Eternal Security of the Believer+LFW=Compatible?

[Daywalker]

I have opened this thread for a PHILOSOPHICAL discussion as to whether or not Libertarian Free Will and Eternal Security of the believer are compatible or not. I am not interested in spending much time with the scriptures on THIS thread. A few verses here or there for necessity's sake perhaps, but not much. I am also not interested in hearing about HOW and WHEN the teaching of the Eternal Security of the Believer came about. To me, this is immaterial.

I outright REJECT the perserverance of the saints. What I hold to is the "eternal security of the believer". I believe that once a man becomes a child of God, that God is "stuck with him" forever regardless of how he behaves. He may chasten him, kill him, etc. etc...but in the end he gets to be perfected like Christ and go into the New Heaven and Earth.

A little more background on my views:
For the record, I do not believe that Jesus Christ COULD have sinned in his temptation. I believe that, just like the bible says, "the thought of foolishness is sin" (Prov. 24:9). If Christ was truly tempted INTERNALLY to sin, he sinned-period. I believe that Christ was tempted in that Satan presented a temptation, but it did not truly TEMPT Christ to sin. I do not believe that Christ COULD be tempted to sin INTERNALLY only outwardly (I. Cor.10: 9).

I also believe that once we get to the New Heaven and Earth that since there is NO MORE DEATH (death is destroyed), that we are ALL secure and CAN NOT die...which would also cause me to believe that we will not sin, that we will truly be "like Christ"-perfect. Personally, I can see no reason why that negates LFW. I just see it as LFW-like the Son of God's.

Here is my thoughts: A person may even ask God to free them from eternal life, but God knows (as any loving father) that IF his child WERE IN HIS RIGHT MIND that he would NOT ask such a thing therefore he would not grant that request. I believe that God "could" look back and acknowledge the fact that at one time the person DID ask to be saved, and for God to not grant the New Heaven and Earth to him, that God would regard this as breaking his own word.

LFW and Eternal Security of the Believer=Compatible?

Thoughts...?
Grace,
Mike
TO THE TULIPS: The purpose of this thread is NOT to discuss why OSAS MUST be the perserverance of the saints vs. my view on OSAS.

[Reader]

I have opened this thread for a PHILOSOPHICAL discussion as to whether or not Libertarian Free Will and Eternal Security of the believer are compatible or not. I am not interested in spending much time with the scriptures on THIS thread.

Then I believe you have posted in the wrong forum. You should post this on the Philosophy 201 forum.

This forum is made available for those who desire to discuss Theology and spend time studying the Scriptures.

[brett]

Hey DW. Good thread!

I know you’re not a calvinist but I’m curious. Where do you stand on Total Depravity (Total Inability)? Do you affirm it and believe that prevenient grace (PG) is necessary before one can believe? Or do lean toward the semi-pelagian view (that we are hindered by our corrupted nature, but still able to believe)??

[Daywalker]

Hey DW. Good thread!

I know you’re not a calvinist but I’m curious. Where do you stand on Total Depravity (Total Inability)? Do you affirm it and believe that prevenient grace (PG) is necessary before one can believe? Or do lean toward the semi-pelagian view (that we are hindered by our corrupted nature, but still able to believe)??
Neither. I believe our nature was never corrupted...I believe that we are just like adam before the fall, able to not sin.

[Reader]

Neither. I believe our nature was never corrupted...I believe that we are just like adam before the fall, able to not sin.


That is full-fledged Pelagianism!

[Sheepdog]

First, "Eternal Security" and "Once Saved Always Saved" are two different things. I have security that, so long as I stay in faith, I will be saved; so, I do have a secured eternity, albeit a conditional one.

Second, Once Saved Always Saved and Libertarian Free Will are indeed compatible, only if (AFAIK) one of the following conditions exist: (1) there is no sin, (2) one is indeed still saved, even after throwing away saving faith, (3) God ensures that no one ever falls away (e.g., "God foreknew i would have fallen away in AD 2007, so He foreordained that i shall die in 2006. ironically, this is effectively a LFW version of Perseverence of the Saints).

For #1, that obviously it is not the case now, though this is a good reason to believe that no saint can lose salvation after being raised on Judgement Day. #2 is the poster child of antimonialism, a.k.a. "Easy Believism." I reject this because the Bible reveals authentic faith and salvation going hand and hand, such that one does not have one without the other. I reject #3 simply because i believe the Bible tells us otherwise.

[Sheepdog]

Neither. I believe our nature was never corrupted...I believe that we are just like adam before the fall, able to not sin.
but DW, Our inability to save ourselves is the reason why the Gospel is so necessary. If it were possible for us to live without sin, then Christ died needlessly.

Really, that more or less sums up Paul's point in Romans and Galatians (though, he equivocated doing the works of the Law with doing that which is righteous, as any other good Jew would have done).

[brett]

Neither. I believe our nature was never corrupted...I believe that we are just like adam before the fall, able to not sin.

Ichiewawa!
:huh::twitch::egad::eek:

[Calvinist4Him]

I have opened this thread for a PHILOSOPHICAL discussion as to whether or not Libertarian Free Will and Eternal Security of the believer are compatible or not. I am not interested in spending much time with the scriptures on THIS thread. A few verses here or there for necessity's sake perhaps, but not much. I am also not interested in hearing about HOW and WHEN the teaching of the Eternal Security of the Believer came about. To me, this is immaterial.

Are you approaching this with an open mind or a closed mind? Although, I understand your desire for a philosophical discusssion, I find it rather interesting how you've all but ruled out the Scriptures from this discussion. I find it interesting, because I could refute your position with Scripture, because your view of "eternal security" (OSAS) is not biblical.


I outright REJECT the perserverance of the saints. What I hold to is the "eternal security of the believer". I believe that once a man becomes a child of God, that God is "stuck with him" forever regardless of how he behaves. He may chasten him, kill him, etc. etc...but in the end he gets to be perfected like Christ and go into the New Heaven and Earth.

Then you outright reject the words of Christ. At least you recoginze the difference between perseverance of the saints and "eternal security". In my honest opinion, your view or philosophy of eternal security (OSAS) is not compatible with the Scriptures. Your essentially telling me that because Hitler made a decision for Christ when he was 8 years old or a teenager that God will overlook his behavior. Have you ever personally experienced the santification of the Holy Spirit? Are you aware of the difference between a tree that bears fruit and one that does not? Do the words "born again" mean anything to you?


A little more background on my views:
For the record, I do not believe that Jesus Christ COULD have sinned in his temptation. I believe that, just like the bible says, "the thought of foolishness is sin" (Prov. 24:9). If Christ was truly tempted INTERNALLY to sin, he sinned-period. I believe that Christ was tempted in that Satan presented a temptation, but it did not truly TEMPT Christ to sin. I do not believe that Christ COULD be tempted to sin INTERNALLY only outwardly (I. Cor.10: 9).

I am under the impression that you adhere to determinism/fatalism (which explains your view of eternal security). I get the impression that you think that if there is a possiblity to be "truly" tempted, then it's impossible to not sin. You believe that Christ was tempted, but not truly tempted? IOW, it wasn't "really" temptation because Christ could not have sinned. Why even say that He was tempted then? Why call it temptation? What is the point in making a distinction betwen "internal" and "external" temptation? Is outward temptation not "truly" temptation?

In my honest opinon, for the sake of this discussion, it would help to make a few OTHER distinctions, that Christ was NOT born with a sinful nature, that Christ knew the hearts and minds of people, that Christ is God in the flesh! The Scriptures say that Christ had the Spirit...without measure!


I also believe that once we get to the New Heaven and Earth that since there is NO MORE DEATH (death is destroyed), that we are ALL secure and CAN NOT die...which would also cause me to believe that we will not sin, that we will truly be "like Christ"-perfect. Personally, I can see no reason why that negates LFW. I just see it as LFW-like the Son of God's.

I will be much more willing to talk about any truth of eternal security once we are in Heaven. ;) I would add that it does not follow that just because we will not sin, that there isn't a possibility we would sin. How do you explain the origin of sin and evil? Umm...did you mean to say sons of God rather than "Son of God's"? (Son of God's sounds like something a mormon might say)


Here is my thoughts: A person may even ask God to free them from eternal life, but God knows (as any loving father) that IF his child WERE IN HIS RIGHT MIND that he would NOT ask such a thing therefore he would not grant that request. I believe that God "could" look back and acknowledge the fact that at one time the person DID ask to be saved, and for God to not grant the New Heaven and Earth to him, that God would regard this as breaking his own word.

Why would a child of God ask to be "free" from eternal life? Are you saying that in Heaven where there is no sin that it's possible that a child of God could be in the wrong state of mind? How? The person asked to be saved? Sure, and we would'nt want God to break His word to Hitler, would we? :blush:


LFW and Eternal Security of the Believer=Compatible?

LFW and eternal security are compatible with the divine foreknowledge of God.


TO THE TULIPS: The purpose of this thread is NOT to discuss why OSAS MUST be the perserverance of the saints vs. my view on OSAS.[/SIZE]

Umm...it would be more appropriate to address those people as Calvinists. Why do you insist on putting so many restrictions on what can and cannot be discussed in a normal thread such as this?

Anyway, let me ask you a philosophical question, is a Holy God and determinism compatible with the existence of evil?

[Daywalker]

but DW, Our inability to save ourselves is the reason why the Gospel is so necessary. If it were possible for us to live without sin, then Christ died needlessly.

Really, that more or less sums up Paul's point in Romans and Galatians (though, he equivocated doing the works of the Law with doing that which is righteous, as any other good Jew would have done).
What am I being saved from? Death. I will die thanks to Adam. So, there is no "me saving myself" by not sinning. Even IF I did not sin, I would still die.

Sheepdog, if we are unable to not sin, then we do not have LFW. We have CFW TO SIN. Think about it. You also stated that you have security as long as "IF", etc. Then you have no security. If I tell you that I have security from theives just as long as they don't come into my home, how is that security? If I have security of not loosing my salvation just as long as I don't sin, WHERE is the security in that?

[Jaltus]

LFW is not something which is taken away if certain options are taken away. LFW is the ability to choose, simply put. If a choice is once availible, it should always be availible unless temporal issues interveen (the entire cannot swim in the same river twice kind of issues).

I think that LFW and eternal security/OSAS are completely incompatible on the philosophical level. If one is able to choose Christ, why can one not choose other than Christ?

In fact, let me push it a bit further. If someone is given the option of choosing Christ but denies Him over and over and over again, then why is it that if you choose Him once you are "stuck" with Him forever? This is inconsistent (let alone my scriptural objections to OSAS and my objections to you, DW, being able to hold to this doctrine based upon your hermeneutical presuppositions).

I think that, once judged completely justified before God, then our status changes and LFW is gone. Just as in hell they cannot choose Christ, so those existing on the new heavens and new Eearth will not be able to choose OTHER than Christ. The White Throne Judgment eliminates LFW from the Universe except for God (at least of those creatures which currently exist, He could decide to create other LFW beings, you never know).

Security in the biblical sense is that nobody can take salvation away from the believer, however this does not mean one cannot give it up. Eternal security simply means, to me, that I can lose my salvation only through willfully and intentionally walking away from God. It is security because it cannot be taken from me, much like how a bank works. I can withdraw my money from a bank, but nobody else (in theory) can withdraw my money from the bank.

[Sheepdog]

What am I being saved from? Death. I will die thanks to Adam. So, there is no "me saving myself" by not sinning. Even IF I did not sin, I would still die. well if all God is saving you from is physical death, then He isn't doing a good job. as the saying goes, only 2 things are certain, death and taxes. (maybe you can be saved from the IRS, though). but if you are innocent, you will not receive punishment, because there is no guilt. where there is no guilt, there is no need of a savior.


Sheepdog, if we are unable to not sin, then we do not have LFW. We have CFW TO SIN. Think about it. thought about it long and hard. quite some time ago, in fact. really, you are just making the same mistake Calvinists do, by assuming the whole onto the individual parts (that is, the Fallacy of Division). The nonbeliever, apart from God's work in them, only sin... however, are there not different levels or types of sin? For instance, if an old lady needed help across the street, i could do nothing (sin of ommission), mug her (theft), or help her accross but to prove to others my own moral superiority (motivated by pride). As long as there are more than one alternative i could potentially choose, i have freedom of choice. ...And that doesn't even count choices which have no inherent moral consequences (e.g. choosing between flavors of ice cream).


You also stated that you have security as long as "IF", etc. Then you have no security. If I tell you that I have security from theives just as long as they don't come into my home, how is that security? If I have security of not loosing my salvation just as long as I don't sin, WHERE is the security in that? Jaltus covered this point well.... though i typically prefer the term assurance over security. but no, the security is in this: And the testimony is this, that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life. These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life. 1 John 5:11-13. But note, John is careful not to use absolute terms, but seeks to assure those who have Christ, those who believe. hence the assurance is conditional. (my position is that we don't lose salvation over any sin, except the sin of total rejection of Christ.)

[Daywalker]

LFW is not something which is taken away if certain options are taken away. LFW is the ability to choose, simply put. If a choice is once availible, it should always be availible unless temporal issues interveen (the entire cannot swim in the same river twice kind of issues).

If men are totally depraved then I hand the crown over to the Calvinists. What is more depraved then TOTAL depravity, nothing. If I COULD choose Christ under a total depravity model, then I would never have been totally depraved. Total Depravity neccessitates Irresistible Grace, and rightfully so, IF Total Depravity were biblical. If I am totally depraved, then I WOULD not have the LFW to choose Christ for that would be something RIGHT to do and thus undermine Total Depravity.

Moreover, we are not talking about LFW being taken away, we are talking about the elect being made into the better image. The bible clearly teaches that we will be made after a heavenly image. I would argue that it is heavenly IN CHARACTER. We will still have LFW, but not sinful desires. Christ paid the price for it to be so. You had agreed that God has LFW, if we will be made after Christ's heavenly image (which we are not right now) then we will ONLY be able to choose righteousness. If that is not so, then God's LFW must be tainted as well-for I will bear HIS heavenly image.

Finally, you stated that LFW is the ability to choose...agreed. Personally, I don't like even having to say LFW. I would just say FREE WILL and leave it at that, but thanks to Calvinism, those days are gone! What LFW did Pharoah have. God knew his character and that Pharoah only WOULD choose a course of action through the hardening of his heart and spirit of unbelief. He had reached a point that he COULD NOT turn back for what was presented to him. I just believe that with our new heavenly image that we COULD NOT turn back once we are in the New Heaven and Earth.

Honestly, Eternal Security of the Believer works great in OVT. In fact, it is the ONLY THING that allows the future to be partially settled-same in any model if it could be worked out. SOMETHING musst make the future partially settled and since OVT believes that God CAN repent of a lot of things, then something must be there that seals the future of the New Heaven and Earth...OSAS provides that.


I think that LFW and eternal security/OSAS are completely incompatible on the philosophical level. If one is able to choose Christ, why can one not choose other than Christ?

You may choose other than Christ as a child of God, but when it comes time for the Ressurection, it won't matter what you chose. You were stuck..and now you have your perfected image, so you will be satisfied :) I may stand without a reward and a crown, but I will have LIFE.


In fact, let me push it a bit further. If someone is given the option of choosing Christ but denies Him over and over and over again, then why is it that if you choose Him once you are "stuck" with Him forever? This is inconsistent (let alone my scriptural objections to OSAS and my objections to you, DW, being able to hold to this doctrine based upon your hermeneutical presuppositions).

Well, Jaltus, for one, you really don't know my hermeneutical presuppositions on a lot of matters. You asked me a question on paltalk about how I view the books of the NT because you DIDN'T know what I would say...or else you would not have asked it. You have even stated that with dispy's we "must elliminate certain books of the bible". That is false. Not only have we written study Bibles, but I would argue that our critics do more to elliminate books of the bible than we ever dreamed of-by stealing promises given to Israel and forcing them on "the church" at the expense of a future, regathered and empowered Israel. Moreover, are you not a dispensationalist? Sure you are. You may argue that the reason that you don't offer up a sacrifice for your sins like Lev. commands is because you are not under the law nor an Old Testament Jew, but that is STILL dispensationally considering your Bible. At the time Lev. was written, it was a PRESENT TRUTH, now it is not. So, be careful when casting stones lest you find yourself living in a glass house. :) I don't want to deal with dispensationalism here, though.

I believe that once we choose Christ, we are STUCK with eachother forever and ever, yes. Why? Let me illustrate...
Last year I desperately needed a car. I was fully aware that my vehicle COULD not get me where I needed to go. I went into a dealership and bought a brand new car. Let's assume I paid cash right up front. The car is now MINE. The car came with a host of options that I saw and liked. I now have owned this car for under a year. I can not go back to the dealership and tell them that I want them to refund my money and take the car back. Why? Because the deal was settled the moment I bought it, OR ELSE, I never TRULY owned the car...

Jaltus, if you are still making "payments" on "salvation" then it was never truly yours and you were never truly saved. In order to be saved you must be "out of harm's way". Are you? Moreover you stated what you perceived to be illogical, that a person would choose to walk away from Christ again and again and still be stuck to him. If that were the case, none would be saved. We walk away from Christ every time we sin. In fact, we WILLfully sin, don't we?


I think that, once judged completely justified before God, then our status changes and LFW is gone.

Then you have just shot down Molinism. Because if THAT were the case then God SHOULD have created the non LFW world to begin with since he was going to anyway. This world, therefore, is a waste in Molinism. In fact, it would be an utter tragedy. God creates LFW to let men choose him ONLY to recreate them as creatures WITHOUT LFW in the New Heaven and Earth? I agree that we WOULD not choose other than Christ in the New Heaven and Earth, but not because LFW is removed, but because we would be patterened after a model that WOULD NOT SIN, Christ. Just as Pharoah was hardened to only sin, we would be remade in an image that is hardened to NOT sin. In LFW the pendullum (sp) swings both ways and will continue to do so (in my view) untill or re-creation.


Just as in hell they cannot choose Christ, so those existing on the new heavens and new Eearth will not be able to choose OTHER than Christ. The White Throne Judgment eliminates LFW from the Universe except for God (at least of those creatures which currently exist, He could decide to create other LFW beings, you never know).

Comments are above


Security in the biblical sense is that nobody can take salvation away from the believer, however this does not mean one cannot give it up. Eternal security simply means, to me, that I can lose my salvation only through willfully and intentionally walking away from God. It is security because it cannot be taken from me, much like how a bank works. I can withdraw my money from a bank, but nobody else (in theory) can withdraw my money from the bank.

Well, remember one thing...you don't own the bank. Christ does. In fact, IF it was his bank to open and shut then he decides who gets what and when. I think God wants all to come to him and would take all at any moment. But you would have to prove that God would LET YOU withdraw your money. I believe God has the good sense to protect you FROM yourself. I would argue that we are simply SEALED. On top of that, the reason I think that the arguement that you presented is inconsistent is also because...it isn't your money either.

Basically, we stand before God as beggers. God says "ok, I love you and I will GIVE you some money...but not without ME. And lucky for you, the riches of my grace can not be spent up nor can I".


well if all God is saving you from is physical death, then He isn't doing a good job. as the saying goes, only 2 things are certain, death and taxes. (maybe you can be saved from the IRS, though). but if you are innocent, you will not receive punishment, because there is no guilt. where there is no guilt, there is no need of a savior.

Yes, my punishment IS death, however on the flip side of that, my true, full punishment is denial of a resurrection. Which goes back to "the wages of sin IS DEATH".
Judically, Christ has paid it all in full. I MIGHT die thanks to Adam, but in the end I MUST live because I am in Christ. I may not ever die in this life because the Ressurrection may come first.


thought about it long and hard. quite some time ago, in fact. really, you are just making the same mistake Calvinists do, by assuming the whole onto the individual parts (that is, the Fallacy of Division). The nonbeliever, apart from God's work in them, only sin... however, are there not different levels or types of sin? For instance, if an old lady needed help across the street, i could do nothing (sin of ommission), mug her (theft), or help her accross but to prove to others my own moral superiority (motivated by pride). As long as there are more than one alternative i could potentially choose, i have freedom of choice. ...And that doesn't even count choices which have no inherent moral consequences (e.g. choosing between flavors of ice cream).

Okay, now THERE is where I draw the line. There are moral choices in choosing ice cream and French Vanilla is "IT"!
okay...that was poor comic relief...but moving on...
Where do you get that the nonbeliever CAN only choose sin without God doing something special in them??? Then there is no LFW. There is CFW to sin but man left in desperate need for God to alter that. God never cursed our nature. Nor would God hand that power over to Adam. That is simply way too much control to give to Adam. He cursed our flesh...that we would DIE thanks to our head, Adam, having messed things up for us. The Bible does not say that we are in a marred image of God. It just states that we are in the image of God and leaves it at that. I believe that the reason why God moves on unbelievers is to HELP them to come around to faith, but they SHOULD have picked him to begin with since they are in the image of God and have LFW. But the paradox is that they DO have LFW in a world where man has made and does make choices to sin. So, God tries to CURVE the paradox of the downward spiral. Honestly, if what you have stated above about the curse is true, then hats off to Calvinism-they got it right. If God truly put "the curse of sinfulness" on man, then we CAN'T undo it WITHOUT irresistable grace.


Jaltus covered this point well.... though i typically prefer the term assurance over security. but no, the security is in this: And the testimony is this, that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life. These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life. 1 John 5:11-13. But note, John is careful not to use absolute terms,

huh??? What is so nonabsolute in that statement? "He who has the Son has life" means just that....


but seeks to assure those who have Christ, those who believe. hence the assurance is conditional.
It never said that they had to keep believing to have "life" from God.


(my position is that we don't lose salvation over any sin, except the sin of total rejection of Christ.)
There are absolutely no verse that plainly state that, and if a person can will themselves out of "the life of God" then how would they ever keep those things in mind? I mean, by what YOU say about the unbelievers being able to only choose sin without Christ, how is that possible?

Again, I COULD use verses, but let's face it, we are just going to look at eachother like the others don't really believe the bible if they won't agree with us. This just prevents a fight. Not trying to be rude here...

[Sir Yap Alot]

I think that LFW and eternal security/OSAS are completely incompatible on the philosophical level. If one is able to choose Christ, why can one not choose other than Christ?

In fact, let me push it a bit further. If someone is given the option of choosing Christ but denies Him over and over and over again, then why is it that if you choose Him once you are "stuck" with Him forever? This is inconsistent (let alone my scriptural objections to OSAS and my objections to you, DW, being able to hold to this doctrine based upon your hermeneutical presuppositions).
That has always been my view....if we have free will before we are saved...why do we lose it after we are saved....we dont

The Angels had free will...Adam & Eve had free will. I think this doctrine is just some peoples safety blanket....they fear the idea of personal responsibility and free choice.

They love the idea of free will before they are saved......just not after they are saved

I bet the Angels also had their head in the sand concerning this...thats why they fell, they did not WANT to look at the possibility of a fall and rejection by God

This post should be in Theology 201

[Daywalker]

That has always been my view....if we have free will before we are saved...why do we lose it after we are saved....we dont

The Angels had free will...Adam & Eve had free will. I think this doctrine is just some peoples safety blanket....they fear the idea of personal responsibility and free choice.

They love the idea of free will before they are saved......just not after they are saved

I bet the Angels also had their head in the sand concerning this...thats why they fell, they did not WANT to look at the possibility of a fall and rejection by God

This post should be in Theology 201
YOu still have free will, but it does not matter. Christ is just as stuck with you as you are with him. I have covered this above. :smile:

[Sheepdog]

If men are totally depraved then I hand the crown over to the Calvinists. What is more depraved then TOTAL depravity, nothing. If I COULD choose Christ under a total depravity model, then I would never have been totally depraved. Total Depravity neccessitates Irresistible Grace, and rightfully so, IF Total Depravity were biblical. If I am totally depraved, then I WOULD not have the LFW to choose Christ for that would be something RIGHT to do and thus undermine Total Depravity.
I would recommend you read up on Calvinism and Arminianism, because these issues are easily addressed. First off, what is more depraved than Total Depravity? Utter Depravity. Utter Depravity means that we are as sinful as we could possibly be (no one except the extreme folks who go beyond traditional Calvinism believe this). Total Depravity doesn't mean that we are as sinful as we could be, but apart from God, everything we do is tainted by sin. Neither Arminianism nor Calvinism traditionally hold to Utter Depravity. Under Total Depravity we may still have Freedom of Choice, albeit it is somewhat limited. (All choices are limited to a degree). But when God draws the sinner with Previent Grace, one is not so limited, but we may choose to draw towards God, or resist His grace.


Moreover, we are not talking about LFW being taken away, we are talking about the elect being made into the better image. The bible clearly teaches that we will be made after a heavenly image. I would argue that it is heavenly IN CHARACTER. We will still have LFW, but not sinful desires. Christ paid the price for it to be so. You had agreed that God has LFW, if we will be made after Christ's heavenly image (which we are not right now) then we will ONLY be able to choose righteousness. If that is not so, then God's LFW must be tainted as well-for I will bear HIS heavenly image.
How will we have free will if we may no longer sin? Remember that sin isn't just doing bad, but missing the mark of holiness. However, your logic doesn't hold because God is omnipotent and thus may have LFW without having a sin nature. We are limited in potence, so this is not necessarily so with us.


Finally, you stated that LFW is the ability to choose...agreed. Personally, I don't like even having to say LFW. I would just say FREE WILL and leave it at that, but thanks to Calvinism, those days are gone! What LFW did Pharoah have. God knew his character and that Pharoah only WOULD choose a course of action through the hardening of his heart and spirit of unbelief. He had reached a point that he COULD NOT turn back for what was presented to him. I just believe that with our new heavenly image that we COULD NOT turn back once we are in the New Heaven and Earth.
but was it possible that Pharoah may have chosen to do the right thing even while being hardened? Really, i think you and Calvinists are reading to much into what "hardening" may entail.


Honestly, Eternal Security of the Believer works great in OVT. In fact, it is the ONLY THING that allows the future to be partially settled-same in any model if it could be worked out. SOMETHING musst make the future partially settled and since OVT believes that God CAN repent of a lot of things, then something must be there that seals the future of the New Heaven and Earth...OSAS provides that.
Actually, the two are inconsistent, without the considerations i spoke of in the other post. if LFW is true, and we still exist in the sinful world, it is entirely possible that an individual falls away. If not, then God would have to ensure that no Christian falls away, and i garantee that is not possible without taking LFW away somewhere. that God cannot know now who will eventually fall away, how may He compensate without taking away our freedom?

besides, i always thought the eschatological prophesies that God promised to bring about gave a partially settled future? (e.g., we know that God will throw Satan into the Lake of Fire, whatever that means, even though we don't know when it will happen).


You may choose other than Christ as a child of God, but when it comes time for the Ressurection, it won't matter what you chose. You were stuck..and now you have your perfected image, so you will be satisfied :) I may stand without a reward and a crown, but I will have LIFE.
why? salvation is promised to those who have faith, not those who had it but threw it away. you cannot have salvation without faith.



I believe that once we choose Christ, we are STUCK with eachother forever and ever, yes. Why? Let me illustrate...
Last year I desperately needed a car. I was fully aware that my vehicle COULD not get me where I needed to go. I went into a dealership and bought a brand new car. Let's assume I paid cash right up front. The car is now MINE. The car came with a host of options that I saw and liked. I now have owned this car for under a year. I can not go back to the dealership and tell them that I want them to refund my money and take the car back. Why? Because the deal was settled the moment I bought it, OR ELSE, I never TRULY owned the car...
the analogy is terribly weak, since you could always sell the car back, or send it to the junk yard.


Jaltus, if you are still making "payments" on "salvation" then it was never truly yours and you were never truly saved. In order to be saved you must be "out of harm's way". Are you? Moreover you stated what you perceived to be illogical, that a person would choose to walk away from Christ again and again and still be stuck to him. If that were the case, none would be saved. We walk away from Christ every time we sin. In fact, we WILLfully sin, don't we?
but we don't lose salvation over one sin, do we? even a Conditional Assurance like myself holds that this is the case. However, Christ's atonement is for believers. If you are no longer a believer, what is there left to atone for your sins, now?


Well, remember one thing...you don't own the bank. Christ does. In fact, IF it was his bank to open and shut then he decides who gets what and when.
exactly, which is why i don't understand why God couldn't let people walk away from Him permanently if He so chosen to.



Yes, my punishment IS death, however on the flip side of that, my true, full punishment is denial of a resurrection. Which goes back to "the wages of sin IS DEATH".
Judically, Christ has paid it all in full. I MIGHT die thanks to Adam, but in the end I MUST live because I am in Christ. I may not ever die in this life because the Ressurrection may come first.
but you are still going to die, provided the Trib or Rapture doesn't come in your lifetime. And that is the problem; if your physical death is paid for, then you cannot die. That you will die means that you are interpeting Romans 6:23 incorrectly.


Okay, now THERE is where I draw the line. There are moral choices in choosing ice cream and French Vanilla is "IT"!
okay...that was poor comic relief...but moving on...
Where do you get that the nonbeliever CAN only choose sin without God doing something special in them??? Then there is no LFW.
dealt with above. Depravity is a limitation on freedom, not a determinate.


God never cursed our nature. Nor would God hand that power over to Adam.
why not? so long as God gives us the grace to return to Him (i am speaking corporately), there is no problem here.


He cursed our flesh...
And in Jewish thought that is equivalent to cursing our natures. you are making a distinction which the Bible writers would never have in mind.

J.P. Holding explains what is called the Semititc Totality Concept here:
http://www.tektonics.org/baptismneed.html


The Bible does not say that we are in a marred image of God. It just states that we are in the image of God and leaves it at that.
it says that the man originally created by God was made in the image of God, and leaves it at that.



huh??? What is so nonabsolute in that statement? "He who has the Son has life" means just that....
the "He who has the Son..." part, of course. also note that John only writes this to the "those who believe," impying that those who do not don't have the Son.


It never said that they had to keep believing to have "life" from God.
it doesn't have to. only those who believe have the life. those who don't believe (including apostates), don't.


There are absolutely no verse that plainly state that,...
no, but there are enough passages that one can make that interpretation, after a cumulative survey of Scripture. 1Tim. 4:1 is a good place to start. As well as John 10:28 and Heb. 6:4-8.


...and if a person can will themselves out of "the life of God" then how would they ever keep those things in mind? I mean, by what YOU say about the unbelievers being able to only choose sin without Christ, how is that possible?
i don't think i understand what you are asking. if i do, then it is that the believer does have Christ that makes it hard to fall away (albeit whether it is impossible or not is another issue).


Again, I COULD use verses, but let's face it, we are just going to look at eachother like the others don't really believe the bible if they won't agree with us. This just prevents a fight. Not trying to be rude here...
if you really could use Scripture, i think you would have. :fight: :wink:

[Sir Yap Alot]

YOu still have free will, but it does not matter. Christ is just as stuck with you as you are with him. I have covered this above.Daywalker, I have noticed that you covered the "you are stuck with him" theology above. However you didn't give any scriptural basis for it. You used the analogy of buying a car, a human parable based on logic, but your believe system is not based on the Bibles righteous judgment.

There are many Scriptures that clearly tell us that the people that fallaway (or backslide) do go to hell.

Heb 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
Heb 10:27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.

Hebrews tells us if we willfully sin after we know what the truth is, there doesn't remain any more sacrifice for Sin. You don't have eternal life to look forward to, but fearfully looking towards judgment and fiery indignation that will devour God's adversaries.

That means you will be totally eaten up by hellfire.

Heb 10:35 Cast not away therefore your confidence, which hath great recompence of reward.
Heb 10:36 For ye have need of patience, that, after ye have done the will of God, ye might receive the promise.
Heb 10:37 For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry.
Heb 10:38 Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him.
Heb 10:39 But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.

Paul says here to a group of messianic Jews in Rome to not lose their confidence, and to have patience and live by faith and do not draw back unto perdition.

But Paul uses the plural speaking to this group of messianic Jews in says " But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul"

Only those that don't draw back will save their souls, the ones that do drawback go into perdition

So immediately we know that it's possible to draw back (backslide) unto perdition unless you exercise confidence and faith and don't backslide. And Paul was giving them a word of confidence by saying "We are not of them that draw back unto perdition, but of them that believe to the saving of the soul".

So you must not backslide (drawback) in order to have your soul saved, otherwise you will be assigned to perdition.

We know that Judas and the Antichrist are called Sons of perdition.

The definition for perdition
G684
ἀπώλεια
apōleia
ap-o'-li-a
From a presumed derivative of G622; ruin or loss (physical, spiritual or eternal): - damnable (-nation), destruction, die, perdition, X perish, pernicious ways, waste.

Joh 17:12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.
2Th 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
2Pe 3:7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
Rev 17:8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: for him room for

Being assigned a place in perdition is hell

Mat 24:44 Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.
Mat 24:45 Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his lord hath made ruler over his household, to give them meat in due season?
Mat 24:46 Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing.
Mat 24:47 Verily I say unto you, That he shall make him ruler over all his goods.
Mat 24:48 But and if that evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming;
Mat 24:49 And shall begin to smite his fellowservants, and to eat and drink with the drunken;
Mat 24:50 The lord of that servant shall come in a day when he looketh not for him, and in an hour that he is not aware of,
Mat 24:51 And shall cut him asunder, and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Matthew says the backsliding servant will be cut into pieces and given the same portion as the hypocrites, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

And we know who these hypocrites are that Jesus is referring to, they are the scribes and Pharisees. And Jesus never once had anything good to say about them, he always told them they were going to hell. Just do it Word search in the Bible for "hypocrites, scribes, Pharisees"

Mat 23:13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.

Also look at verses referring to "weeping and gnashing of teeth"

Mat 22:11 And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment:
Mat 22:12 And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless.
Mat 22:13 Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

In every instance weeping and gnashing of teeth is referring to people in hell.

the tree that does not bear fruit is pulled up and burned (a reference to hellfire)

Luk 13:6 He spake also this parable; A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought fruit thereon, and found none.
Luk 13:7 Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard, Behold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and find none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground?
Luk 13:8 And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung it:
Luk 13:9 And if it bear fruit, well: and if not, then after that thou shalt cut it down.

Joh 15:1 I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.
Joh 15:2 Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit.
Joh 15:3 Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you.
Joh 15:4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.
Joh 15:5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.
Joh 15:6 If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.

Heb 6:4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
Heb 6:5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
Heb 6:6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
Heb 6:7 For the earth which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it, and bringeth forth herbs meet for them by whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing from God:
Heb 6:8 But that which beareth thorns and briers is rejected, and is nigh unto cursing; whose end is to be burned.
Mat 13:40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.

Mat 7:19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.

If the tree does a bear fruit, or if you leave Jesus and you lose your fruit
"Joh 15:4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me."
You will be gathered with the tares and thrown into hellfire.

"Mat 7:19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire."

2Pe 2:20 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.
2Pe 2:21 For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.
2Pe 2:22 But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.

It would have been better for a backslider to have never known the ways of righteousness, then to have known righteousness and gone back into sin.

And we certainly know that people who do not know the ways of righteousness go to hell. So in essence you would have been better off being a Muslim or a Hindu rather than a backsliding Christian.

In fact the Scriptures tell us this

Luk 12:45 But and if that servant say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; and shall begin to beat the menservants and maidens, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken;
Luk 12:46 The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.
Luk 12:47 And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.
Luk 12:48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.

Luke tells us the backsliding believer will be held at a higher degree of accountability and punish more severely than the one that didn't know of the Lord's will.

Jam 1:12 Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him.
Jam 1:13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:
Jam 1:14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.
Jam 1:15 Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.
Jam 1:16 Do not err, my beloved brethren.

Jam 5:19 Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him;
Jam 5:20 Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.

James tells the "brothers in Christ" that if any of them err from the truth, and one convert him, he has saved his brothers soul from death.

Mat 10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

The first death is the death of the body, the second death is the death of the soul in hell.

Gal 5:13 For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.
Gal 5:16 This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.
Gal 5:17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.
Gal 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
Gal 5:20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
Gal 5:21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

Paul wrote this to the brothers in Galatia. He told them explicitly that people who practice the ways of the flesh will not inherit the kingdom of God

Eph 5:1 Be ye therefore followers of God, as dear children;
Eph 5:2 And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweetsmelling savour.
Eph 5:3 But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints;
Eph 5:4 Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks.
Eph 5:5 For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.
Eph 5:6 Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.
Eph 5:7 Be not ye therefore partakers with them.

Paul was writing to the brothers at Ephesus. And it seems that some of them were living according to the flesh. And he warned them to let no man deceive you, because people who do these things do not inherit the kingdom of God, but the wrath of God. and do not partake with THEM

I could go on and on and on, there are so many verses, but the point should be clear that backsliders do not inherit the kingdom of God and do go to hell.


P.S. thats why so many people are converting from OSAS to perseverance of the saints. because its so clear backsliders do exist and do go to hell

[Daywalker]

I have been busy lately so I have not had the time to reply to these posts. I will come back to it when I get the chance.

Well, if you are wondering WHY I don't use scripture it is because this WAS supposed to be a philosophical discussion. Honestly, I don't hold to your views of eternal torment and hell. The burning up of the people is a ref. to the lake of fire ON EARTH during the Day of the Lord, BUT I believe that they will be raised from it and STILL go into the New HEaven and Earth.

If you are not interested in a philisophical discussion, then this thread is not for you.
Sorry,
Mike Holt
Best WIshes.

[Daywalker]

I would recommend you read up on Calvinism and Arminianism, because these issues are easily addressed. First off, what is more depraved than Total Depravity? Utter Depravity. Utter Depravity means that we are as sinful as we could possibly be (no one except the extreme folks who go beyond traditional Calvinism believe this). Total Depravity doesn't mean that we are as sinful as we could be, but apart from God, everything we do is tainted by sin. Neither Arminianism nor Calvinism traditionally hold to Utter Depravity. Under Total Depravity we may still have Freedom of Choice, albeit it is somewhat limited. (All choices are limited to a degree). But when God draws the sinner with Previent Grace, one is not so limited, but we may choose to draw towards God, or resist His grace.

Then you could never call on God in faith…your calling on God would be tainted with sin. Hats off again to the Calvy’s if Total Depravity (TD) is true . Also you said that man is, with previent grace, NOT SO LIMITED. BUT, that still makes them limited, doesn’t it? It does not change their nature one iota nor does preient grace change anything. Either way, it would be God having to UNDO the curse to save you. As long as God cursed our personality and character, it can’t be thwarted without IRRESISTIBLE grace.


How will we have free will if we may no longer sin? Remember that sin isn't just doing bad, but missing the mark of holiness. However, your logic doesn't hold because God is omnipotent and thus may have LFW without having a sin nature. We are limited in potence, so this is not necessarily so with us.

My answer: Do you believe that we will have free will in “heaven”? If no, then score one for the Calvinists again. Here is what I need you to answer: At what point is a person FINALLY totally saved. I mean just when is it a DONE DEAL? Does God have to REMOVE your LFW to do it?


but was it possible that Pharoah may have chosen to do the right thing even while being hardened? Really, i think you and Calvinists are reading to much into what "hardening" may entail.

The bible states “no”. Pharoah could not change at that point because he fixed himself into a corner.


Actually, the two are inconsistent, without the considerations i spoke of in the other post. if LFW is true, and we still exist in the sinful world, it is entirely possible that an individual falls away. If not, then God would have to ensure that no Christian falls away, and i garantee that is not possible without taking LFW away somewhere. that God cannot know now who will eventually fall away, how may He compensate without taking away our freedom?

We can fall away…but it does not matter…I believe our salvation was not a matter of perserverence, but a matter of whether or not we once called upon God. You forget, salvation IS two fold. I must call, and God must honor his promise of eternal life. Even if God left me to walk in SIN for the rest of my life does not prove that when I put on immortality and bear the image of the heavenly that I will sin. Again, this is God keeping HIS end of the bargain…I believe he saved me from myself as much as anyone else!


besides, i always thought the eschatological prophesies that God promised to bring about gave a partially settled future? (e.g., we know that God will throw Satan into the Lake of Fire, whatever that means, even though we don't know when it will happen).

I would argue that if Armianism is correct, there could be NO partially settled future for man because we could always will ourselves out of life.


why? salvation is promised to those who have faith, not those who had it but threw it away. you cannot have salvation without faith.

I would argue that we can’t throw it away…not salvation from the grave, that is. I would argue that if I lost my salvation, Christ would have to loose his place in the heavenly places…but I don’t want to get into it here.


the analogy is terribly weak, since you could always sell the car back, or send it to the junk yard.

I was not creating a doctrine out of an illustration so…


but we don't lose salvation over one sin, do we?

Asking God to REMOVE your salvation is just one sin, yet you believe that it is possible to do this, correct?


even a Conditional Assurance like myself holds that this is the case. However, Christ's atonement is for believers. If you are no longer a believer, what is there left to atone for your sins, now?

Christ’s atonement only for believers? OUCH! That is limited atonement! I thought that you were not a Calvinist.


exactly, which is why i don't understand why God couldn't let people walk away from Him permanently if He so chosen to.

Because God is obligated to keep his original contract with me. I called on God for eternal life, now God must keep it. God was not given the option to renegotiate.


but you are still going to die, provided the Trib or Rapture doesn't come in your lifetime. And that is the problem; if your physical death is paid for, then you cannot die. That you will die means that you are interpeting Romans 6:23 incorrectly.

I can still die with my physical death paid for, but I WILL experience resurrected life because I trusted Christ. My hope is not that I won’t die, but that I will experience resurrected life and immortality.


dealt with above. Depravity is a limitation on freedom, not a determinate.

If we are cursed in our character then we can’t undo it, it therefore MUST be determinate or else the curse was never a curse.


why not? so long as God gives us the grace to return to Him (i am speaking corporately), there is no problem here.

I think you need to divide standing from state, that seems to be the mistake of both Calvinists and Arminians. They seem to think that every time the word saved is used that it has to do with sainthood or something.


And in Jewish thought that is equivalent to cursing our natures. you are making a distinction which the Bible writers would never have in mind.

I disagree


J.P. Holding explains what is called the Semititc Totality Concept here:
http://www.tektonics.org/baptismneed.html



it says that the man originally created by God was made in the image of God, and leaves it at that.

Right, so why do you change it? It never says we lost the image of God. In fact, Gen. 9 confirms that man IS created in the image of God, not that he only ONCE WAS in the image of God. The NT also confirms what I just stated. Why would you want to deny this?


the "He who has the Son..." part, of course. also note that John only writes this to the "those who believe," impying that those who do not don't have the Son.

You have to prove that we can loose the Son. We can loose him in our STATE, but not our STANDING I would say. We can loose our daily walk, but not our position of sainthood.


it doesn't have to. only those who believe have the life. those who don't believe (including apostates), don't.

dealt with above.


no, but there are enough passages that one can make that interpretation, after a cumulative survey of Scripture. 1Tim. 4:1 is a good place to start. As well as John 10:28 and Heb. 6:4-8.

They are only being judged FOR REWARDS in I. Tim. 4:1 to get “the crown of” righteousness…has nothing to do with earning salvation. Heb. 6 has people being scorched at the Lord’s Coming, but I would say RAISED later at his New Heaven and Earth which was not mentioned in THAT text, but that was not the point of the text in Heb. 6. Scripture with scripture I could prove this, but do not want to. Similar things could be said of John 10 I am sure if I looked it up…but I won’t.


i don't think i understand what you are asking. if i do, then it is that the believer does have Christ that makes it hard to fall away (albeit whether it is impossible or not is another issue).
[size=3]




if you really could use Scripture, i think you would have. :fight: :wink:
I will not be using the bible because as far as I am concerned NOBODY will change the way they see it. Maybe this is a little pessimistic, but I am a realist here…
This thread was ONLY for philosophy, not the bible

Bottom line: WHEN are we saved permanently? And did God have to take away our LFW to do it?

[Daywalker]

Daywalker, I have noticed that you covered the "you are stuck with him" theology above. However you didn't give any scriptural basis for it. You used the analogy of buying a car, a human parable based on logic, but your believe system is not based on the Bibles righteous judgment.

Would you be happier if I just quoted from you book of Jasher or Enoch? LOL
Anyway…I don’t TRUST this discussion to a bible discussion because anybody can post MILLIONS of verses all through a skewed perspective. I am NOT trying to debate IF a person can loose their sainthood, but IF LFW and Eternal security CAN GO TOGETHER…THAT is what the title of this thread is.


There are many Scriptures that clearly tell us that the people that fallaway (or backslide) do go to hell.

Not the issue.


And we certainly know that people who do not know the ways of righteousness go to hell. So in essence you would have been better off being a Muslim or a Hindu rather than a backsliding Christian.

That is just sick. Man, I hope a calvy did not just read this.


I could go on and on and on, there are so many verses, but the point should be clear that backsliders do not inherit the kingdom of God and do go to hell

again, not the issue.


P.S. thats why so many people are converting from OSAS to perseverance of the saints. because its so clear backsliders do exist and do go to hell

not only not the issue, but a sad commentary on those that deny the fact that “JESUS saves”.

[Jaltus]

If men are totally depraved then I hand the crown over to the Calvinists. What is more depraved then TOTAL depravity, nothing. If I COULD choose Christ under a total depravity model, then I would never have been totally depraved. Total Depravity neccessitates Irresistible Grace, and rightfully so, IF Total Depravity were biblical. If I am totally depraved, then I WOULD not have the LFW to choose Christ for that would be something RIGHT to do and thus undermine Total Depravity.

SD already talked about how Utter Depravity goes above and beyond Total Depravity. Total Depravity simple means that man cannot chose God in and of themselves. God's grace must precede salvation. In other words, God must draw before man can follow after Him. All orthodox Christians hold to this. If you do not hold to this, then you (in the general sense) are Pelagian, not orthodox.


Moreover, we are not talking about LFW being taken away, we are talking about the elect being made into the better image. The bible clearly teaches that we will be made after a heavenly image. I would argue that it is heavenly IN CHARACTER. We will still have LFW, but not sinful desires. Christ paid the price for it to be so. You had agreed that God has LFW, if we will be made after Christ's heavenly image (which we are not right now) then we will ONLY be able to choose righteousness. If that is not so, then God's LFW must be tainted as well-for I will bear HIS heavenly image.

Wow, you sound like a Calvinist! You just described CFW to a T! CFW holds that God can change (read manipulate) our desires in order to shape our choices. Congratulations, you are now a Calvinist and no longer hold to LFW anyway. And by the way, if a being has LFW and they make you into their image, that does not mean you have LFW, it just means you have been made into their image. You have not been made into them.


Finally, you stated that LFW is the ability to choose...agreed. Personally, I don't like even having to say LFW. I would just say FREE WILL and leave it at that, but thanks to Calvinism, those days are gone! What LFW did Pharoah have. God knew his character and that Pharoah only WOULD choose a course of action through the hardening of his heart and spirit of unbelief. He had reached a point that he COULD NOT turn back for what was presented to him. I just believe that with our new heavenly image that we COULD NOT turn back once we are in the New Heaven and Earth.

I agree with that also, but for other reasons. I believe that salvation is not simply a present tense nor past tense experience, but is also a future tense experience (see G. B. Caird New Testament Theology chapter 4, also look at I Peter, etc). We were saved, we are being saved, and we will be saved. However, the "will be saved" is the point where we are totally conformed into His likeness (which is an argument many commentators make for the actual happenings of Romans 8:29-30).

Sorry, this is hard to do simply philosophically without resorting to scripture. I'll try better.

Anyway, with salvation not being fully realized until the final judgment, I would say that all status for the universe (except God) changes. We have made our LFW choices while on earth, and the judgment, whether to ternal life or eternal death, is ratified from the throne and made into an everlasting reality. Since we freely chose God in life, our choice is made eternal that we always choose God. Therefore, CFW prevails based upon our LFW choices.


Honestly, Eternal Security of the Believer works great in OVT. In fact, it is the ONLY THING that allows the future to be partially settled-same in any model if it could be worked out. SOMETHING musst make the future partially settled and since OVT believes that God CAN repent of a lot of things, then something must be there that seals the future of the New Heaven and Earth...OSAS provides that.

Eternal Security, in the sense you are defending, is anathema to real OVT since OVT holds LFW above every other consideration other than God's love. ES is a complete denial of LFW, as I will try to demonstrate below.



You may choose other than Christ as a child of God, but when it comes time for the Ressurection, it won't matter what you chose. You were stuck..and now you have your perfected image, so you will be satisfied :) I may stand without a reward and a crown, but I will have LIFE.

Avoided my question. I'll press the issue below.



Well, Jaltus, for one, you really don't know my hermeneutical presuppositions on a lot of matters. You asked me a question on paltalk about how I view the books of the NT because you DIDN'T know what I would say...or else you would not have asked it. You have even stated that with dispy's we "must elliminate certain books of the bible". That is false. Not only have we written study Bibles, but I would argue that our critics do more to elliminate books of the bible than we ever dreamed of-by stealing promises given to Israel and forcing them on "the church" at the expense of a future, regathered and empowered Israel. Moreover, are you not a dispensationalist? Sure you are. You may argue that the reason that you don't offer up a sacrifice for your sins like Lev. commands is because you are not under the law nor an Old Testament Jew, but that is STILL dispensationally considering your Bible. At the time Lev. was written, it was a PRESENT TRUTH, now it is not. So, be careful when casting stones lest you find yourself living in a glass house. :) I don't want to deal with dispensationalism here, though.

For someone who does not want to deal with it, you sure wrote a lot. I reject the basic premise of classical dispensationalism that God works different ways and ONLY through those specific different ways during different times. I believe and know that God always works by and through the medium of grace which shows itself in different ways at different times, but is essentially the same throughout all of history, now today and forever. I disagree with the way dispensationalism puts God in a time-constrained box. I disagree with the entire hermeneutical presupposition of dispensationalism. It misreads the Bible on many levels and forces unnatural readings of the text.


I believe that once we choose Christ, we are STUCK with eachother forever and ever, yes. Why? Let me illustrate...
Last year I desperately needed a car. I was fully aware that my vehicle COULD not get me where I needed to go. I went into a dealership and bought a brand new car. Let's assume I paid cash right up front. The car is now MINE. The car came with a host of options that I saw and liked. I now have owned this car for under a year. I can not go back to the dealership and tell them that I want them to refund my money and take the car back. Why? Because the deal was settled the moment I bought it, OR ELSE, I never TRULY owned the car...

Of course salvation is a multi-faceted and multi-temporal issue. It would be more akin to leasing a car and, at the final judgment, God paying for the remainder of what you owe on the car which you could not have afforded in the first place. Salvation is NOT strictly during this life time, otherwise there is no need for the final judgment. Remember that being justified requires a declaration (hence the forensic flavor of the word) and nobody is fully justified until that declaration.


Jaltus, if you are still making "payments" on "salvation" then it was never truly yours and you were never truly saved. In order to be saved you must be "out of harm's way". Are you? Moreover you stated what you perceived to be illogical, that a person would choose to walk away from Christ again and again and still be stuck to him. If that were the case, none would be saved. We walk away from Christ every time we sin. In fact, we WILLfully sin, don't we?

Exactly, salvation is a future-oriented thing, along with past and present. Your totally past-present understanding is why you are misunderstanding the flaw in your own argument.


Then you have just shot down Molinism. Because if THAT were the case then God SHOULD have created the non LFW world to begin with since he was going to anyway. This world, therefore, is a waste in Molinism. In fact, it would be an utter tragedy. God creates LFW to let men choose him ONLY to recreate them as creatures WITHOUT LFW in the New Heaven and Earth? I agree that we WOULD not choose other than Christ in the New Heaven and Earth, but not because LFW is removed, but because we would be patterened after a model that WOULD NOT SIN, Christ. Just as Pharoah was hardened to only sin, we would be remade in an image that is hardened to NOT sin. In LFW the pendullum (sp) swings both ways and will continue to do so (in my view) untill or re-creation.

If God create a nonLFW world, His aims are not met. This world is a tragedy for sin entered into it. Heck, if you think your objection works against Molinism, wouldn't it work against any LFW world? I know you will reject the thought, and if you think about it some more, you will see why it does not apply to Molinism either.

Basically above you are arguing for psychological or charachterstic determinism. In other words, God is allowed to determine what you do based on psychological or characteristic issues. Again, this negates LFW. No matter how you word it, you are negating LFW. As soon as you say "we cannot choose" you have negated LFW.


Well remember one thing...you don't own the bank. Christ does. In fact, IF it was his bank to open and shut then he decides who gets what and when. I think God wants all to come to him and would take all at any moment. But you would have to prove that God would LET YOU withdraw your money. I believe God has the good sense to protect you FROM yourself. I would argue that we are simply SEALED. On top of that, the reason I think that the arguement that you presented is inconsistent is also because...it isn't your money either.

Again, this denies LFW (and is a pretty bad illustration since no bank can deny you your own money). A one way bank is a travesty, and so is your conception of what one can freely do and not do.


Basically, we stand before God as beggers. God says "ok, I love you and I will GIVE you some money...but not without ME. And lucky for you, the riches of my grace can not be spent up nor can I".

I think we both have taken this illustration too far and so I will not comment further.

ASIDE:


huh??? What is so nonabsolute in that statement? "He who has the Son has life" means just that....

It never said that they had to keep believing to have "life" from God.

Technically, it should be translated "who who is having the Son..." which does show the continuous nature of the issue. I John is very good for this, as it clearly talks about salvation being something we can have only if we continue to remain, no matter how badly the Calvinist translators don't want you to realize that.

END ASIDE

I believe God created this world with LFW. That is how mankind was able to fall, because man chose other than God wanted. Men continue to choose other than God wants, and this continuous state of affairs is known as SIN. Because all men fell through Adam, none of us are able not to sin (total depravity). Once sin entered the world, it became a matter of time before each individual fell and continues to fall (I will not discuss original sin here, as it would take us even farther afield than many of my above points). By creating with LFW, God cannot be responsible for sin since mankind freely chose it.

However, ES takes away a choice that was previously open. The question I posed, and I feel you avoided, was this: if we are able to reject the offer of salvation again and again while getting still more chances, why is it philosophically speaking that once we accept our choice is over with? This is a serious problem for someone who wants to hold to LFW and ES. LFW is eliminated by ES since one is no longer able to choose other when the choice had once been open.

Moving on to living in the new heavens and earth, I believe that the resurrected and glorified are denied LFW for their own good so that they are not able to choose other. By creating people with LFW, God made people who would (or could) freely choose Him making His glory all the greater. People not choosing Him display His wrath in that they will be punished. If there was no LFW, God's glory would be less and His wrath unknown. By disabling LFW after the final judgment (or at it, whatever), He is "locking in" the choice that one made during life, allowing the entire life to stand as a contiguous witness to their choice. Otherwise if someone "accidentally" or "unwillingly" chooses God, they are not locked in. A life of salvation needs to accompany a choice of salvation. The new heavens and the new earth eliminate all possibility for suffering, and this means all possibility to choose other than God.

[Daywalker]

SD already talked about how Utter Depravity goes above and beyond Total Depravity. Total Depravity simple means that man cannot chose God in and of themselves. God's grace must precede salvation. In other words, God must draw before man can follow after Him. All orthodox Christians hold to this. If you do not hold to this, then you (in the general sense) are Pelagian, not orthodox.

Well, of course it would be a shame if we were not “orthodox”. I mean, God forbid we should realize that the Fathers were off in their theology. LOL


Wow, you sound like a Calvinist! You just described CFW to a T! CFW holds that God can change (read manipulate) our desires in order to shape our choices. Congratulations, you are now a Calvinist and no longer hold to LFW anyway. And by the way, if a being has LFW and they make you into their image, that does not mean you have LFW, it just means you have been made into their image. You have not been made into them.

Then you were never in their image. Period. Jaltus, I don’t know if you are catching this, but this is the pot calling the kettle black. What I posed was a HARDENED LFW…where I take on an image like Christ’s who WOULD NOT SIN. Surely you must know that if man can be hardened TO SIN (like Pharoah) that LFW could work the opposite way. I have LFW before and after the resurrection…you created LFW for absolutely no purpose if it was going to be denied in the end. It would make God the author of sin if he COULD have created a possible world with CFW and chose to let millions of people just become toast all for nothing. I think what we are looking for is CONSISTENCY with our theology. By the way, since in CFW there is also that element of DETERMINISM pushing it, I STILL don’t have CFW…what I have is man made in a heavenly image with nothing DRIVING him to do anything other than a hardening against sin. We are comparing apples to oranges here if you look closely. CFW says NO SPONTANIETY and all actions are GOVERNED. LFW is spontaneous, but thanks to the heavenly image, we will always spontaneously choose RIGHT without God having to hold us by the hand or force our choices.


I agree with that also, but for other reasons. I believe that salvation is not simply a present tense nor past tense experience, but is also a future tense experience (see G. B. Caird New Testament Theology chapter 4, also look at I Peter, etc). We were saved, we are being saved, and we will be saved. However, the "will be saved" is the point where we are totally conformed into His likeness (which is an argument many commentators make for the actual happenings of Romans 8:29-30).

huh??? So, let me get this straight, even though you affirm the WILL BE SAVED, you deny the “are being saved” which comes before the “will be saved”. Then you are not truly “being saved”…if that is the case you might not “be saved in the end”. And if that is true then the promise of eternal life is just CHANCE at eternal life and one that God poorly describes if it were a reality.


Anyway, with salvation not being fully realized until the final judgment, I would say that all status for the universe (except God) changes. We have made our LFW choices while on earth, and the judgment, whether to eternal life or eternal death, is ratified from the throne and made into an everlasting reality. Since we freely chose God in life, our choice is made eternal that we always choose God. Therefore, CFW prevails based upon our LFW choices.

Except for the minor tragedy that that cancels out the need to make THIS possible world where millions “go to eternal death” and suffer needlessly for this thing called “LFW”. If we LOOSE LFW then it was pointless to make it to begin with. In fact, if God made LFW only to get rid of it, then he created it in vain…and worse than that, it was evil. Again, millions suffer needlessly when God COULD in Molinism made a world of CFW which you already affirmed that he does in Rev.21. So, it did not matter WHO chose him in life because God wanted creatures WITHOUT LFW in the end. It is just pointless.


Eternal Security, in the sense you are defending, is anathema to real OVT since OVT holds LFW above every other consideration other than God's love. ES is a complete denial of LFW, as I will try to demonstrate below.

There you go. Then God’s love prevails in LFW because God is protecting us from our LFW choice of backing out of eternal life.


Avoided my question. I'll press the issue below.

Not intentional, I assure you.



For someone who does not want to deal with it, you sure wrote a lot. I reject the basic premise of classical dispensationalism that God works different ways and ONLY through those specific different ways during different times. I believe and know that God always works by and through the medium of grace which shows itself in different ways at different times, but is essentially the same throughout all of history, now today and forever. I disagree with the way dispensationalism puts God in a time-constrained box. I disagree with the entire hermeneutical presupposition of dispensationalism. It misreads the Bible on many levels and forces unnatural readings of the text.

Jaltus, do you obey the book of Lev. and offer up a sacrifice for sins? No? Why not? Because you know that it is not TRUTH FOR TODAY. If you did offer up sacrifices you would be in sin because you would be placing yourself out of the direct command of NOT obeying religious ordinances and laws (Col. 2). You are also to NOT keep the 4 ordinances of the Acts period as such, but you do at the expense of not dividing Paul’s word. And yes, in the Greek, DIVIDE does mean DIVIDE…in fact, it can also mean “dissect”.

If Dispensationalism puts God in a box, then all other forms of theology (Covenantal, etc) puts God in a coffin because the Lord was too weak to keep his promise to Israel for them to rule as the head of the nations. This was even found in Gen. with Abraham and circumcision. His seed would rule (those that were circumcised) and ALSO kings would come forth from him (other nations). Never the less, you have God REPLACING Israel today or TRANSFORMING Israel today into something that God COULD NOT DO. If God made the promise to Israel about ruling the world null and void, then he broke his own rules. All God has to do in the kingdom is resurrect Israel and his word is kept. IF you deny that God has ended that program for Israel, then great. But I doubt you do. Either way, dispensationalism pinpoints truth directed at us. The bible is not a buffet for people just to pick and choose what they like and leave what they don’t.


Of course salvation is a multi-faceted and multi-temporal issue. It would be more akin to leasing a car and, at the final judgment, God paying for the remainder of what you owe on the car which you could not have afforded in the first place. Salvation is NOT strictly during this life time, otherwise there is no need for the final judgment. Remember that being justified requires a declaration (hence the forensic flavor of the word) and nobody is fully justified until that declaration.

God states plainly in Romans that they ARE justified freely by His grace. It is a done deal by identification and will be made manifest later visibly.


Exactly, salvation is a future-oriented thing, along with past and present. Your totally past-present understanding is why you are misunderstanding the flaw in your own argument.

John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.
Looks to me (without retranslating the Bible to make it say differently) that the whole past/present dilemma is summed up. We can’t loose it. It did not say that Christ’s hearers had to KEEP believing. It also says they have already PASSED from death to life and that we CAN’T come into condemnation.


If God create a nonLFW world, His aims are not met. This world is a tragedy for sin entered into it. Heck, if you think your objection works against Molinism, wouldn't it work against any LFW world? I know you will reject the thought, and if you think about it some more, you will see why it does not apply to Molinism either.

My point is that God CAN’T create a nonLFW world. It is also that God thought that sin MIGHT NOT come into play. God did not know the future as a fact, and had every reason to believe that the probabilities were as such that Adam would not fail. This brings up the next question, did God create Lucifer before or after he made man. Did Lucifer become SATAN before of AFTER he made man? I know that we are dealing with some unknown variables here, but the fact remains, I can claim that God did not know that it WOULD happen in definite terms, God risked and it failed. In your views there was no risk, God was a good Calvinist that predestined man to sin when he made this possible world and Lucifer. That is selfishness become description.


Basically above you are arguing for psychological or charachterstic determinism. In other words, God is allowed to determine what you do based on psychological or characteristic issues. Again, this negates LFW. No matter how you word it, you are negating LFW. As soon as you say "we cannot choose" you have negated LFW.

No, we are spontaneous creatures that will act in accordance with our heavenly image when the time comes. It is a different model.


Again, this denies LFW (and is a pretty bad illustration since no bank can deny you your own money). A one way bank is a travesty, and so is your conception of what one can freely do and not do.

Well, since we have over used the illustration…


I think we both have taken this illustration too far and so I will not comment further.


Technically, it should be translated "who who is having the Son..." which does show the continuous nature of the issue. I John is very good for this, as it clearly talks about salvation being something we can have only if we continue to remain, no matter how badly the Calvinist translators don't want you to realize that.

There you go. You are now translating the bible based upon your presuppositions. But the funny thing is this, your retranslation does not change eternal security…because they are STILL HAVING THE SON. You will say that that is conditional on THEM, but that does not come out of that text. hehehe


I believe God created this world with LFW. That is how mankind was able to fall, because man chose other than God wanted. Men continue to choose other than God wants, and this continuous state of affairs is known as SIN. Because all men fell through Adam, none of us are able not to sin (total depravity). Once sin entered the world, it became a matter of time before each individual fell and continues to fall (I will not discuss original sin here, as it would take us even farther afield than many of my above points). By creating with LFW, God cannot be responsible for sin since mankind freely chose it.

Except that he CHOSE this possible world with EDF so…
What is so funny is that he chose this possible world where Adam falls just 3 chapters into the story. Ironic, isn’t it? Hehe Well, IF God CAN create other possible worlds (which I deny-but it is necessitated in Mol.) then he SHOULD have created a few LFW worlds where man start to populate the worlds then BLAM! Merges them all into ONE WORLD and removes LFW and replaces it with CFW before they can sin. Why not? I mean in OVT God CAN’T do that, but in Mol. God is “all about” possible worlds…
No before you say that is this illogical, remember this…we are all eagerly awaiting the “little list of God’s POSSIBLE WORLDS” (lol).


However, ES takes away a choice that was previously open. The question I posed, and I feel you avoided, was this: if we are able to reject the offer of salvation again and again while getting still more chances, why is it philosophically speaking that once we accept our choice is over with? This is a serious problem for someone who wants to hold to LFW and ES. LFW is eliminated by ES since one is no longer able to choose other when the choice had once been open.

Jaltus, there is no problem here because it stands to reason that if the future is partially settled with God, then it could be partially settled for US at some point. I am saying that point, for me, was when I trusted Christ. The reason that our choice is over with once we accept salvation is because our choice was a one time deal. We chose ETERNITY, and now its settled. If LFW and salvation were based upon a “perserverence” model, you would have a point. The problem too is this…we make MANY choices where we must simply live with the consequences and we also can’t turn back time to undo them. This too fits in with OVT. The good news is, once we get our heavenly image, we won’t ever regret the choice.

Because it is assured eternal life, I can’t change the future any more than the past or present, God sees eternal life as a settled fact for the child of God. I must live with the consequences with this action just like any other action that I perform.


Moving on to living in the new heavens and earth, I believe that the resurrected and glorified are denied LFW for their own good so that they are not able to choose other. By creating people with LFW, God made people who would (or could) freely choose Him making His glory all the greater. People not choosing Him display His wrath in that they will be punished. If there was no LFW, God's glory would be less and His wrath unknown.

So it is a shame for the wrath of God to be unknown? YIKES! WOW. Now YOU have just described Calvinism to a “T”.



By disabling LFW after the final judgment (or at it, whatever), He is "locking in" the choice that one made during life, allowing the entire life to stand as a contiguous witness to their choice.
And so it is with my model. God can show that despite our humanity, God is able to save us WHEN WE CHOSE him.


Otherwise if someone "accidentally" or "unwillingly" chooses God, they are not locked in. A life of salvation needs to accompany a choice of salvation. The new heavens and the new earth eliminate all possibility for suffering, and this means all possibility to choose other than God.
Right, because God is able to win WITH LFW not despite it. Spontaneous creatures WILL only choose him at that time.

[bar Jonah]

I believe the question in the thread title completely misses the mark, to begin with. The issues of Eternal Security/Assured Salvation/OSAS and LFW don't even intersect! One is an ontological issue, and the other is a legal one!

It's like asking, "Are diplomatic immunity and LFW compatible?"

The question itself makes no sense, to me. Regardless of one's actual views, the hypothetical view of LFW may mean you can turn away from God, but that automatically mean you lose your salvation. That's quite a leap, a huge assumption. If God wishes, He can lock your salvation into place, regardless of what you do via LFW. IF that is His will.

So, are they compatible? Yes, just like being blood type O+ and being an American are compatible. :lol:

:shrug:

[Jaltus]

Quick point to DW:

You seriously misread me. I said I hold to three times of salvation. We were saved, we are being saved, and we will be saved.

[Daywalker]

I believe the question in the thread title completely misses the mark, to begin with. The issues of Eternal Security/Assured Salvation/OSAS and LFW don't even intersect! One is an ontological issue, and the other is a legal one!

It's like asking, "Are diplomatic immunity and LFW compatible?"

The question itself makes no sense, to me. Regardless of one's actual views, the hypothetical view of LFW may mean you can turn away from God, but that automatically mean you lose your salvation. That's quite a leap, a huge assumption. If God wishes, He can lock your salvation into place, regardless of what you do via LFW. IF that is His will.

So, are they compatible? Yes, just like being blood type O+ and being an American are compatible. :lol:

:shrug:
In the END, R.I., that was what I was going to get at-kinda. But I was trying to approach it from the standpoint that LFW does not mean that man must be able to loose his salvation. I believe that God DOES lock our salvation into place regardless of what we do with LFW.


Quick point to DW: You seriously misread me. I said I hold to three times of salvation. We were saved, we are being saved, and we will be saved.
ok...

[Daywalker]

John 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

About my so called "Pelegianism"...

I believe that the reason the above verse holds true is because God knows that man is so weak that he WOULD NOT overcome sin in this enticing world UNLESS God did something. He saw that with Adam. He potentially would be able to choose Christ IF IT WEREN'T for the fact that LFW in this world sucks thanks to the tempations around us. It is like hooking up a 10 year old styled computer with DSL. It just can't perform as it ought because it was never designed to. I still do not see it as our nature being cursed, though...just that we are not "strong enough" to make it past the age of accountability without help because we are born untrained, and eager to discover pleasures that WOULD harden us against anything godly.

[Sir Yap Alot]

I am NOT trying to debate IF a person can loose their sainthood, but IF LFW and Eternal security CAN GO TOGETHER…THAT is what the title of this thread is
I outright REJECT the perserverance of the saints. What I hold to is the "eternal security of the believer". I believe that once a man becomes a child of God, that God is "stuck with him" forever regardless of how he behaves. He may chasten him, kill him, etc. etc...but in the end he gets to be perfected like Christ and go into the New Heaven and Earth.
I just responded to part of your original thread.


And we certainly know that people who do not know the ways of righteousness go to hell. So in essence you would have been better off being a Muslim or a Hindu rather than a backsliding Christian.

That is just sick. Man, I hope a calvy did not just read this.
The scriptures say it

2Pe 2:20 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.
2Pe 2:21 For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.
2Pe 2:22 But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.

It says it would have been better to have never known the ways of righteousness if you backslide after being cleaned up through Jesus


Well, if you are wondering WHY I don't use scripture it is because this WAS supposed to be a philosophical discussion. Honestly, I don't hold to your views of eternal torment and hell. The burning up of the people is a ref. to the lake of fire ON EARTH during the Day of the Lord, BUT I believe that they will be raised from it and STILL go into the New HEaven and Earth.

If you are not interested in a philisophical discussion, then this thread is not for you.
Sorry,
Mike Holt
Best WIshes.
Thats fine if you want this to be a philosophical discussion. but you cant really refrain from using scriptures to support your belief when the basis of your argument (and the title of the thread) is coming from a belief that Jesus died for peoples sins and will save them from eternal death through faith in him. If you believe that, then you must also believe what the rest of the bible says.

And I don't believe people will be tormented forever in fire. I believe they will be totally consumed in the fire after they have paid for their sins. the more sins you have, the longer it takes to be consumed by the flames.

But the lake of fire can not be on this earth because Revelation 20 says

Rev 20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
Rev 20:11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.
Rev 20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
Rev 20:13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
Rev 20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
Rev 20:15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Rev 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.

The devil is thrown into the lake of fire before the millennium. and at the great white throne judgment the heavens and earth disappear, and God casts people into hell that are not in the book of life, then he makes a new heaven and new earth. so Hell can't be on this earth.

[Daywalker]

The scriptures say it

It says it would have been better to have never known the ways of righteousness if you backslide after being cleaned up through Jesus


No, it didn't. It never said that it would be better for them to be Hindu or Muslim at all. It just says that it was better that they did not know the way of righteousness...you built a doctrine off of what the bible DID NOT say...the one does not prove the other. You are holding up apples as if they prove the oranges.


Thats fine if you want this to be a philosophical discussion. but you cant really refrain from using scriptures to support your belief when the basis of your argument (and the title of the thread) is coming from a belief that Jesus died for peoples sins and will save them from eternal death through faith in him. If you believe that, then you must also believe what the rest of the bible says.

John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

There. OSAS. It did not say that they had to keep believing...if it did then it contradicted the latter end where it says "IS PASSED from death unto life".

Watch, you will either go around this text or retranslate it somehow... :fight:


And I don't believe people will be tormented forever in fire. I believe they will be totally consumed in the fire after they have paid for their sins. the more sins you have, the longer it takes to be consumed by the flames.

There are no verses to back that one up. Just because the servant is beaten with the more stripes does not prove that he is burning longer. I think that text that I paraphrased is how you came up with that...OR that part about how the one guy will not come out of jail till he has paid the utmost farthing or something like that... Either way, it does not state what you are making it to be. :stop:


But the lake of fire can not be on this earth because Revelation 20 says

Rev 20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
Rev 20:11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.
Rev 20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
Rev 20:13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
Rev 20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
Rev 20:15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Rev 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.

The devil is thrown into the lake of fire before the millennium. and at the great white throne judgment the heavens and earth disappear, and God casts people into hell that are not in the book of life, then he makes a new heaven and new earth. so Hell can't be on this earth.[/box]

The New HEaven and Earth takes place after the 1000 yr reign if you look up Rev. 20 from the start. The devil is in prison (symbolism) for 1000 years then is released for a little season then is cast into the lake of fire and shortly thereafter the New Heaven and Earth is made.
Bottomless pit VS. lake of fire...

Revelation 20:1-3 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.

Revelation 20:7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,
Revelation 20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

[Sir Yap Alot]

No, it didn't. It never said that it would be better for them to be Hindu or Muslim at all. It just says that it was better that they did not know the way of righteousness...you built a doctrine off of what the bible DID NOT say...the one does not prove the other. You are holding up apples as if they prove the oranges.
Yes, it says it would have been better for them to have never known the ways of righteousness. and the only way you can know righteousness is by knowning Jesus. I don't discriminate against the unrighteous, Hindus, Muslims, Atheists, Agnostics etc... you can add any of the unrighteous in there, i just chose Muslims and Hindus

1Co 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

If you have never known the ways of righteousness, you have never known Jesus, hense your not saved and will not see the kingdom of God. but yet that would have been better for you than if you backslid into sin after knowing righteousness. because

Luk 12:47 And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.
Luk 12:48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.

its a simple to understand. the more you know, the more you are held accountable for


John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

There. OSAS. It did not say that they had to keep believing...if it did then it contradicted the latter end where it says "IS PASSED from death unto life".

Watch, you will either go around this text or retranslate it somehow
I totally agree with that, he IS saved the moment he becomes a believer. but your not reading the other scriptures that tell you what must be done to keep it, or you can pass out of eternal life just as easily as you passes into it.

And yes the bible does say you have to keep believing and obeying to stay saved

Luk 8:13 They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away.

these people in Luke only believe for a while, hense they are only saved for a while

1Co 15:1 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
1Co 15:2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.

Unless you keep in memory what was preached to you, you believed in VAIN

Heb 3:12 Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God.
Heb 3:13 But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin.
Heb 3:14 For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end;
Heb 3:15 While it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation.
Heb 3:16 For some, when they had heard, did provoke: howbeit not all that came out of Egypt by Moses.
Heb 3:17 But with whom was he grieved forty years? was it not with them that had sinned, whose carcases fell in the wilderness?
Heb 3:18 And to whom sware he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that believed not?
Heb 3:19 So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief

This is a real simple warning to understand. Paul gives a warning to the brethren. there is a warning to TAKE HEED lest they depart from the living God with a heart of unbelief. then he goes on to tell them what God did to the Israelites that believed not . many people don't take these warnings seriously to TAKE HEED lest they depart from the faith. but Paul though it was important to warn them that you WILL NOT enter Gods rest as a unbeliever...so TAKE HEED

Also pay close attention to verse 14 "For we are made partakers of Christ, IF we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end;". notice the condition IF

Jud 1:5 I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not.

Rom 11:19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in.
Rom 11:20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
Rom 11:21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
Rom 11:22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
Rom 11:23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.

2Th 2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
2Th 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2Th 2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

2 Thessalonians says they refuse to LOVE the truth. these are people that knew the truth but did not love it.they also took pleasure in unrighteousness, and because of this God sends them a strong delusion so they will believe a lie and be damned. they don't believe a lie UNTILL God sends them a strong delusion. that sounds a lot like the people in 2 Peter

2Pe 2:20 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.

These people did not love the truth, but took pleasure in unrighteousness.


The New HEaven and Earth takes place after the 1000 yr reign if you look up Rev. 20 from the start. The devil is in prison (symbolism) for 1000 years then is released for a little season then is cast into the lake of fire and shortly thereafter the New Heaven and Earth is made.
Bottomless pit VS. lake of fire...
Right, but God is casting people into Hell after he had destroyed this heaven and this earth. so Hell is not on this earth. that was my point

[Daywalker]

Yes, it says it would have been better for them to have never known the ways of righteousness. and the only way you can know righteousness is by knowning Jesus. I don't discriminate against the unrighteous, Hindus, Muslims, Atheists, Agnostics etc... you can add any of the unrighteous in there, i just chose Muslims and Hindus

1Co 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

If you have never known the ways of righteousness, you have never known Jesus, hense your not saved and will not see the kingdom of God. but yet that would have been better for you than if you backslid into sin after knowing righteousness. because

Luk 12:47 And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.
Luk 12:48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.

its a simple to understand. the more you know, the more you are held accountable for


I totally agree with that, he IS saved the moment he becomes a believer. but your not reading the other scriptures that tell you what must be done to keep it, or you can pass out of eternal life just as easily as you passes into it.

And yes the bible does say you have to keep believing and obeying to stay saved

Luk 8:13 They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away.

these people in Luke only believe for a while, hense they are only saved for a while

1Co 15:1 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
1Co 15:2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.

Unless you keep in memory what was preached to you, you believed in VAIN

Heb 3:12 Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God.
Heb 3:13 But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin.
Heb 3:14 For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end;
Heb 3:15 While it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation.
Heb 3:16 For some, when they had heard, did provoke: howbeit not all that came out of Egypt by Moses.
Heb 3:17 But with whom was he grieved forty years? was it not with them that had sinned, whose carcases fell in the wilderness?
Heb 3:18 And to whom sware he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that believed not?
Heb 3:19 So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief

This is a real simple warning to understand. Paul gives a warning to the brethren. there is a warning to TAKE HEED lest they depart from the living God with a heart of unbelief. then he goes on to tell them what God did to the Israelites that believed not . many people don't take these warnings seriously to TAKE HEED lest they depart from the faith. but Paul though it was important to warn them that you WILL NOT enter Gods rest as a unbeliever...so TAKE HEED

Also pay close attention to verse 14 "For we are made partakers of Christ, IF we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end;". notice the condition IF

Jud 1:5 I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not.

Rom 11:19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in.
Rom 11:20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
Rom 11:21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
Rom 11:22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
Rom 11:23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.

2Th 2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
2Th 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2Th 2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

2 Thessalonians says they refuse to LOVE the truth. these are people that knew the truth but did not love it.they also took pleasure in unrighteousness, and because of this God sends them a strong delusion so they will believe a lie and be damned. they don't believe a lie UNTILL God sends them a strong delusion. that sounds a lot like the people in 2 Peter

2Pe 2:20 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.

These people did not love the truth, but took pleasure in unrighteousness.


Right, but God is casting people into Hell after he had destroyed this heaven and this earth. so Hell is not on this earth. that was my point
QUOTE=Sir Yap Alot]Yes, it says it would have been better for them to have never known the ways of righteousness. and the only way you can know righteousness is by knowning Jesus. I don't discriminate against the unrighteous, Hindus, Muslims, Atheists, Agnostics etc... you can add any of the unrighteous in there, i just chose Muslims and Hindus[/QUOTE]

I guess this is the part of the movie where I put down my light saber and surrender to the "light side" of the force, but sadly I refuse to go with the script.

What never seems to occur to the Arminians is that if God is casting ALL unbelievers as well as those that simply "LOST salvation" into the lake of fire, that it would STILL be better for them to enjoy salvation temporarily. At least, by having had it they might be able to fix their lives up from sin, repair a broken marriage in Christ's strength, so on and so forth. Things that the unsaved do not get help from God on because they are not his children and hence, does not have the power to work IN them to that respect.

All the verses that you gave prove nothing except one thing...you reject OSAS and if a person does not, then he is like a Calvinist to you. The purpose of this thread is NOT to prove or disprove OSAS. It is also not the purpose of this thread to prove LFW. The purpose of this thread is to philosophically prove IF OSAS and LFW can go together providing that both are true. OR even IF a person thinks that they are false to prove how they don't go together and CAN'T go together PHILOSOPHICALLY.

I gave John 5:24, that proves OSAS.


John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my
word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath
everlasting life, and shall not come into
condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

All you have proved is that IF a person turns from the faith, that God may kill them...that does not mean that they are not going to be raised in time for the New Heaven and Earth though. It does not prove that their name COULD NOT be reinserted into the Lamb's book of life.