Temporal Salvation?

[fhansen]

So you think that Paul was NOT "indwelt" with the Holy Spirit
when writing Php 3:10-14? You think he was unsaved?

You think he was "working" toward becoming "indwelt"?

I guess we will have to agree to disagree because I think
Paul was ALREADY "indwelt" and was working on sanctification,
which we (elect) all do AFTER we have become saved.

Jim
.

He was indwelt to the extent that he remained in Christ. And Christian tradition calls him a saint which attests that he did, indeed, 'attain to the resurrection'. As it turns out we can, on this side of the veil, have a nearly absolute assurance that Paul, in fact, is in heaven.

 

[5thKingdom]

The bible is often vague or even seemingly contradictory which is why many sincere-and educated-people often sincerely disagree on significant doctrine. It was, simply, never intended to be what many seem to want it to be, some sort of systematically structured catechism.

I said:
I appreciate your comments but they do not reflect what the
BIBLE teaches so I have to reject them all. Do some "Christians"
fall away... absolutely. Because most "Christians" are not saved
"wheat" sown by God, with an "indwelling" Holy Spirit. Instead,
they are unsaved "tares" sown by Satan. Them "falling-away"
only PROVES that reality... or them being rejected by Jesus after
the Final Harvest PROVES that reality.


I do not see WHERE or HOW the Bible is "vague or even
seemingly contradictory" about this issue. And education
(or sincerity) is of no consequence whatsoever since Biblical
Truth is "revealed" to the elect and there are MANY very sincere
"Christians" who are going to be REJECTED by Christ.
[Mat 7:21-23 and Luke 13:23-30]


I admit God has "revealed" Gospel Truth in a progressive manner.
Saints living in the (2nd) Jewish "Kingdom of Heaven"
[Mat 22:2-7] understood more than the Saints living during the
(1st) Pre-Flood Kingdom. And Saints living in the (3rd) Christian
"Kingdom of Heaven" [Mat 13] understood more than Jewish
Saints. Saints in the (4th) Great Tribulation "Kingdom of Heaven"
understood more than Saints from the Great Commission (before
their "testimony" was "finished" and all the elect were "sealed").
And God PROMISED the Last Saints, in the "Season and Time"
would reveal Biblical mysteries that remained "closed-up" and
"sealed" to all previous Saints [Dan 12:4 and 12:8-10]. And
we would PREACH these mysteries as the Seventh Trumpet
"begins to sound" [Rev 10:7-11]


But (to your point) I find that most often (on major doctrines)
the "vague or even seemingly contradictory" understandings
are the case of people being (a) less mature Christians or
(b) Christians producing less "fruit"... remember the elect
produce thirty-fold or sixty-fold or one hundred-fold so
it's a mistake to assume all Christians understand the
same Biblical Truths or (c) they are unsaved "tares"
in the church and never MEANT to understand.

Jim
.

 

[5thKingdom]

He was indwelt to the extent that he remained in Christ. And Christian tradition calls him a saint which attests that he did, indeed, 'attain to the resurrection'. As it turns out we can, on this side of the veil, have a nearly absolute assurance that Paul, in fact, is in heaven.

I agree that Paul was "indwelt", I do not see how there can be
any doubt about that. However, I do not understand what you
mean about "indwelt to the extent..."

I am not aware of any Scripture that teaches men are "indwelt"
25% or 50% or 75%... do you know of any Scriptures that
teach such a doctrine?

Or do you think the Bible says you can be "indwelt" with eternal
life... and then LOSE the Holy Spirit and eternal life?

Jim
.

 

[5thKingdom]

We can have a level of assurance, balanced by humility with an awareness of our limitations and weaknesses. God is 100% trustworthy and true, while we are the wildcards in it all. He, alone, knows with absolutely certainty the beginning from the end, whose names are written in the Book of Life and whose are not.

I disagree. I think the Bible teaches the elect can know NOW
that they are "indwelt". And I do not find any Scripture teaching
men can LOSE their eternal life.

Jim
.

 

[fhansen]

I agree that Paul was "indwelt", I do not see how there can be
any doubt about that. However, I do not understand what you
mean about "indwelt to the extent..."

I am not aware of any Scripture that teaches men are "indwelt"
25% or 50% or 75%... do you know of any Scriptures that
teach such a doctrine?

Or do you think the Bible says you can be "indwelt" with eternal
life... and then LOSE the Holy Spirit and eternal life?

Jim
.

I never mentioned a percentage. Jesus said we must remain in Him and He in us, that apart from Him we could do nothing. We have the option-either at the beginning of our new relationship, or at any point down the road. Unless Christ is in us the Spirit certainly isn’t either. Sin is forgiven and taken away. We can return to sin, a life in the flesh. And Scripture tells us that sin separates us from God and excludes us from heaven.

 

[5thKingdom]

I never mentioned a percentage. Jesus said we must remain in Him and He in us, that apart from Him we could do nothing. We have the option-either at the beginning of our new relationship, or at any point down the road. Unless Christ is in us the Spirit certainly isn’t either. Sin is forgiven and taken away. We can return to sin, a life in the flesh. And Scripture tells us that sin separates us from God and excludes us from heaven.

No, you never mentioned a percentage... you said to an "extent".
If you are suggesting we can LOSE our eternal life, I disagree.
I do not disagree that we can fall into sin but, if we are covered
by His Atonement, all of our sins (past, present and future) have
already been PAID.

I agree that when we fall into sin we experience separation from
the grace of walking in the spirit but when we have eternal life
that means ETERNAL.

Saints can, and do sin. Normally we LEARN from that experience.
But Saints cannot LOSE their salvation... there are no Scriptures
that teach that doctrine.

.

 

[fhansen]

I said:
I appreciate your comments but they do not reflect what the
BIBLE teaches so I have to reject them all. Do some "Christians"
fall away... absolutely. Because most "Christians" are not saved
"wheat" sown by God, with an "indwelling" Holy Spirit. Instead,
they are unsaved "tares" sown by Satan. Them "falling-away"
only PROVES that reality... or them being rejected by Jesus after
the Final Harvest PROVES that reality.


I do not see WHERE or HOW the Bible is "vague or even
seemingly contradictory" about this issue. And education
(or sincerity) is of no consequence whatsoever since Biblical
Truth is "revealed" to the elect and there are MANY very sincere
"Christians" who are going to be REJECTED by Christ.
[Mat 7:21-23 and Luke 13:23-30]

Nah, I've met plenty of self-proclaimed elect that don't necessarily agree on Scripture. And Scripture is vague in many places, but not really on this one even though varying positions could be supported with various passages. But it's quite obvious from Genesis to Revelation that God seeks man's love and obedience, for our own good, an obedience born of love to put it correctly, and love is necessarily a choice even as grace is necessary in order to to help us obtain it in the quantity and of the quality God desires for us. Man's justice/righteousness is achieved to the extent that he loves God with his whole heart, soul, mind and strength. And this is why the Christian Church can rightly teach, quoting a 16th century believer in this case, a simple yet profound truth,
"At the evening of life we shall be judged on our love".

To the extent that a Christian understands this, they've matured in their faith. Another believer, Basil of Caesarea from the 4th century, had this to say,
"If we turn away from evil out of fear of punishment, we are in the position of slaves. If we pursue the enticement of wages, . . . we resemble mercenaries. Finally if we obey for the sake of the good itself and out of love for him who commands . . . we are in the position of children."

 

[fhansen]

No, you never mentioned a percentage... you said to an "extent".
If you are suggesting we can LOSE our eternal life, I disagree.
I do not disagree that we can fall into sin but, if we are covered
by His Atonement, all of our sins (past, present and future) have
already been PAID.

I agree that when we fall into sin we experience separation from
the grace of walking in the spirit but when we have eternal life
that means ETERNAL.

Saints can, and do sin. Normally we LEARN from that experience.
But Saints cannot LOSE their salvation... there are no Scriptures
that teach that doctrine.

.

There is certainly sufficient Scripture teaching that sinners do not enter heaven. God will have His way.

 

[5thKingdom]

"At the evening of life we shall be judged on our love".

I am sorry, I did not realize that you are catholic.
I would be considered Reformed or Orthodox Protestant,
so we follow different Gospels. We believe all of our sins
(past, present and future) were already PAID. So we will
never agree on Biblical doctrines. I am sorry for wasting
both of our time.

Jim

 

[fhansen]

I am sorry, I did not realize that you are catholic.
I would be considered Reformed or Orthodox Protestant,
so we follow different Gospels. We believe all of our sins
(past, present and future) were already PAID. So we will
never agree on Biblical doctrines. I am sorry for wasting
both of our time.

Jim

It’s not a waste of time at all Jim. We both presented the truth as we’ve come to believe it. I was a very conservative Protestant at one time BTW.

 

[GDL]

Not really; we can be justified, or placed in a state of justice/righteousness as new creations, and then be expected to continue in that vein. Or, we can, alternatively, walk away from it, returning to a life lived in the flesh, and therefore losing that free gift of justice, that state of justification. This is why salvation is also said to be "worked out", because the human will is increasingly drawn and coaxed to participate, to persevere, to make our calling and election sure. In this way we can be tested and refined and actually increase in holiness, or we can also go the other direction.

Nicely stated.

And the “worked out” more specifically is defined “to effect/accomplish by labor“ with the emphasis being on the accomplishment. I looks to me like you’ve summarized Phil2:12-13 quite well, among a lot of other concepts.

Thanks!

 

[GDL]

He was indwelt to the extent that he remained in Christ. And Christian tradition calls him a saint which attests that he did, indeed, 'attain to the resurrection'. As it turns out we can, on this side of the veil, have a nearly absolute assurance that Paul, in fact, is in heaven.

Enjoying most of what you say, but, in open honesty, you lost me a bit here with the “Christian tradition calls him a saint” comment. Don’t you mean Catholic tradition?

 

[GDL]

Nah, I've met plenty of self-proclaimed elect that don't necessarily agree on Scripture. And Scripture is vague in many places, but not really on this one even though varying positions could be supported with various passages. But it's quite obvious from Genesis to Revelation that God seeks man's love and obedience, for our own good, an obedience born of love to put it correctly, and love is necessarily a choice even as grace is necessary in order to to help us obtain it in the quantity and of the quality God desires for us. Man's justice/righteousness is achieved to the extent that he loves God with his whole heart, soul, mind and strength. And this is why the Christian Church can rightly teach, quoting a 16th century believer in this case, a simple yet profound truth,
"At the evening of life we shall be judged on our love".

To the extent that a Christian understands this, they've matured in their faith. Another believer, Basil of Caesarea from the 4th century, had this to say,
"If we turn away from evil out of fear of punishment, we are in the position of slaves. If we pursue the enticement of wages, . . . we resemble mercenaries. Finally if we obey for the sake of the good itself and out of love for him who commands . . . we are in the position of children."

Some thoughts re Basil's thoughts:

Since we can become perfected in love & perfect love casts off fear I can see the correlation to the maturity you speak of (and thanks for bringing up teleios earlier) & why you quote him in this regards. Losing the fear of punishment / discipline completely, must be quite the thing to attain to. A good reminder & mirror to consider. Other than that, turning away from evil for fear of punishment is certainly part of the process as is being in the position of being a servant vs. His friend - not yet fully instructed by Him...

The mercenaries statement brings to mind a bit of a false humility possibility. Since God tells us of meros & misthos, I'm not sure why I shouldn't have this in mind, not as my priority, but why not part of the consideration? I think his relegation of this to mercenaries is a way to make it seem extreme, but such things are part of the instruction for us.

I see the Biblical warrant for the obey because we love, but I also see much instruction that our obedience is our love. There are so many terms, like Children of God, correlated to obedience, which is also correlated to faith, as well as love, that this obedience to Him becomes very central. I obey Him because of who He is <> I love Him because of who He is <> I believe Him because of who He is. "...we'll be judged on our love" <> our obedience <> our faith. I'm not sure there's much difference at the end of the analysis, but love is certainly the summary as is clearly stated & identified in the 2 greatest commands. I obey Him because I love Him <> I love Him because I obey Him. Either one works for me based upon how I read His Word. Since we've been commanded to believe and to love, there's really no way to do wither apart from obeying Him.

 

[WordSword]

Of course not.
If eternal salvation is "eternal"...
then what part of eternal do we not understand?.

I was looking through here again and realized I'm not sure what you mean by "of course not." Thanks.

 

[fhansen]

Enjoying most of what you say, but, in open honesty, you lost me a bit here with the “Christian tradition calls him a saint” comment. Don’t you mean Catholic tradition?

A saint is simply one who's been recognized as having attained heaven-and they become sort of heroes and heroines of the faith even when they aren't biblical figures. Both the eastern and western churches have recognized Paul as such in some official capacity and I'm sure that the majority of Protestant churches do as well, officially or otherwise.

 

[WordSword]

We cannot assume that everyone who's heard John 18:9, whether when those words were first read or down through the centuries thereafter, and applied them to themselves, were/are necessarily saved.

Not sure what your are saying here, but truly saved means permanently redeemed.

We're supposed to retain a certain level of wondering and anticipation and doubt about ourselves

Concerning what issue? Not sure what you mean. Thanks.

But one thing I do: Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead, I press on toward the goal to win the prize of God’s heavenly calling in Christ Jesus."

I understand this to mean that Paul endured until the end, which is our "mark"; and the prize is receiving physically (heaven) what we already have spiritually, e.g. presently possess God and heaven via His Spirit, and eventually possess Him and heaven physically (prize).

Either way any gospel that relieves man of the obligation to be righteous himself is a false gospel.

Amen, it's not gospel if one professes righteousness and is not in Christ, for one cannot be in Christ and not manifest His righteousness (Phl 2:13); which righteousness is His alone and cannot be imparted but must be imputed, for man has no personal righteousness, which are only "filthy rags", being sinful in our "old man" alone. It's been rightly said that the attributes of God (righteousness, holiness, justification, etc.) are incommunicable to the creature (man, angel).

 

[fhansen]

Some thoughts re Basil's thoughts:

Since we can become perfected in love & perfect love casts off fear I can see the correlation to the maturity you speak of (and thanks for bringing up teleios earlier) & why you quote him in this regards. Losing the fear of punishment / discipline completely, must be quite the thing to attain to. A good reminder & mirror to consider. Other than that, turning away from evil for fear of punishment is certainly part of the process as is being in the position of being a servant vs. His friend - not yet fully instructed by Him...

Yes, and I think Basil would agree whole-hardheartedly.

The mercenaries statement brings to mind a bit of a false humility possibility. Since God tells us of meros & misthos, I'm not sure why I shouldn't have this in mind, not as my priority, but why not part of the consideration? I think his relegation of this to mercenaries is a way to make it seem extreme, but such things are part of the instruction for us.

Here I think he's simply saying that at some point one may believe they can earn their way to heaven-such that eternal life is compensation for what they've done just as mercenaries fight for money rather than out of loyalty, patriotism, etc.

I see the Biblical warrant for the obey because we love, but I also see much instruction that our obedience is our love. There are so many terms, like Children of God, correlated to obedience, which is also correlated to faith, as well as love, that this obedience to Him becomes very central. I obey Him because of who He is <> I love Him because of who He is <> I believe Him because of who He is. "...we'll be judged on our love" <> our obedience <> our faith. I'm not sure there's much difference at the end of the analysis, but love is certainly the summary as is clearly stated & identified in the 2 greatest commands. I obey Him because I love Him <> I love Him because I obey Him. Either one works for me based upon how I read His Word. Since we've been commanded to believe and to love, there's really no way to do wither apart from obeying Him.

I think Basil's message is that obedience flows from love. This is what Adam was missing, in fact, and is the main virtue that God's been endeavoring to cultivate in man from the beginning as love literally defines man's justice-and this is why the Greatest Commandments are what they are and why Paul would say in 1 Cor 13:13:
"And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love."

And I think it's interesting to consider that the Greatest Commandments are the only ones that cannot be faked-I can obey externally for the wrong motivations but one either loves or they don't-even if we may love to varying degrees of intensity.

 

[GDL]

A saint is simply one who's been recognized as having attained heaven-and they become sort of heroes and heroines of the faith even if they aren't biblical figures. Both the eastern and western churches have recognized Paul as such in some official capacity and I'm sure that the majority of Protestant churches do as well, officially or otherwise.

Appreciate the reply. Still not a concept I comfortably accept. With all the references & addresses to “saints” in the NewCov, there’s little to no warrant that I‘ve seen to accept the sainthood recognitions of churches. Also, with the uncertainty you’ve mentioned, how does a church take the position of being such a judge to confer this? Maybe I’m not understanding you correctly, but all such Roman conferring, for instance, still has zero interest for me & and seems more of a push for the perceived authority of the system.

 

[fhansen]

Appreciate the reply. Still not a concept I comfortably accept. With all the references & addresses to “saints” in the NewCov, there’s little to no warrant that I‘ve seen to accept the sainthood recognitions of churches. Also, with the uncertainty you’ve mentioned, how does a church take the position of being such a judge to confer this? Maybe I’m not understanding you correctly, but all such Roman conferring, for instance, still has zero interest for me & and seems more of a push for the perceived authority of the system.

I guess the canonization process can be looked at that way but as I've come to see it it's simply a matter of recognizing and appreciating the obvious virtue attained of some who've gone before us, and can serve as models for us, while also acknowledging that we simply can't comment on the fate of most.

 

[fhansen]

Not sure what your are saying here, but truly saved means permanently redeemed.

Yes, the elect are the elect. We just don't know who they are with 100% certainty-who will persevere and who will not, for example, and final judgment comes at the end, not at the beginning of our walk even if we can surely have a level of assurance now, based on God's promises and trustworthiness together with the way we live our lives with the fruit produced etc.

Concerning what issue? Not sure what you mean. Thanks

.
Concerning salvation-in light of our weaknesses, limitations and sinfulness. A degree of humility is in order here. God is infinitely trustworthy and true while we're the wildcard in it all.

I understand this to mean that Paul endured until the end, which is our "mark"; and the prize is receiving physically (heaven) what we already have spiritually, e.g. presently possess God and heaven via His Spirit, and eventually possess Him and heaven physically (prize).

I take it to me he's striving, as the narrative implies. Otherwise he's being more than a bit redundant, no?

Amen, it's not gospel if one professes righteousness and is not in Christ, for one cannot be in Christ and not manifest His righteousness (Phl 2:13); which righteousness is His alone and cannot be imparted but must be imputed, for man has no personal righteousness, which are only "filthy rags", being sinful in our "old man" alone. It's been rightly said that the attributes of God (righteousness, holiness, justification, etc.) are incommunicable to the creature (man, angel).

Why should the attributes or virtues be incommunicable to creatures? If they are then the whole drama from Eden until now is a pointless exercise in unnecessary pain and suffering for those same creatures. Adam could never have been rightly held accountable for his "sin"; the word "sin" should have no meaning in fact.

We're made in God's own image remember-and He's got big plans for man. Salvation isn't just an after thought-or a reluctant plan B for an elected portion of otherwise worthless wretches. When God made man and angels He made something, something great and noble-or at least potentially so. And He's been in the process of bringing His beloved creation into a perfection that He, alone, has in mind fully, since the beginning.