Assurance of Salvation

RomansFiveEight said:

I don't think so Bryan. Maybe others have an alternative opinion but it didn't bother me. There's a world of difference between questions, honest answers, etc and trying to convert people. you also didn't try to answer someone's question about Methodism with a Calvinistic answer.

You and I might have different points of view with it comes to theology and ecclesiology, but I've never felt like you weren't a positive addition around here. Even if you are a misinformed heretic. (Kidding!)

You've also helped me to understand a Calvinists perspective of wesleyanism without making offensive claims like by being a Wesleyan I'm not following the Bible.

Click to expand...

I think that the correct term is "crazy-eyed, wild-haired, bible-thumping misinformed heretic".

Thanks for the votes of confidence, GS and R58. The more I learn about Calvinism, the more similarities I find. The only significant practical difference seem to be whether regeneration or faith comes first. Everything else seems to come from that.

I was asking because Anto9us seems to be really agitated. I was hoping that he was mostly agitated about the Baptist guy, but he's trying to pick a fight with me over on the Reformed debate board, accusing me of libel and such.

I can only answer for myself and my own experiences. You may be guilty by association though, as he maybe wasn't aware that you have been an active part of this forum and a former UM yourself. He may have just seen you commenting along that other guy who was being decidedly aggressive. I would just encourage you to try and broker peace however you can.

I do read some of the other forums around here but rarely, if ever, post.

RomansFiveEight said:

I can only answer for myself and my own experiences. You may be guilty by association though, as he maybe wasn't aware that you have been an active part of this forum and a former UM yourself. He may have just seen you commenting along that other guy who was being decidedly aggressive. I would just encourage you to try and broker peace however you can.

I do read some of the other forums around here but rarely, if ever, post.

Click to expand...

I'm just ignoring him now. I just wanted to make sure that the three of you didn't agree with his accusations.

BryanW92 said:

I'm just ignoring him now. I just wanted to make sure that the three of you didn't agree with his accusations.

Click to expand...

I don't know what his accusations are (and don't need to know), so I can hardly agree (or disagree) with them. Anyway, no problem here.

BryanW92 said:

GraceSeeker, Circuitrider, RomansFiveEight:

Was I being out of line when we were comparing Calvinism to Arminianism in this forum? I wasn't trying to convert you or tell you that you were wrong or that Wesleyan theology is wrong at all.

Click to expand...

No, the way that you have approached the discussion hasn't been a problem at all. You give and seek information without trying tell tell us all what to do or what to believe about our own faith.

MystyRock said:

Ok? Can we ever really fill those gaps in this life? I'm beginning to think I'll always have questions. And wear out the ? key on my keyboard.

Click to expand...

That's what I love about the Christian faith. There is always something more to learn and experience about the Triune God.

RomansFiveEight said:

Bingo.

What I don't like about OSAS is that it seems like a binding contract. Like salvation comes with a lifetime warranty and no matter how you abuse it God is somehow bound to it, God's hands are tied. I don't think it works like that. Salvation is God's gift to give, and we know through the scriptures and his son Jesus that there is assurance in it being a freely offered gift. But we must accept it. And as Circuitrider put it in another thread; we don't lose free will when we become a Christian. We may choose, of our own free will, to reject God.

You don't lose salvation like you lose a quarter out of your pocket. It doesn't happen by accident.

An example is the young girl who grows up in the church, but begins to struggle with her faith. At some point, she rejects the church. And at some point, rejects God. Spends her life a self-proclaimed Atheist and an opponent of faith. A OSAS proponent would say one of two things. Either A) She is still saved because she prayed the sinners prayer or otherwise did some sort of work that bound God's hand or B) She was never saved in the first place. The latter is the one I hear the most, but it ignores free will. If we cannot lose salvation, then either we don't have free will, or we control God. Neither is true. I believe that girl was saved, and lost her salvation. I also believe God's prevenient grace will be at work through every breath of her life pleading for her to return; but stopping short of forcing her to return. It must be her own decision.

Click to expand...

It always makes me wonder why so many of the Southern Baptists (strong OSAS proponents) are so big on altar calls. I will often hear preachers talking about a certain number of persons being "saved" just by going to the altar, yet when some of them fall away, the excuse is they were never saved in the first place. Sooooo....why proclaim everybody as saved if there is a possibility that someone up there is just going through the motions?

VolRaider said:

It always makes me wonder why so many of the Southern Baptists (strong OSAS proponents) are so big on altar calls. I will often hear preachers talking about a certain number of persons being "saved" just by going to the altar, yet when some of them fall away, the excuse is they were never saved in the first place. Sooooo....why proclaim everybody as saved if there is a possibility that someone up there is just going through the motions?

Click to expand...

That's an enormous pet peeve. Counting salvations like winning tickets at the fair. "We got 12 salvations!"

VolRaider said:

Sooooo....why proclaim everybody as saved if there is a possibility that someone up there is just going through the motions?

Click to expand...

Do you seriously wonder? Having recognized it in my own number counting that I'm obliged to do annually as a United Methodist pastor, I thought it might be linked to human pride. But, maybe that tells you more about me than about others.

GraceSeeker said:

Do you seriously wonder? Having recognized it in my own number counting that I'm obliged to do annually as a United Methodist pastor, I thought it might be linked to human pride. But, maybe that tells you more about me than about others.

Click to expand...

Although we're counting butts-in-pews; and other similar metrics. Nobody is asking us "how many people did you save" is if WE are Jesus; and as if WE have knowledge only God has!

rofl

I'd give anything to see the phrase "butts-in-pews"

actually printed in a church bulletin, - like

Last Sunday -- "Butts-in_Pews = 136"
Professed saved = 6
already fell from grace = 2

dollars charged on debit cards = 2015
dollars actually approved
on debit cards = 1738

oh -

Bryan -

I don't hold no grudges

you don't hafta ignore me

Anto9us said:

rofl

I'd give anything to see the phrase "butts-in-pews"

actually printed in a church bulletin, - like

Last Sunday -- "Butts-in_Pews = 136"
Professed saved = 6
already fell from grace = 2

dollars charged on debit cards = 2015
dollars actually approved
on debit cards = 1738

Click to expand...

We don't report attendance in the bulletin or newsletter or anything (just our weekly reporting to the conference as required.) But if we did I bet I could slip "Butts in Pews" without most folks noticing. They look to see if they know the hymns and that's about it. Love these folks to death; but I'd be remiss if I didn't admit to lamenting over every phone call about why 'something wasn't announced' when not only was it announced, but it was clearly printed in the bulletin as well!

Actually, I have slowly (but successfully) moved us away from announcing in worship OR printing committee meetings in the bulletins. We now no longer announce, print, or post upcoming meetings. Sunday morning worship is a time to worship God; not conduct business. The committee members are responsible for being at the meetings, and it's the same time each month (Worship last Monday at 7, Ad Council second Monday at 6:30, etc. Been that way for years and years. It doesn't need announced). An e-mail reminder gets sent out to those individuals by the secretary and our monthly newsletter includes a calendar of events which includes meeting info. This shift in attitude to worship instead of conducting business has been really beneficial to us. And when you explain WHY we aren't announcing the upcoming Ad Council meeting (which is the same day and time it's been for DECADES), most folks understand and say 'oh, that makes sense'. Attendance at committee meetings has not changed.

VolRaider said:

It always makes me wonder why so many of the Southern Baptists (strong OSAS proponents) are so big on altar calls. I will often hear preachers talking about a certain number of persons being "saved" just by going to the altar, yet when some of them fall away, the excuse is they were never saved in the first place. Sooooo....why proclaim everybody as saved if there is a possibility that someone up there is just going through the motions?

Click to expand...

It is for the numbers in many cases I'm afraid.

Some of those same pastors are baptizing children as young as five years old and yet claiming to be opposed to infant baptism. It is pretty hard to take the idea of an adult profession seriously from a five year old. But it gets their baptism numbers up and that is how the success of their church is measured.

The three Baptist Bs - Buildings, Budgets, and Baptisms.

circuitrider said:

It is for the numbers in many cases I'm afraid.

Some of those same pastors are baptizing children as young as five years old and yet claiming to be opposed to infant baptism. It is pretty hard to take the idea of an adult profession seriously from a five year old. But it gets their baptism numbers up and that is how the success of their church is measured.

The three Baptist Bs - Buildings, Budgets, and Baptisms.

Click to expand...

To be fair, although the metrics are different; some of our own churches can be like that. Including one of the ones I serve. They are all about building, budget, and attendance. And attendance matters not whether the people are growing in Christ, they just want more people so they can have a bigger budget. The priorities are in the wrong place (they don't desire disciples, they desire offering checks). I suggested during a sermon some time ago that genuine desires for church growth means that we'd still want new people even if we knew they would never drop a dime into the offering plate, volunteer one minute of their time to the church dinners; or do anything but grow and serve God. Anything else isn't a desire for growth of God's kingdom, but growth of ourselves.

You're in a much larger church than I am so maybe you don't see those same dynamics. Or maybe those dynamics exist here because they are so permeated by the Baptists down the street. Who knows. But I share those number frustrations. If someone came to me and said "We need more people in our community to develop a genuine faith in God", I'd fall out of my chair stone cold dead. My heart couldn't handle such a shock. (Okay, that's an exaggeration. And actually I do have lots of folks like that; but they aren't as loud as the money minority). What I usually get is "We need more people so we can make our budget".

But at least they are honest. The SBC church I grew up in talked about "getting salvations" all the time, but their motivations were the same. I discovered that during a "Church business meeting" when, I kid you not, the words were said, "We need to go out and save some more souls so we can increase our income".

At least that group in my churches are honest enough to say they just want pew-cushion-testers that write checks

I am in what I consider a good program sized church. But they all also remember when it was a much larger church 20 or more years ago. They'd like more numbers too. But I've been blessed to not see numbers as our main focus.

Where I church struggles is with being as supportive of the Conference as they could be. Sioux City is a long way from Des Moines. People here are closer to Omaha and Sioux Falls, SD than they are Des Moines. They often feel isolated from Des Moines in this part of the state.

So I can push a missions offering any time. UMCOR giving is always good. Any local mission project will see money pour in. But when it is conference giving they aren't as enthusiastic because they don't understand connectionalism as well as they should.

circuitrider said:

I am in what I consider a good program sized church. But they all also remember when it was a much larger church 20 or more years ago. They'd like more numbers too. But I've been blessed to not see numbers as our main focus.

Where I church struggles is with being as supportive of the Conference as they could be. Sioux City is a long way from Des Moines. People here are closer to Omaha and Sioux Falls, SD than they are Des Moines. They often feel isolated from Des Moines in this part of the state.

So I can push a missions offering any time. UMCOR giving is always good. Any local mission project will see money pour in. But when it is conference giving they aren't as enthusiastic because they don't understand connectionalism as well as they should.

Click to expand...

Yeah. I have that at the smaller of my two churches. My larger church connects to a number of conference events, participates in district and conference events and training, etc. The other church doesn't, and has this attitude that they are the forgotten church on the fringe and so they aren't keen on connectionalism. They grudgingly pay their apportionments, and that's about it.

But it's why we do what we do, right? Nadia Bolz-Weber, who is a very 'colorful' Lutheran Pastor to say the least, has a fantastic quote about Christian orthodoxy, "That's okay, I'll believe it for you". Even though she's sort of radically liberal and breaks boundaries, she's very orthodox in her theology. (One of the few far-left people you'll find I think who still hold to the virgin birth, literal resurrection, existence of Hell, etc.) When folks tell her they don't believe what she believes, she tells them "That's okay, I'll believe it for you". I like the sentiment there. Our job as Pastors is to, in a way, believe it for them. When we continue our passion for our connection I do believe it rubs off. We won't convince everyone, but I think we're doing our job when we continue to support our connection even if there are voices who don't.

So many small churches believe they'd be better off congregational, too. Which is just so untrue. Someone in my church told me they wish they could just have hired me instead of having me appointed and then potentially 'taken away' in the future. (It's the smaller of my two churches which pays less than what a full-time minimum wage earner makes, and provides no health insurance, etc., nobody would've needed to take me away. I wouldn't be there any longer as a local hire than I would've been as appointed by the Bishop. Once established I'd be looking for a full time position.) It's a flattering though; but if they really think that highly of me, then they should recognize that it's the denomination that trained and vetted me. It was my candidacy mentor that another church paid for (because they pay his salary, and so our time together is on their dime), it was licensing school that I only paid $150 for, and the conference paid thousands for. It was a DCOM that met in someone elses church, with someone elses Pastors vetting and encouraging me, etc. What shaped me into who I am and what continues to shape me is the connection. If they had hired me, in this fantasy world, they'd want to get rid of me. I'd be nowhere near what I am today. (And, hopefully, that means today I'm nowhere near what I'll be tomorrow)

Yes, having come out of congregational pastoring, I tell our church that if they had to pay everything the conference pays for they'd be shocked how much of their apportionment they'd already be paying anyway.

Congregational churches pay the full cost of finding a pastor, the full cost of moving a pastor, the full insurance expenses, etc.

The grass isn't greener.

RomansFiveEight said:

I suggested during a sermon some time ago that genuine desires for church growth means that we'd still want new people even if we knew they would never drop a dime into the offering plate, volunteer one minute of their time to the church dinners; or do anything but grow and serve God.

Click to expand...

I suggested the same about a year ago. I was reminded by an "influential member of the church" that the light bill doesn't pay itself. The trap of church leaders wanting wallets to fill the pews is not a new problem, nor is it one that will go away until Christ returns.