Temporal Salvation?

[TibiasDad]

The prodigal parable is a great example of the parent-child relationship in which fellowship was broken and then restored.

You see, you are so myopic that you can't even see the self-stultifying element of your argument, the part that proves my point. I'll demonstrate my point: you said "relationship in which fellowship was broken and then restored." And my whole argument is about those relationships that are not restored. Those who have believed, but fall away and don't believe any longer and never return to repent they are still lost and dead!

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

However, this verse isn't about salvation, but about fruit production in the power of the Holy Spirit, which involves being in fellowship with the Lord.

Are you reading the same Bible that everyone else is? There is absolutely nothing about "fruit production in the power of the Holy Spirit"! Here is the entire context of the text:


Heb 3:7So, as the Holy Spirit says: “Today, if you hear his voice, 8do not harden your hearts as you did in the rebellion, during the time of testing in the wilderness, 9where your ancestors tested and tried me, though for forty years they saw what I did.

10That is why I was angry with that generation; I said, ‘Their hearts are always going astray, and they have not known my ways.’ 11So I declared on oath in my anger,
‘They shall never enter my rest.’ ” 12See to it, brothers and sisters, that none of you has a sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God. 13But encourage one another daily, as long as it is called “Today,” so that none of you may be hardened by sin’s deceitfulness. 14We have come to share in Christ, if indeed we hold our original conviction firmly to the very end. 15As has just been said:

“Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as you did in the rebellion.”

16Who were they who heard and rebelled? Were they not all those Moses led out of Egypt? 17And with whom was he angry for forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose bodies perished in the wilderness? 18And to whom did God swear that they would never enter his rest if not to those who disobeyed? 19 So we see that they were not able to enter, because of their unbelief.

There is nothing about fruit production, and plenty about not being disobedient as their ancestors had been after the exodus!

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

If what you just posted were true, then there would no need of using both words.

Then I guess there is no need of calling heads or tails on a coin toss! They (head and tail) are inexorably linked and yet distinct and independent sides of a singular entity (a coin).

There is a legal side of a relationship (the technical and static aspects like husband and wife, parent and child, brother and sister, being friends) and a relational side (the pragmatic and dynamic aspect which is fellowship, interaction, communication). The health of any relationship is based solely on the relational, dynamic side of things. You are not in a healthy marriage simply because of the signed licence hanging on the wall, or a birth certificate that says that Billy X''s mother and father are Pauline and Paul X. Relationships are about the getting along aspects of life, the fellowship, partnership, interactions between two parties irrespective of the legal status! This is part of the implications of not being under Law but under Grace! No fellowship, no realtionship!

Doug

 

[FreeGrace2]

You need to persevere so that when you have done the will of God, you will receive what he has promised. Heb 10:36

The epistle to the Hebrews isn't about getting saved. It's about the promise of eternal reward. Only those who persevere will be eternally rewarded. If you view the promised land as a picture of heaven, you would be quite wrong. The Israelites had to WORK for conquering the promised land. Work is REWARDED. Salvation is by GRACE through FAITH. Do you understand the difference?

[QUOTEBecause you have kept my word about patient endurance, I will keep you from the hour of trial that is coming on the whole world, to try those who dwell on the earth. Rev 3:10 (ESV)[/QUOTE]
ALL of the promises to the 7 churches of Rev 2-3 are about REWARD for faithful service. NONE are about keeping or gaining salvation.

You will be hated by everyone because of My name, but the one who perseveres to the end will be saved. Matt 10:22

The obvious context here is the 7 year Tribulation. So, "to the end" refers specifically to the end of the Tribulation, when Jesus Christ returns to earth to set up His Millennial kingdom.

“Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me. At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved. Matt 24:9-13

Same context; the Tribulation.

Blessed is the one who perseveres under trial because, having stood the test, that person will receive the crown of life that the Lord has promised to those who love him. James 1:12

All crowns are references to eternal reward.

But, it seems ALL Arminians don't understand that there will be REWARD for faithful service (WORK), or LOSS of reward for unfaithfulness.

These passages detail the following:

• perseverance is a commanded necessity,
• The one who perseveres to the end is the one who is saved.
• That there will be those who will reject and fall away from the Faith and they do not endure, and thus, they do not "receive the crown of life that the Lord has promised to those who love him."

You just don't understand the doctrine of eternal reward.

So only those who have become disciples and remain faithful to the end will receive thermostat of God, which includes but is not limited to salvation/eternal life.

Wrong again. Salvation/eternal life is given the MOMENT one believes in Christ. I've already demonstrated that from Scripture.

If they believed once, as your portend, and thus they possessed eternal life, but do not persevere to the end, do they, according to the above scriptures, "receive the crown of life that the Lord has promised to those who love him"?
Doug

That's correct. Such believers will NOT receive the promised reward for faithful service.

Once again,

1 Cor 3:14,15
14 If what has been built survives, the builder will receive a reward.
15 If it is burned up, the builder will suffer loss but yet will be saved—even though only as one escaping through the flames.

Red words promise a REWARD for faithful service.
Blue words promise a LOSS of reward for unfaithrul service.
Green words promise the LOSER "will be saved" nonetheless.

So, prove me wrong in these verses. That they somehow mean something totally different than what they SAY so clearly.

I gave you color coding for ease of response.

 

[FreeGrace2]

You see, you are so myopic that you can't even see the self-stultifying element of your argument, the part that proves my point.

You're just talking nonsense here.

I'll demonstrate my point: you said "relationship in which fellowship was broken and then restored." And my whole argument is about those relationships that are not restored.

See? You keep proving that you have no clue about the difference between relationship and fellowship.

Those who have believed, but fall away and don't believe any longer and never return to repent they are still lost and dead!
Doug

The words "lost" and "dead" IN THAT CONTEXT refer to fellowship, not relationship.

This is easily proven. Even when the idiot son was lost and dead (metaphors obviously), he was STILL A SON. Do you see? The RELATIONSHIP was NOT lost, nor dead. But the fellowship was.

And you can't prove otherwise. Jesus' words won't let you.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Are you reading the same Bible that everyone else is? There is absolutely nothing about "fruit production in the power of the Holy Spirit"!

This would be laughable if it weren't so sad. Did you once say you were or are a preacher? If so, I can only feel very sad for whomever you taught.

Just research the phrase "power of the Spirit" and read the context. In EVERY one, the issue was about works, or fruit. That idea is part of Christianity 101. It's very basic.

Here is the entire context of the text:
Heb 3:7So, as the Holy Spirit says: “Today, if you hear his voice, 8do not harden your hearts as you did in the rebellion, during the time of testing in the wilderness, 9where your ancestors tested and tried me, though for forty years they saw what I did.
10That is why I was angry with that generation; I said, ‘Their hearts are always going astray, and they have not known my ways.’ 11So I declared on oath in my anger,
‘They shall never enter my rest.’ ” 12See to it, brothers and sisters, that none of you has a sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God. 13But encourage one another daily, as long as it is called “Today,” so that none of you may be hardened by sin’s deceitfulness. 14We have come to share in Christ, if indeed we hold our original conviction firmly to the very end. 15As has just been said:
“Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as you did in the rebellion.”
16Who were they who heard and rebelled? Were they not all those Moses led out of Egypt? 17And with whom was he angry for forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose bodies perished in the wilderness? 18And to whom did God swear that they would never enter his rest if not to those who disobeyed? 19 So we see that they were not able to enter, because of their unbelief.

There is nothing about fruit production

Actually, it's ALL about service, or fruit production. Is "faithful service" a part of fruit production or not? Those who would say 'not' really don't have any clue about how to understand Scripture.

And as to v.19, it seems you have no clue that this verse directly applies to Moses himself. So, what does the verse mean in reference to Moses? Given all your posts, I don't expect a credible answer to this question.

But I can prove from Scripture that Moses "was not able to enter because of his own unbelief".

and plenty about not being disobedient as their ancestors had been after the exodus!

Uh, it was the entire first generation of the Exodus that WERE disobedient, and as a result, NONE of them, including Moses, entered the promised land.

There were just 2 exceptions in the first generation: Caleb and Joshua. They did enter.

 

[FreeGrace2]

There is a legal side of a relationship (the technical and static aspects like husband and wife, parent and child, brother and sister, being friends) and a relational side (the pragmatic and dynamic aspect which is fellowship, interaction, communication).

Well, well. It seems you DO understand the difference between the 2. So why do you keep posting stuff that doesn't reveal your understanding.

The health of any relationship is based solely on the relational, dynamic side of things.

Absolutely! And that was John's point in 1 John 1. He used the word "fellowship" 4 times in 3 verses.

You are not in a healthy marriage simply because of the signed licence hanging on the wall, or a birth certificate that says that Billy X''s mother and father are Pauline and Paul X.

Exactly!

Relationships are about the getting along aspects of life, the fellowship, partnership, interactions between two parties irrespective of the legal status!

No, relationships AREN'T about that. Fellowship IS about that. So maybe you still don't actually grasp the difference.

This is part of the implications of not being under Law but under Grace! No fellowship, no realtionship!

Well, you really blew it there, with that statement.

Fellowship FOLLOWS relationship.

My point about relationships vs fellowship is that in God's economy (marriage and childbirth), the relationships are PERMANENT. But fellowship is dynamic and can be lost.

But that destroys your false doctrine that salvation (relationship) can be lost.

Salvation is NOT fellowship but relationship. That's what you don't want to believe, apparently.

Can you undo your physical birth? No. Same for spiritual birth. There's NOTHING in the Bible that would lead anyone to such a ridiculous conclusion.

 

[TibiasDad]

Can you undo your physical birth? No. Same for spiritual birth. There's NOTHING in the Bible that would lead anyone to such a ridiculous conclusion.

Genetics are irrelevant, fellowship is the only thing that matters, being in communion. The prodigal was out of the father's care, protection; not caring about the father or his concerns. There was nothing that the father could do about his son's choices, and the inheritance he had wasted was gone, never to be replaced or replenished. The technical means nothing! And you are going where angels fear to tread to think that a relationship is merely based on a technical basis. I say this as a pastor, as the biblical pastors said to those to whom their letters were addressed; "Watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers." (1 Tim 4:16) Life choices and doctrine matter! Perseverance in the Faith has the result of salvation for both the pastor and his hearers (those who obey and follow the pastor's example and leading)!


Doug

 

[GDL]

Aren't the spiritual [genetics] given for a purpose - as Jesus was discussing with Nicodemus:

NKJ Ezek. 36:24-27 "For I will take you from among the nations, gather you out of all countries, and bring you into your own land. 25 "Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean; I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and from all your idols. 26 "I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. 27 "I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them.

If the purpose [of experiential righteousness] is not achieved, were the genetics given? Would He grant to His Son those He knows will not obey Him? Will He have unruly children who never grow up? In a large house there are vessels of honor & dishonor. What are the dishonorable ones - true children just to be disciplined, even to death, & stripped forever of potential rewards, or darnel to test the true in their growth? If one does not abide, & follow, etc., were the genetics given?

It's been awhile since I even thought about this topic, let alone attempt to participate in discussing it. A case can be made for both positions to battle over - obviously. I do recall that last time I was dealing with this in my own studies, John6 became extremely interesting and caused me to boil it down (at that time) to this granting situation & why God would grant anyone to His Son that would not become what He wills us to become. It's impossible to see Him as a failing parent. A wise & strategic one, sure. And whatever He is doing, is good, whether, or not He gives & takes away.

I also found John6 to be very interesting with how Jesus dealt with those He was testing with what He was saying - those disciples that found His words "harsh" + were "offended" + walked away & followed Him no more, He simply said did not believe / had not been granted to Him by His Father. And He turned right around and challenged those that remained with Him to see if they wanted to go away also, but they remained. At what point in time does someone get to be offended by Him + walk away & never return & say they had been granted? On the other hand, why does He say that growth & repentance may not be permitted by Him at some point? Are you in & then just destined to continuing discipline and an unrewarded eternity (He granted you so you could stand at the Bema in shame)? Were you in & now you're out? Were you ever in?

I pretty much know what the FG answers are and that's not my reason for asking. The point is that the Scripture does gives reasons to ask such questions & I came to find the FG position wanting and the topic deserving continued study.

 

[TibiasDad]

If the purpose [of experiential righteousness] is not achieved, were the genetics given? Would He grant to His Son those He knows will not obey Him? Will He have unruly children who never grow up? In a large house there are vessels of honor & dishonor. What are the dishonorable ones - true children just to be disciplined, even to death, & stripped forever of potential rewards, or darnel to test the true in their growth? If one does not abide, & follow, etc., were the genetics given?

You are assuming an automatic, infallible, reaction, and not a willful submission to and following of the Spirit. Indeed, one may start out well, but we must continue grow continually "make every effort to add to your faith goodness; and to goodness, knowledge; and to knowledge, self-control; and to self-control, perseverance; and to perseverance, godliness; and to godliness, mutual affection; and to mutual affection, love. For if you possess these qualities in increasing measure, they will keep you from being ineffective and unproductive in your knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. But whoever does not have them is nearsighted and blind, forgetting that they have been cleansed from their past sins." ( 2 Peter 1:5-9)

I'm a bit confused by your response, if the "genetic" aspect is the ultimate factor, then nothing else matters and the warning passages are reduced to wrist slappings and our choices are irrelevant to our spiritual vitality!


Doug

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said:
"Can you undo your physical birth? No. Same for spiritual birth. There's NOTHING in the Bible that would lead anyone to such a ridiculous conclusion."

Genetics are irrelevant

Sure, deny the obvious. Why did the Holy Spirit use familiar words to describe the believer's RELATIONSHIP to God? Because BOTH RELATIONSHIPS are PERMANENT.

Are you listening?

Maybe you aren't aware that at the moment of saving faith the believer is sealed with the Holy Spirit. This is also called "indwelling". We possess God's very "seed". If that isn't spiritual DNA, then words just don't mean anything.

You can view the indwelling any way you want, but it's clearly no different than spiritual DNA. So "genetics" is very important; spiritual genetics.

And the believer is indwelt with the Spirit for the purpose of identifying the believer as God's own possession, EXACTLY like a child is the possession of the father, in terms of RELATIONSHIP. And that is PERMANENT. Oh, yeah, I already mentioned that. But it's so important it needs to be repeated as often as necessary.

fellowship is the only thing that matters, being in communion.

The only problem is that you have stated that relationship and fellowship are basically the same thing. So your statement is TRUE, but NOT for the reasons you opine.

The prodigal was out of the father's care, protection; not caring about the father or his concerns. There was nothing that the father could do about his son's choices, and the inheritance he had wasted was gone, never to be replaced or replenished. The technical means nothing!

It means EVERYTHING. But being in such denial, of course you would make this claim.

And you are going where angels fear to tread to think that a relationship is merely based on a technical basis.

Where did I ever say "merely" in regard to the believer's RELATIONSHIP with God? There is nothing "merely technical" about it. That is absurd to even say.

At the moment of saving faith, the believer BECOMES a child of God, through spiritual BIRTH. Of course physical and spiritual birth are technical, but both are absolutely necessary for getting to heaven.

I say this as a pastor, as the biblical pastors said to those to whom their letters were addressed; "Watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers." (1 Tim 4:16) Life choices and doctrine matter! Perseverance in the Faith has the result of salvation for both the pastor and his hearers (those who obey and follow the pastor's example and leading)!
Doug

I am sad for anyone you preach to or teach. It seems you know very little about spirituality, or spiritual growth. And your denial of eternal security is just over the top.

If eternal security is not true, then faith alone in Christ alone is meaningless.

Christ died for us. Christ saves us. All man can to is receive it. And Jesus said recipients of eternal life SHALL NEVER PERISH.

And you haven't proven otherwise.

 

[GDL]

My main question & point is why would our Father grant to Christ those He knows will fail? Is He just giving opportunity to free will & allowing free will to come in & then go out - to gain then lose (without the debating input that this cannot happen)? Why does He need to do that in granting people to His Son when/assuming He knows the end from the beginning?

It seems in all these discussions, it's the normal situation. 1 is right & 1 is wrong, or both are wrong, or both are right & we're not harmonizing something.

 

[GDL]

I'm a bit confused by your response, if the "genetic" aspect is the ultimate factor, then nothing else matters and the warning passages are reduced to wrist slappings and our choices are irrelevant to our spiritual vitality!


Doug

Sorry to not quote you in #132.

To clarify: On the one hand, I don't think the warnings are to be reduced. I think things like being dried up & burned are ultimate consequences beyond fellowship & rewards interpretations. On the other hand, I think Eternal Security does have an application, but it's more strict than I supposedly just have to believe in Christ at a moment in time 1 time.

What I'm saying is, once we have the rebirth (EZ36), does our Father fail in raising us (question may be akin to Perseverance of the Saints)? He's giving His Spirit to people to enable them for experiential righteousness in Christ. Does He grant people to Christ and provide His Spirit to those He knows in advance will insult & extinguish the Seal & not repent?

I know there are commands not to do these things and the coordinate commands to remain, etc. But my question still remains: Why does (assumption) God grant people to His Son, whom He knows in advance will fail? I'm not saying that He does, or doesn't - I'm asking why He does, or would?

Probably mot clear still. Happy to rephrase as needed.

 

[WordSword]

My main question & point is why would our Father grant to Christ those He knows will fail? Is He just giving opportunity to free will & allowing free will to come in & then go out - to gain then lose (without the debating input that this cannot happen)? Why does He need to do that in granting people to His Son when/assuming He knows the end from the beginning?

It seems in all these discussions, it's the normal situation. 1 is right & 1 is wrong, or both are wrong, or both are right & we're not harmonizing something.

My point in saying that is to express that He would not do that.

 

[GDL]

My point in saying that is to express that He would not do that.

To clarify then, the only ones granted are those who will not walk away, fall away & thus will proceed to maturity & beyond & endure to the end?

If you'd like to modify this, please do.

 

[WordSword]

To clarify then, the only ones granted are those who will not walk away, fall away & thus will proceed to maturity & beyond & endure to the end?

If you'd like to modify this, please do.

Yes, to me one who is genuinely saved cannot fail to continue to endure, because the Father ensures it (Phl 1:6; 2:13; 2Th 3:3; 1Th 5:24).

 

[TibiasDad]

John6 became extremely interesting and caused me to boil it down (at that time) to this granting situation & why God would grant anyone to His Son that would not become what He wills us to become. It's impossible to see Him as a failing parent. A wise & strategic one, sure. And whatever He is doing, is good, whether, or not He gives & takes away.

What you are suggesting is crossing over to the "dark side" (just kidding) and a completely monergistic paradigm. There is no failing as a parent, for, as with all of us, our children make their own choices, speaking especially of adults with reasonable cognition and foundation, and we have no responsibility for those choices. God can loses nothing by our disobedience choices, he is neither more or less as a result of our choices. God keeps promises regardless of the choices that man makes; those who believe and trust are given eternal life and those who don't are given everlasting death. God's integrity is upheld either way.

Doug

 

[GDL]

Yes, to me one who is genuinely saved cannot fail to continue to endure, because the Father ensures it (Phl 1:6; 2:13; 2Th 3:3; 1Th 5:24).

So, all the commands to abide/remain & warnings to not fall away, etc., are for what purpose?

 

[WordSword]

So, all the commands to abide/remain & warnings to not fall away, etc., are for what purpose?

We would need to address actual passages in question to pursue from here (and I prefer only one or two at a time). Thanks!

 

[GDL]

What you are suggesting is crossing over to the "dark side" (just kidding) and a completely monergistic paradigm. There is no failing as a parent, for, as with all of us, our children make their own choices, speaking especially of adults with reasonable cognition and foundation, and we have no responsibility for those choices. God can loses nothing by our disobedience choices, he is neither more or less as a result of our choices. God keeps promises regardless of the choices that man makes; those who believe and trust are given eternal life and those who don't are given everlasting death. God's integrity is upheld either way.

Doug

Used to being accused of being on the dark side! No problem.

Not even close to monergism. I think it's always Faith+Works, with God clearly defining what works He does and what works we do & clearly separating the two.

Works of Righteousness are not Faith+Works in the strict sense. They can't be. Imprisoned under subjection to sin & death, we can't do Works of Righteousness, but that doesn't mean we bind our hands & feet & mouth & do or ask nothing, just because someone tells us we can't or don't do anything. We work to get to Faith, even if that work is to stop fighting God who is dragging us by teaching us, and do whatever it is we can do that is necessary to hear Him.

In J6 Jesus commanded unbelievers to work to receive the gift of information He gives that endures to eternal life. They were traveling around by foot & boat (certainly work) to follow Him for free food at minimum & He had no problem telling them to redirect their strenuous efforts to hear & believe who He is and what He truly was there to freely give. God was already doing the work teaching re His Son whom He had sent & who was doing the on site work with His Father to proclaim & validate the information. All of this is based in God's work & not ours. Jesus obviously knows this & He didn't stop from mixing a command to work into the receipt of the gift instruction.

In J10 He presented Himself to His sheep & they had to hear & believe & follow to enter the gate/Him. IMO Jesus in J10 is identifying hearing & following Him as belief that He is the Christ.

Faith is much more dynamic than some want to make it out to be. Not only are there many descriptive words & concepts linked to it (like in J10 above) but John chose to use eis instead of en, or some other word or phrase when he spoke of believing in(to) Christ. I don't think this is a meaningless structure.

I'm interested to read what WordSword says re: all the warnings. I have my thoughts about these also. I've been pointing out (not presuming to instruct or show what was previously unseen) to WS that all these verses suggest we can lose what we are given, but that doesn't mean such things cannot be harmonized with God ensuring we succeed. As I've also been saying, I do see Eternal Security, but I see it in a more strict sense than some others do. I also see Faith & Salvation more in line with what Mounce (the Calvinist!) sees. Faith is not alone & Salvation is clearly a process to be entered into & completed.