Eternal Security

[DD2008]

And there is no telling a false assurance from true assurance. Hence the command to work out your salvation with fear and trembling and to make sure of our call and election sure. But this isn't possible if God grants false faith, works, and assurance.

If you are following Christ you can't have false assurance.

 

[DD2008]

to DD2008 concerning your quote:

I don't agree with this statement, For Paul Himself said; what he should do he did not and what He shouldn't do He did. one fine example of this was in acts when he wanted to go back to Jerusalem to observe the passover/ the tradition he had always kept as a Jew. The Holy Ghost told him not to go, even sent a Prophet to Him to warn him that he would be bound up if he went. paul was regenerated and choose to go against God for traditions of the law. if the regenarated man always chose God then we wouldn't need Chastisement, for He only chastises those that He loves , if the regenerated always went with God there would be no chastisement.

My statement was dealing with justification not sanctification. We are justified after we are regenerated by repenting and placing our faith in Christ. All of the regenerate do this. So, they always choose God. They always repent and trust Christ. Once a person is justified he begins a life long process of sanctification where he cooperates with the Holy Spirit to become conformed to the image of Christ. During sanctification many sin often. Sanctification isn't complete until after death. Then comes glorification when we are given new Christ like bodies...etc.

It's part of the order of salvation. Most soteriological confusions come from misunderstanding the order of salvation.

 

[faceofbear]

If you are following Christ you can't have false assurance.

Since you're actually responding to me, I'll respond to this.

You're completely missing the point. The issue is that if you are not saved, you might have a false assurance but believe it to be a real assurance and there is no certainty of whether you've received a false or true assurance nor can you be certain you are following Christ as so many will believe they are, but aren't. Which is my point. If we assume I am saved, there is nothing that separates my assurance from a false assurance. Just that one is a genuine assurance -- but which one is genuine we do not know.

For example, if Persona A has a false assurance and Person B has a true assurance, there is no seeming difference between either of their assurances. Person A believes they are saved, and so does Person B, but neither of they will find out for certain they are genuinely saved until Heaven.

If we are honest, we are both capable of falling away from the faith. If you fall away you'd say, "Well, I was never genuinely saved in the first place." But such a thought is unthinkable to you at this current moment because you believe yourself to be saved. That is, you cannot prove whether your belief is saving faith, no matter what. Because you might not be genuinely saved, though you believe you are. And if you aren't, you still believe you are. Which is my point. There is no security, only skepticism. You might say, "I know I'm saved." But again, I can say that I bet many who fell from the faith could have said the same at one point. Yet in each persons case they think themselves different -- but the reality is, we aren't.

Many people follow Christ, and many people fall away. There's countless examples in the new testament of this. But you'd say, "They weren't truly saved." Yet nothing separates them from you, except they received a false assurance. And yet they felt exactly the same way you do about your faith at this current moment, therefore, it is possible, that you aren't "genuinely" saved because you don't know for 100% certainty which assurance you've received.

 

[FaithPleases]

You can know you are saved by your fruits. The better question you grown children should be asking yourselves is how can you remain saved? Obviously the word does not have a clear answer on whether one can or cannot lose there salvation hence this arguement is taking place. Where did the idea come from that God gives people false assurance? I thought the devil did that. I am not saying that all people who are saved do this, but if one has the gift of tongues is it safe to say that the holy spirit abides in them? Hence being a child of God?

 

[razeontherock]

You can know you are saved by your fruits.

True, but the converse is not true, especially in a new / young believer. "Bearing fruit" comes from abiding in the vine, having His Life course through our being to such an extent that it overflows us and cannot be contained. Much of what often passes as "fruit" is not that at all ...

 

[FaithPleases]

then how does one know if he is bearing fruit

 

[His_disciple3]

My statement was dealing with justification not sanctification. We are justified after we are regenerated by repenting and placing our faith in Christ. All of the regenerate do this. So, they always choose God. They always repent and trust Christ. Once a person is justified he begins a life long process of sanctification where he cooperates with the Holy Spirit to become conformed to the image of Christ. During sanctification many sin often. Sanctification isn't complete until after death. Then comes glorification when we are given new Christ like bodies...etc.

It's part of the order of salvation. Most soteriological confusions come from misunderstanding the order of salvation.

what ever the order is, a regenerated person is still a regenerated person after Justification or sanctification. so a regenerated person is not always for God if they sin. so the confusion is not with the order of salvation but your statement, maybe rewording might clear up some of the misguiding statement, or maybe you could use some bigger words that certainly would clear it up.

 

[Hupomone10]

Actualy these people are confused because the anti calvinists attack their assurance with ideas that attack the sovereignty of God.

Greetings, brother.

If you believe this, then I don't think you've been paying attention to their posts; at least to FaceofBear's and several he mentioned.

I have noticed no long dialogues between them and Arminians. I have noticed one of them posting questions multiple times on the protected forum "Semper Reformanda". I haven't noticed him posting on any protected synergist forums (are there any?).

Most Christians I know who have had doubts, these doubts either 1) relate directly to their lives and certain sinful attitudes or actions they feel unable to overcome, or 2) to questionable passages in scripture, usually both.

That is my consistent observation over 32 years walking with the Lord. I have never heard sovereignty of God come up as an underlying factor.

How sovereignty comes in is when high Calvinists read that into the situation, just as high Arminians read complacency into the OSAS doctrine. Both groups look through a filter, and that's what they see.

Let me say this to you. There is no assurance of salvation outside of the sovereignty of God. If God isn't sovereign and in control he can't be trusted to do what he says he will do, his prophecies can't be trusted to come true, and you can't trust him to save you. But if he really is omnipotent, omnicient, omnipresent, immutable, and sovereign, you can trust without a shadow of a doubt that he is in charge, nothing will stay his word and all he says will come to pass, so when he says "I will raise you up on the last day." You know it will happen, because he is God.

I disagree with you there, brother.
But it's interesting that you put it into that context - sovereignty of God. Most of your above paragraph is about God's Word and God being faithful to His Word and doing what He promises; yet you described that as the doctrine of sovereignty of God.

I think this illustrates one of the issues FaceofBear is having with this whole thing. People can't think outside a narrow box of sovereignty of God enough to even consider scriptures that imply personal responsibility.

Sovereignty of God is a wonderful thing, but it is not where I look for assurance of eternal life. God's sovereignty is also shown by sending me to an eternal hell if I do not embrace Christ as Savior.

Blessings,
H.

 

[DD2008]

Sovereignty of God is a wonderful thing, but it is not where I look for assurance of eternal life. God's sovereignty is also shown by sending me to an eternal hell if I do not embrace Christ as Savior.

Blessings,
H.

It should be where you look for assurance, because that's who God is, the sovereign Lord of all. Because if God isn't sovereign then that means something is out there that can make him react to situations thus eliminating the guarantee that things will go his way. So, since he is sovereign and has predestined everything that will be those who are elected to salvation have absolute assurance that they are saved.

Ephesians 1:11 NASB
11also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will,

 

[DD2008]

what ever the order is, a regenerated person is still a regenerated person after Justification or sanctification. so a regenerated person is not always for God if they sin. so the confusion is not with the order of salvation but your statement, maybe rewording might clear up some of the misguiding statement, or maybe you could use some bigger words that certainly would clear it up.

I am sorry it wasn't clear. I will reword it. A regenerated person will always repent and accept Christ as his savior. A non regenerated person will always reject him. That's what I meant when I said for God and against God.

After accepting Christ one is justified, then one is systematically sanctified, during that process they sometimes sin, however, they are saved for eternity from the moment they repented and believed. So a saved person who sins will confess that sin to God and redirect his life in an effort to not do it again.

 

[DD2008]

Many people follow Christ, and many people fall away. There's countless examples in the new testament of this. But you'd say, "They weren't truly saved." Yet nothing separates them from you, except they received a false assurance. And yet they felt exactly the same way you do about your faith at this current moment, therefore, it is possible, that you aren't "genuinely" saved because you don't know for 100% certainty which assurance you've received.

They didn't receive a false assurance, they were just false converts. Many people join churches and such for social reasons, many are just scared of going to hell and don't want to repent of their sins, they just want someone to tell them they're not going to hell, They would be overjoyed to be convinced that God doesn't exist because they really don't like him because they love to do the things that God calls sin and have no plans of giving it up, they actually strive to have their sins accepted because they are unregenerate and naturally evil. A saved person LOVES Christ. He loves good things, Godly things. That is the difference and that is his assurance because God has made him LIKE Him. He is conforming a saved person to the image of his SON. That is assurance, when you love God and know he loves you and you are becoming like Him. You are in the family of God and you love it you agree with it you are becoming like Christ, your old self is dead and your new self is focused on Christ.

Philippians 3:10 NIV
10 I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death,

If the above is you, you are saved. You aren't yet sanctified, you aren't yet glorified, but you are saved.

 

[Hupomone10]

...All of this to say the point I've been stressing: telling someone they called God a liar simply because they disagree with your interpretation of scripture is rather rude, disrespectful, harmful, and not necessarily giving the loving correction suggested in scripture.

Obviously Christ only meant certain things that He said, and apparently you can pick and choose which He meant.

You're completely ignoring the contrary premises and stacking the deck by picking and choosing what to respond to in appeal to your favor...

I guess I should just cross out all verses about the necessity to endure since all those exhortations are useless for those who are "truly" saved, but are only exhortations for the non-believers. Even though many of those exhortations were seemingly written and spoken unto believers. *shrug* Go figure.

And there is no telling a false assurance from true assurance. Hence the command to work out your salvation with fear and trembling and to make sure of our call and election sure.

Greetings, FaceofBear. Obviously you're thinking this thing through. This is some of the best objective analysis I've seen you do.

If I hear you right, one thing you're pointing out is that most people regard their assurance from the standpoint of where they are right now, assuming that they will never fall away or fall into sin. And because of that assumption they can easily say that any who do fall away were never saved to start with. And, down to the last person, they assume without a doubt they are saved at this moment.

Anyone could in the future encounter obstacles to their faith or their walk that seem too difficult to overcome; any assumption to the contrary is naivety or arrogance. What will they believe at that point? Will they believe they're ok, because of the sovereignty of God? Or will they believe, as they have so confidently asserted, that they were never saved?

I know. I believed and taught all these things. I taught that a Christian doesn't habitually sin; then I habitually sinned. I taught that Christians who do not walk with the Lord and produce fruit were never really saved. Then I fell into drunkenness and then to alcoholism because of issues in marriage that became the primary focus, taking my eyes off Christ.

Before that time, I knew beyond the shadow of a doubt that I was saved.

So now, as a severe alcoholic and also a captive to lust, I had a problem: was I never saved, or had I lost it, or was I saved and a captive to carnal nature?

When I recovered, it was primarily due to taking my position in Christ which I had left behind, and renewing my mind by changing wrong thinking with right thinking, and that came about by staying in the Word consistently.

I also reaffirmed my faith in Christ as Savior, but that was more to cover all bases than anything. Nothing happened to me when I recovered. I didn't change perspective toward Christ and who He is, toward what He had done for me, toward the fact that I was a sinner. All that changed was that I began to think and act like a Christian who is free.
________________________

I particularly like your last quote above. Everyone thinks their assurance is genuine. Here's a quote from someone on this Baptist forum a few months back, and in my opinion shows how obsession with a doctrine can not only give false assurance, but possibly even deceive the person about what salvation is altogether:

[FONT=&quot]I was chosen by Christ at the beginning of the world.
However, I do remember when I realized my election. I was 6 when I realized my election. I made a commitment to follow Jesus at age 6.
My parents wanted me to remember my Baptism so I got baptized when i was 12.”

"When I realized my election?" This is faith in a doctrine, not faith in Christ the Person; and it grieves my heart that the message of salvation is shared in this pitiful way to anyone, much less to a little one.

Nothing is said about coming under conviction of sin; nothing is said about realizing that this young person, although precious, was that horrible thing that placed Christ on the Cross; nothing is said about a realization that they had no right to the presence of Holy God whatsoever apart from their punishment being placed on Christ; and most importantly, nothing is said about going to the cross and embracing Christ through faith as Savior, only a "commitment to follow Jesus."

Is it any surprise if this person later struggled with doubts about assurance of salvation?

When are we going to stop teaching our pet doctrines as the way to salvation? When are we going to stop teaching this works'-oriented "commitment to follow" as a means to eternal life?

If we taught with conviction the truths of man's sinful state,
the truths of the cross,
the truths of necessity to respond in simple faith by fleeing to the Cross of Christ from the wrath to come,
the truth that you are saved by faith and continue by faith,

would we not build a more powerful foundation for new believers, both for assurance and for Christian living?

Blessings,
H.[/FONT]

 

[DD2008]

1 John 1:9 NIV
9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.

The very fact that a person would be convicted that something is a sin, is proof that the Holy Spirit is working in their lives. If you agree with God and turn from your sin you are repentent. That is what regenerated people do.

 

[Hupomone10]

It should be where you look for assurance, because that's who God is, the sovereign Lord of all. Because if God isn't sovereign then that means something is out there that can make him react to situations thus eliminating the guarantee that things will go his way. So, since he is sovereign and has predestined everything that will be those who are elected to salvation have absolute assurance that they are saved.

No, brother, it shouldn't. Maybe for you it should be. Maybe you have to contemplate that attribute of God in order to arrive at assurance of God's acceptance of you. But I do not.

I'm very assured of my salvation in Christ, and I have never to my knowledge had to think of God's sovereignty to come to that.God is sovereign, no doubt; and that is not in dispute, not to me.

And, as I have said, I haven't for a long time had any doubts about my acceptance in Christ nor my assurance of eternal life forever with Him. It comes from His Word and the fact that I have responded to Christ in faith exactly as His Word says.

He is sovereign, but my assurance is through His Word.

since he is sovereign and has predestined everything that will be those who are elected to salvation have absolute assurance that they are saved.

This gives no assurance unless one assumes they are elect. That is an assumption, not faith in Christ as Savior and payment for sin.

That would be fine if one knew they were elected; but that is a subjective mental assumption. One doesn't wake up one day and have this epiphany, "hey, I'm one of the elect!" and then come to saving faith. And God doesn't tap you on the shoulder and say "hey, you're one of My elect." It would be wonderful if He did, but instead He asks us to receive His Son in faith.

One knows he is elect because he believes in Christ. If you're elect, you believe. If you believe, you're elect.

As I said before, and it is becoming increasingly more obvious: this is quite possibly the cause for many people's lack of assurance; because people are telling them their assurance of salvation is to be based on something totally apart from them and having quite possibly nothing to do with them. Assurance comes only from a personal contact between the person and God. It is what God did for them personally through Christ, not because He happens to be sovereign and can choose who He wants and reject who He wants.

I merely ask that you give this consideration, brother, because I think this approach is doing many people harm.

Blessings,
H.

 

[DD2008]

No, brother, it shouldn't. Maybe for you it should be. Maybe you have to contemplate that attribute of God in order to arrive at assurance of God's acceptance of you. But I do not.

I'm very assured of my salvation in Christ, and I have never to my knowledge had to think of God's sovereignty to come to that.God is sovereign, no doubt; and that is not in dispute, not to me.

And, as I have said, I haven't for a long time had any doubts about my acceptance in Christ nor my assurance of eternal life forever with Him. It comes from His Word and the fact that I have responded to Christ in faith exactly as His Word says.

He is sovereign, but my assurance is through His Word.

This gives no assurance unless one assumes they are elect. That is an assumption, not faith in Christ as Savior and payment for sin.

That would be fine if one knew they were elected; but that is a subjective mental assumption. One doesn't wake up one day and have this epiphany, "hey, I'm one of the elect!" and then come to saving faith. And God doesn't tap you on the shoulder and say "hey, you're one of My elect." It would be wonderful if He did, but instead He asks us to receive His Son in faith.

One knows he is elect because he believes in Christ. If you're elect, you believe. If you believe, you're elect.

As I said before, and it is becoming increasingly more obvious: this is quite possibly the cause for many people's lack of assurance; because people are telling them their assurance of salvation is to be based on something totally apart from them and having quite possibly nothing to do with them. Assurance comes only from a personal contact between the person and God. It is what God did for them personally through Christ, not because He happens to be sovereign and can choose who He wants and reject who He wants.

I merely ask that you give this consideration, brother, because I think this approach is doing many people harm.

Blessings,
H.

The reason that faith in Christ is a guarantee of salvation is because God is sovereign. The reason that God's word accomplishes the purpose for which he sent it is true is because God is sovereign.

So, to get to the bottom of assurance, the reason you can have assurance is because God is sovereign and there is nothing that can thwart his purpose, so the elect are by his power saved and will live forever because God by his power will keep them alive forever with him. It's part of knowing God. It's who he is at the fundamental level. Without that knowledge one really don't know the first thing about God.

That's it. I don't believe in relativism. God is sovereign. That's the answer. If he has elected you, you will at some point in life repent and believe in Christ. If he hasn't you won't, but will receive the just outpouring of his wrath upon you.

So, assurance is a gift of God. It is a part of faith. If you really have faith you have assurance. You may doubt from time to time, but you will always be brought back to assurance through faith by the grace of God.

That's why God inspired John to write what he did:

1 John 5:13 NIV

I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life.

 

[Hupomone10]

The reason that faith in Christ is a guarantee of salvation is because God is sovereign. The reason that God's word accomplishes the purpose for which he sent it is true is because God is sovereign.

Whatever. We both believe in God's sovereignty.

So, to get to the bottom of assurance, the reason you can have assurance is because God is sovereign and there is nothing that can thwart his purpose, so the elect are by his power saved and will live forever because God by his power will keep them alive forever with him. It's part of knowing God. It's who he is at the fundamental level. Without that knowledge one really don't know the first thing about God.

I can tell you don't want to let this go, but we will have to agree to disagree. Trying to insist that everyone see God's sovereignty as crucial to their assurance just isn't going to work.

I have had peace with God and assurance because of it for most of my Christian walk without obsessing on God's sovereignty. I do not intend to start now. I just finished two booklets on assurance and neither one mentioned God's sovereignty as being the end-all of assurance.

That's it. I don't believe in relativism. God is sovereign. That's the answer. If he has elected you, you will at some point in life repent and believe in Christ. If he hasn't you won't, but will receive the just outpouring of his wrath upon you.

But isn't God sovereign in both of the above scenario's you proposed? If so, then the one group's assurance is not contingent on sovereignty, for in both groups the sovereignty of God is at work.

So, assurance is a gift of God. It is a part of faith. If you really have faith you have assurance. You may doubt from time to time, but you will always be brought back to assurance through faith by the grace of God.

First, I know of nowhere in scripture that says assurance of salvation is a gift. This will be covered at the end.

Second, this is an example of what I was talking about with some doctrinal emphases, that they hurt people. Based on what you said, if someone is saved but having doubts, they may conclude this absence of assurance to mean absence of faith, since as you put it, assurance is a gift of God. If they don't have assurance, maybe it means they don't have real saving faith and aren't truly saved.

Good job brother. By making assurance an indication of being saved, you just made lack of assurance an indication that one is not saved!

I'm going to agree to disagree, but I believe far from helping people or glorifying God as I know you intend to do, you are harming them with this. It's just my opinion, but I wish you would take it into consideration.

That's why God inspired John to write what he did:
1 John 5:13 NIV
I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life.

This I agree with; and we're back to faith in Christ and in His Word as the basis of assurance.

In Christ,
H.

 

[faceofbear]

You can know you are saved by your fruits. The better question you grown children should be asking yourselves is how can you remain saved? Obviously the word does not have a clear answer on whether one can or cannot lose there salvation hence this arguement is taking place. Where did the idea come from that God gives people false assurance? I thought the devil did that. I am not saying that all people who are saved do this, but if one has the gift of tongues is it safe to say that the holy spirit abides in them? Hence being a child of God?

Again. Missing the point. People who do not have "saving faith," generally have fruits. The point is you don't know whether your fruits are genuine or not. Many people have fruits for a time and then fall away, believing they were genuinely saved. But one would say, "They weren't truly saved." However, this then asks the question, well, what if someone who was never genuinely saved dies before their fruit bearing runs out or before they come to the realization they were never saved? This means every single person on this forum could believe they are saved, have fruits, yet not be saved. Rather I believe that if one CURRENTLY has fruits and PRESENTLY has them at the point of, they are saved and should have assurance. But if we can be falsely assured and falsely produce fruits, we cannot ever attain any assurance but only be skeptical about whether we are genuine.

I do believe that fruits provide assurance, but I do not agree assurance exists if you believe God gives false assurance, and false assurance does come. I was one who received it when I was younger (if OSAS is true) which is why I am skeptical in regards to assurance in a OSAS environment. But if OSAS is not true, I simply fell away and would have gone to hell.

Where does the idea of God giving a false assurance come? Well, if God is sovereign in the Calvinistic sense and people believe in Christ, but don't have saving faith in Christ, then they have a false assurance -- which must have been willed by God if He is sovereign in the high Calvinistic sense of sovereignty (and I do believe God is sovereign, again, before anyone accusing me of pelagianism). But I don't believe that God wills such things because I believe God wishes all to come to a knowledge of truth.

God bless you real good brother

P.S. I do agree with your overall analysis, but disagree with some of the semantics.

 

[FaithPleases]

That's discouraging. Hopefully we get to a point in or relationships where God says "We will live on the new heaven forever?

 

[Hentenza]

That's discouraging. Hopefully we get to a point in or relationships where God says "We will live on the new heaven forever?

He already did. He sent His only begotten Son so that whosoever believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life. If you believe and trust in Jesus you will spend eternity in the New heaven.

Works do not save. Works are a result of salvation and for some God has planned more of His works ahead of time than others. Not even the works that we do are our own.

We are purchased (redeemed) by His blood. To loose salvation would mean that God canceled the purchase. Not likely since God does not change His mind.

 

[MrJim]

He already did. He sent His only begotten Son so that whosoever believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life. If you believe and trust in Jesus you will spend eternity in the New heaven.

Works do not save. Works are a result of salvation and for some God has planned more of His works ahead of time than others. Not even the works that we do are our own.

We are purchased (redeemed) by His blood. To loose salvation would mean that God canceled the purchase. Not likely since God does not change His mind.

..never...? There's not a particular course happening that will remain that the fervent prayers of a righteous man cannot alter, in effect pleading for God to move in a direction that wasn't going to happen before, in turn changing God's "mind"? This is called fatalism I think...