin Luther

"Whoever shall maintain that wrong is done to heretics and blasphemers in punishing them makes himself an accomplice in their crime and guilty as they are. There is no question here of man's authority; it is God who speaks, and clear it is what law he will have kept in the church, even to the end of the world. Wherefore does he demand of us a so extreme severity, if not to show us that due honor is not paid him, so long as we set not his service above every human consideration, so that we spare not kin, nor blood of any, and forget all humanity when the matter is to combat for His glory." - John Calvin, after the toasting of Michael Servetus

In which, yes, things like the Catholic inquisition were bad, however, at times, Protestants were no better. This... Though... Is not to down denominations such as the Lutherans. My dad goes to a Lutheran church and the preacher there is an old guy, chaplain at a university, and very saintly in his life. Whenever I visit dad's Lutheran church I take time to thank the guy for his good service in the community. And this is not to say my denomination is any better as our preachers can be just as bad. I went to a Methodist camp meeting and asked an old timer what denomination he was, and he sneered at me and said, "Methodist, what else is there?"

The salvation of the old Saint of the Wilderness Robert Sheffey came at a revival meeting at an old store building. There were drunks there who would pelt the preacher with corn cobs, but Robert and a few others went up front to make their profession of faith in Christ. Robert wanted to defend the meeting, but the preacher would not hear to it, and maintained the furtherance of the gospel must be non-violent. Which was the correct thing to do!

"I will certainly do my best to see that no rowdy crowd comes up here again and bothers you even if I have to knock them down the stairs with this poker." - Robert Sheffey

"That is not the way of the Savior, my young brother. You do want to be more like Him?" -asked the preacher

"Yes." - Replied Robert

"Then he who would be more like the Christ must study the Bible and learn of His life and works. Imitate Him in all your thoughts and deeds. You are not so foolish as to think that that will come easy?"- The preacher from the readings of "The Saint of the Wilderness" by Jess Carr

And Robert Sheffey would keep his non-violent humility with him all his days...

I agree with your post entirely and greatly admire the sentiment you express therein.

However I am confused, forgive me, about just one thing: what does that have to do with my post?

 

[YeshuaFan]

Jesus explains precisely who those are in
John 6:65: "No one can come to me unless the Father has enabled him."
They are given to the Son and come as the result of being enabled (6:65)

Jesus states it as to them alone who have been enabled to come to the Son.

The passage deals with those who believe and come only because they are enabled to do so. (John 6:65)
The rest of the Jews whom he did not enable rejected him and the gospel.

There is no promise given here, there is only statement of spiritual fact: only those he enables can come.

There is no promise here of anything, there is only statement of spiritual fact.
And that fact is that he will lose none of those whom the Father has enabled and given to him.
(John 6:39)

The "all" are those whom he has enabled and will come--without exception, and none of the all shall he lose (John 6:39)
And that turned out to be a few Jews (the rest having rejected him and being cut off the one olive tree of God's people--Romans 11:17-19) and a whole lot of Gentiles.

Jesus indeed was referring to all who were ever to get saved in this passage!
I do see eternal security for all saved in Christ Jesus

 

[rockytopva]

I agree with your post entirely and greatly admire the sentiment you express therein.

However I am confused, forgive me, about just one thing: what does that have to do with my post?

I quoted the wrong post, apologies. The point was to make that there have been many, especially John Calvin, who have thought they arrived at some kind of doctrinal superiority, but could turn out to be cruel men in their old age.

 

[YeshuaFan]

I quoted the wrong post, apologies. The point was to make that their have been many, especially John Calvin, who have thought they arrived at some kind of doctrinal superiority, but could turn out to be cruel men in their old age.

John Calvin was not a cruel man, and he merely thought that he was teaching what the bible does!

 

[timothyu]

and he merely thought that he was teaching what the bible does!

Influenced by the society of the day?

 

[Uber Genius]

If you happen to answer yes to this question, my next question would be.... under this theological system, would you agree there is no sure way you could have absolute assurance of anything you believe being true? In other words, there is no way of knowing the truth

Here you have, I assume unintentionally, given us a trick question.

Your problem is due to limits of human knowledge.

Descartes gives us some reasons we should doubt "absolute assurance," about things as important as an external world, other minds (other people exist), and the reality of the past. So we are not told that our trust in God's working in human history is predicated on "Absolute assurance," or anything close to that description. We can trust God exists and is good based on natural theological arguments, introspection to examine the contents of our souls and the origin of our internal moral compass. We can remember experiences we have had of God's presence, or miracle action in our lives, as well as the testimony of other witnesses to same.

If we look at scripture and adjust the "Authoritative dial," back and forth between 0 and 100, even at 0, where scripture is just a human collection of ancient accounts of God interacting with man, we still have something akin to hundreds of witnesses recounting events in a courtroom. So as epistemically bars go, the Bible with its fulfilled prophecy, and ancient wisdom, continuity of ideas that are coherent among 40 authors, across 66 books, over 1300-1500 years by authors from differ t walks of life and circumstances presents a pretty powerful case to the jury.

But if we demand absolute assurance, not only would no one ever get convicted in a court again, but we couldn't even count on the fact that we are NOT a brain in a vat being manipulated by scientists to believe there is a real world. Sad indeed.

 

[timothyu]

Does someone setting up office make them an authority?

 

[Uber Genius]

John Calvin was not a cruel man, and he merely thought that he was teaching what the bible does!

Why not both.

Like Other Catholics and Protestants of the late 15th through mid-16th centuries the process for murdering your interlocutors was:
1- Get someone with some authority to declare your opponents view as heresy
2 - Declare your opponent a heretic
3 - Catch them
4 - Make them recant (often with gift of torture (see 1 Cor. 12-14 for more on use of the gifts of the HS))
5 - Else murder them in Jesus' our precious savior's name

Luther was a master at avoiding points 3-5.

But calling Calvin cruel... that's hitting below the belt (so he had a few Christians murdered...ah ...I mean stopped the heresy of differing in the slightest from Calvin's own view.

 

[The Liturgist]

John Calvin was not a cruel man, and he merely thought that he was teaching what the bible does!

I think his luring of Servetus to Geneva was at a minimum cruel, although the theocratic government of Geneva that followed Calvin was much worse than him. Likewise Luther and Knox had faults, but less so I think than Cranmer or Calvin. I greatly admire Wesley and Jan Hus the Martyr because of their gentle disposition.

I also do not claim moral superiority to Calvin, Cranmer, Knox or Wesley; surely I am the worst of sinners.