Evangelicals: How do you know you have "Saving Faith"?

[jooh8ter]

You are a superficial son of a *****. That’s such a hurtful question. Go slob on your father’s dck. Go suck off a donkey. Your mother is in the business, so she could help you out. Shell grab the nuts and you can suck. That question was so mean. How dare you ask that question. Start acting your age and not your dck size.

 

[Philthy]

"mikeledes:

The children of God, apophasis, are heirs. An heir, by definition, has not taken possessio of his inheritance yet.

Sorry buddy, not true according to Christ’s own words:
John 5:24 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.

Hi Apo -

A couple of things:

First, you continue to assume that when one “has” eternal life that they have the fullness of eternal life and that their salvation is complete. Why? The verse you quoted does not refute mikeledes position at all. Simply because you “have” eternal life does not mean you are removed from being an heir to the fullness of that eternal life.

Secondly, you continue to put forth that “having” eternal life precludes losing it. A number of passages have already been put forward which deny this. Does “…otherwise you too shall be cut off…” ring any bells? We have been through this so many times it is disheartening.

Lastly, even Muslims believe in “Him who sent me”; ie they believe that Christ was a prophet of the God of Abraham. Do you include them in the body of Christ?

Phil

 

[Philthy]

Romans 8:30 NAS95 30 and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.

You left out "Those whom he foreknew he predestined, called, justified and glorified. Who were those whom he foreknew? It’s revealed in Chapter 11 - it is the Israelites.

"I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means! I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin. God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew. Do you not know what the scripture says of Eli’jah, how he pleads with God against Israel? "

Strangely enough I was thinking about this discussion prior to coming onto CA. Have you ever wondered who is NOT foreknown by God? What does that even mean?
Finally, I will add that this section of Romans is difficult to pull together. I have come to wonder if, since the crucifixion, all of mankind is included in the “those he foreknew” in the sense that they all have access to the sacrifice of Christ who died on their behalf.

 

[Michael_Howard]

You left out "Those whom he foreknew he predestined, called, justified and glorified. Who were those whom he foreknew? It’s revealed in Chapter 11 - it is the Israelites.

"I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means! I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin. God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew. Do you not know what the scripture says of Eli’jah, how he pleads with God against Israel? "

Strangely enough I was thinking about this discussion prior to coming onto CA. Have you ever wondered who is NOT foreknown by God? What does that even mean?
Finally, I will add that this section of Romans is difficult to pull together. I have come to wonder if, since the crucifixion, all of mankind is included in the “those he foreknew” in the sense that they all have access to the sacrifice of Christ who died on their behalf.

Good point. I think the problem lies in the fact that folks try and islotate Romans chapter 9 without getting the full context of chapters 8-11 and looking at them as a whole. Good point!

 

[apophasis]

Odell:

question 1
(1 Pet 1:9) “As you attain the goal of your faith, salvation of your souls.” If we are saved once, saved forever, do we need to continue striving toward a goal? We must continue the journey because, even though one might find Christ at a single point in time, it is important to deepen the faith and strengthen the relationship in order to remain in Christ.

#1 Whats yoiur goal? bible says our goal of our faith is salvation. Does your faith have a goal?

Peter is addressing the Jewish believers in the various places in verse one. They are born again through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead and their inheritance is imperishable, undefiled and will not fade away, reserved in heaven for them who are protected by the power of God through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last times. Their salvation does not occur in the “last times,” but is revealed for all to observe (see 1 Jn. 3:2).

But for now the faith through which they were SAVED was facing trials, that the proof of it (their faith), being more precious than gold which is perishable, being tested by fire, may be found to result in the praise of His glory and honor at the revealing of Jesus Christ [1 Pet. 1:1-7).

This too is the “*goal” of my faith through which I too have been saved. That no matter what trials I must endure in this life, the result will be to His “praise and glory” at the revealing of Him who saved me (vs. 7); “redeemed” (ransomed) me, not with perishable things like gold and silver, but with His precious blood (1 Pet. 1:17-19). For He was known before the foundation of the world, but has appeared in these last times for the sake of me who through Him I am now a believer in God, who raised Him from the dead and gave Him glory, so that my faith and hope are in God (1 Pet. 1:20-21) - not a church, not a creed, pastor, pope or prelate. But in God who saved/redeemed/ransomed me with the precious blood of Christ!

And as Peter says in vss. 8-9, that even though I haven’t seen Him I LOVE HIM, and though I don’t see Him now I BELIEVE IN HIM, and the outcome of my faith in Him is the salvation of my soul (1 Pet. 1:8-9). This “outcome” is not future, but an abiding, present, imperishable one, reserved in heaven for me. My salvation is totally complete in Him (body, soul and spirit), but the full revelation of it will not be seen until Christ Himself is revealed. Until then, in this life, I walk by faith.

My body has yet to experience its redemption (i.e., glorification), but He has sealed me in Him with the Holy Spirit as a “down payment” (pledge, guarantee) toward this glorious event (Eph. 1:13-14; 4:30; 2 Cor. 5:5).

This is the “goal” of my faith. Not to get saved at some future time, but because I am.

This is all I have time for tonight, Odell. I’ll eventually get to the rest of your questions. But the tragedy is, I know that with the waive of your hand in unbelief you’ll dismiss it all.

 

[apophasis]

Hi Apo -

A couple of things:

First, you continue to assume that when one “has” eternal life that they have the fullness of eternal life and that their salvation is complete. Why? The verse you quoted does not refute mikeledes position at all. Simply because you “have” eternal life does not mean you are removed from being an heir to the fullness of that eternal life.

I see this argument as a total rationalization and a blatant denial of what the word “eternal” means.

Secondly, you continue to put forth that “having” eternal life precludes losing it. A number of passages have already been put forward which deny this. Does “…otherwise you too shall be cut off…” ring any bells? We have been through this so many times it is disheartening.

I have already given commentary on this Romans eleven verse. It has nothing to do directly with the Church Christ is building and has ransomed with His own blood.

Lastly, even Muslims believe in “Him who sent me”; ie they believe that Christ was a prophet of the God of Abraham. Do you include them in the body of Christ?

Do you understand the testimony God has given concerning the Son is that He is a mere prophet? You think that’s what Jesus was referring to in John 5:24? I’m truly starting to wonder about you, Phil.

 

[Odell]

first of all thank you Im not going to just pass them off either. all Ive wanted is your response to some questions. dosnt mean im going to agree with you but I will defenitly look into what you have to say.

But for now the faith through which they were SAVED was facing trials, that the proof of it (their faith), being more precious than gold which is perishable, being tested by fire, may be found to result in the praise of His glory and honor at the revealing of Jesus Christ [1 Pet. 1:1-7).

No where in the verse does it say these souls ARE saved but that the goal of there faith is salvation.

This is my goal there may be more but this is deffently one of them.

glory, so that my faith and hope are in God (1 Pet. 1:20-21) - not a church, not a creed, pastor, pope or prelate. But in God who saved/redeemed/ransomed me

with the precious blood of Christ!

you really dont need to hope for anything your saved. but my faith and hope is in God. Who gave us a Church including you. my faith is not in a creed, the creed is my faith! My faith is not in a pope just as the apostles faith was not in Petters. But that Petter kept them unified. And ofcourse you dont see the importance of unification.

This is all I have time for tonight, Odell. I’ll eventually get to the rest of your questions. But the tragedy is, I know that with the waive of your hand in unbelief you’ll dismiss it all.

thanks for your time.

the bottom line is I trust fully in the same God you trust in. Im a seeker of the truth there is no tragedy in that.

God bless.
[/quote]

 

[mikeledes]

I know. And that’s why you utterly fail to rightly divide the Word of truth.

Amillennialism is not a result of the study of God’s prophetic Word, but a lack of it. It is based on an erroneous presupposition.

Premillennialism, on the other hand, is based on a literal interpretation of the prophetic delineations of the future of Israel and the Kingdom of God.

In other words, it’s a result of allowing God’s prophetic Word to speak for itself rather than spiritualizing it to fit one’s own presupposition, i.e., the Church is now the new Israel.

Premillennialism is based on the “untenable” notion that God Himself lilterally had something to say concerning the future of the Church Christ is now building during this age and national Israel whose “fortunes” He promised to “restore” in the age to come. And what He revealed can be literally trusted.

WHAT? Trust God’s literal word on both salvation and prophecy? Blasphemy!!!

Up until Augustine the Church was predominately Premillennial. And rightly so. They accepted the “Jewish” understanding of the Kingdom. The verses you quoted need to be understood in context and in light of His revealed, prophetic Word.

But this is all the topic of another thread. The relevance being only that you form doctrines on passages that don’t apply to Christ’s Church, such as Matthew chapters 24 and 25.

Well, at least I don’t feel so lonely now that the Calvinists and Lutherans are also lumped in among those fail to rightly divide the word of truth. I also find it very interesting that you would invoke the Church Fathers to support premillenialism. There were premillenialists in the early church, but there is absolutely no evidence that this was the predominant or accepted viewpoint.

Here are some amillenialist Protestant websites that expose the error of premillenialism. I hope you take the time to read them. The first one is from a Reformed (calvinist) point of view:

prca.org/articles/amillennialism.html

graceonlinelibrary.org/etc/printer-friendly.asp?ID=635

fide-o.blogspot.com/2006/08/quick-look-at-amillennialism.html

The Book of Revelation is full of symbolism (numbers, beasts, dragons, etc.) It is a vision, not a literal historical/ chronological account. This is beyond the purvue of this thread so I won’t discuss this any further.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[apophasis]

first of all thank you Im not going to just pass them off either. all Ive wanted is your response to some questions. dosnt mean im going to agree with you but I will defenitly look into what you have to say.

Yet you’ve already begun to argue back. So I don’t think you’re all that interested:

No where in the verse does it say these souls ARE saved but that the goal of there faith is salvation.

I’ll quote what wrote on 1 Pet. 1:8-9 in my previous post:And as Peter says in vss. 8-9, that even though I haven’t seen Him I LOVE HIM, and though I don’t see Him now I BELIEVE IN HIM, and the outcome of my faith in Him is the salvation of my soul (1 Pet. 1:8-9). This “outcome” is not future, but an abiding, present, imperishable one, reserved in heaven for me. My salvation is totally complete in Him (body, soul and spirit), but the full revelation of it will not be seen until Christ Himself is revealed. Until then, in this life, I walk by faith.My NASB interprets it “outcome,” not “goal.” As I said, the passage does not say that the “outcome” or “goal” of my faith in Him is future. The full revelation of it, of course, is yet future (along with the full revelation of Christ), but the immediate outcome of my faith in Him was the salvation of my soul. Based on the GRACE that even the ancient, Hebrew prophets spoke of when they anticipated the sufferings of Messiah and the “glories to follow” because of that suffering - not because of my own endurance but because He endured the cross and through it secured my salvation in His blood (1 Pet. 1:10-12).

 

[apophasis]

Well, at least I don’t feel so lonely now that the Calvinists and Lutherans are also lumped in among those fail to rightly divide the word of truth. I also find it very interesting that you would invoke the Church Fathers to support premillenialism. There were premillenialists in the early church, but there is absolutely no evidence that this was the predominant or accepted viewpoint.

I disagree. Remember, those early Calvinists and Lutherans were former RCs. And their struggle and focus was not eschatology but soteriology.

Here are some amillenialist Protestant websites that expose the error of premillenialism. I hope you take the time to read them. The first one is from a Reformed (calvinist) point of view:

I’ve been to school, I’ve thoroughly studied their views.

The Book of Revelation is full of symbolism (numbers, beasts, dragons, etc.) It is a vision, not a literal historical/ chronological account.

I agree. Chapters 6-22 are not historical - they’re future to this Church age. That which is prophetic is often presented in symbols. If it was historical there would be no need.

 

[mikeledes]

I have already given commentary on this Romans eleven verse. It has nothing to do directly with the Church Christ is building and has ransomed with His own blood.

Unfortunately, it does not hold water.

Romans 11:19-22

**19Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in.
20Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
21For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
22Behold 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. **

Romans 11:20 makes it quite clear that Paul is talking to and about Gentile Christians for only Gentile Christians can stand by their faith. An unbelieving Gentile can not stand by a faith they do not have. That’s just common sense. If *unbelieving *Israeilites, the natural branches, were cut off, how can unbelieving Gentiles be grafted in an partake of the root of the tree?

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

I disagree. Remember, those early Calvinists and Lutherans were former RCs. And their struggle and focus was not eschatology but soteriology.I’ve been to school, I’ve thoroughly studied their views.

Modern day Calvinists and Lutherans are amillenialist. So is the Bible answer man Hank Hanegraft. Last time I checked, all of them are not former Catholics. “Thoroughly studying” other view points, Apophasis, should not close you off from reading other material on this issue.

God bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

I agree. Chapters 6-22 are not historical - they’re future to this Church age. That which is prophetic is often presented in symbols. If it was historical there would be no need.

And yet you interpret the 1000 year reign literally and not symbolically. What objective standard do you use to determine whether one part of the Book of Revelation should be interpreted figuratively and another literally?

God Bless,
Michael

 

[Philthy]

I see this argument as a total rationalization and a blatant denial of what the word “eternal” means.

I see this as an ad hoc reply which fails to address my point, which, BTW, was presented charitably. IMHO there is no reason to believe, as you do, that the inheritance of eternal life is instantaneous, permanent and complete at the time one comes to faith alone in Christ. It is entirely plausible and Scriptural that the eternal life we will come to possess is graduated. Eternal life can have both a “quantity” and a “quality”. I believe we can all agree that we have not entered into the fullness of the quality of eternal life that we will experience in Heaven. This fact alone points to the gradation of our experience of eternal life. It is corroborated by Scripture.
Moreover, it is possible for eternal life to be gifted conditionally while it is simultaneously possible for it to be rejected by failure to keep faith through sin. Again, Scripture reveals in many places circumstances in which Christians are warned to persevere otherwise they will be cut off. You chose to ignore all of them based upon the Scripturally-unstated notion that they do not pertain to those with saving faith.
apo:

Do you understand the testimony God has given concerning the Son is that He is a mere prophet? You think that’s what Jesus was referring to in John 5:24?

I said nothing regarding my opinion of the verse. I’m simply pointing out that the one verse that you keep retreating to in order to hold your position (while dismissing many to the contrary) doesn’t quite say what you want it to say, and Im sure some Muslims would consider themselves meeting the criteria that is set forth. That doesnt mean I would agree with them, of course, because you need to take all of Scripture into account - not just bits and pieces. As far as the verse quoted, it sets forth two conditions for eternal life:
A) whoever hears my word
B) whoever believes in God the Father (ie “in the one who sent me”)

 

[Odell]

Yet you’ve already begun to argue back. So I don’t think you’re all that interested:

You know I could just egnore you kind of like you have done my questions up until now. That looks to me like your not interested in anything I have to say.

The only question you were interested in is #1?

I’ll quote what wrote on 1 Pet. 1:8-9 in my previous post:And as Peter says in vss. 8-9, that even though I haven’t seen Him I LOVE HIM, and though I don’t see Him now I BELIEVE IN HIM, and the outcome of my faith in Him is the salvation of my soul (1 Pet. 1:8-9). This “outcome” is not future, but an abiding, present, imperishable one, reserved in heaven for me. My salvation is totally complete in Him (body, soul and spirit), but the full revelation of it will not be seen until Christ Himself is revealed. Until then, in this life, I walk by faith.My NASB interprets it “outcome,” not “goal.” As I said, the passage does not say that the “outcome” or “goal” of my faith in Him is future. The full revelation of it, of course, is yet future (along with the full revelation of Christ), but the immediate outcome of my faith in Him was the salvation of my soul. Based on the GRACE that even the ancient, Hebrew prophets spoke of when they anticipated the sufferings of Messiah and the “glories to follow” because of that suffering - not because of my own endurance but because He endured the cross and through it secured my salvation in His blood (1 Pet. 1:10-12).

I understand this more seeing your bible puts it different and you explained it a little better.

or it may be I just see it better.

I still dont agree over all your view of things you still have 12 more questions to answer so who knows.

Ill wait for you to respond to all the questions before I respond. I understand it is easy to get behind when I ask you something after each question. So answer the questions If I see where your questions dont line up with scripture then I will respond. But it is not that I am not interested. Its called a debate if I was not interest I would egnore you and your questions.

here is you chance to answer the question I have asked in response to some things you said to me. You promised you would get to the rest when you have time.

Ill be here waithing.

 

[MotherNoRest]

I think the point here is that Evangelicals claim to be assured of their salvation… but how do they know that they are not one of the lukewarm that the Lord will spit out or one of those who say “Lord, Lord” but not enter the Kingdom? Do those who don’t make it tell themselves “I’m not making it” or are they caught by surprise?

Catholics claim a ‘moral’ assurance but not an ‘absolute’ assurance of entering heaven. This would eliminate the possibility that we could constantly delude ourselves by eliminating the option of a believer to KNOW he or she will go to heaven. We can only HOPE in going to heaven but we can be pretty darn sure and even anticipate the joy of heaven. And the difference between HOPING and KNOWING is lots of good works and prayers and perseverence to keep our souls in the state of grace lest we, too, fall away, like the seed that fell on rocky soil. And prayers and good works are what God wants of His followers (in conjunction with their faith, of course).

He’s a pretty smart guy!!

 

[japhy]

There’s also Romans 13:11, which says salvation is nearer to us now than when we first believed. Paul is not speaking to Jews here, he is speaking to Gentiles (cf. Romans 11:13), so I do not think he means “now that Jesus has come, salvation is nearer to us [Jews] now than [before the New Covenant]”.

I could be wrong.

 

[JoeyWarren]

There’s also Romans 13:11, which says salvation is nearer to us now than when we first believed. Paul is not speaking to Jews here, he is speaking to Gentiles (cf. Romans 11:13), **so I do not think he means “now that Jesus has come, salvation is nearer to us [Jews] now than [before the New Covenant]”. **I could be wrong.

You are not wrong here. Paul is post Resurrection. Paul is part of the we.

 

[apophasis]

Romans 11:20 makes it quite clear that Paul is talking to and about Gentile Christians for only Gentile Christians can stand by their faith. An unbelieving Gentile can not stand by a faith they do not have. That’s just common sense.

It’s a general statement toward Gentiledom which has now, by the grace of God, received the gospel message.

 

[apophasis]

I see this as an ad hoc reply which fails to address my point, which, BTW, was presented charitably. IMHO there is no reason to believe, as you do, that the inheritance of eternal life is instantaneous, permanent and complete at the time one comes to faith alone in Christ. It is entirely plausible and Scriptural that the eternal life we will come to possess is graduated. Eternal life can have both a “quantity” and a “quality”. I believe we can all agree that we have not entered into the fullness of the quality of eternal life that we will experience in Heaven. This fact alone points to the gradation of our experience of eternal life. It is corroborated by Scripture.

When a child is born into this world it is fully human. Its experiences unto adulthood do not make it more human.

Moreover, it is possible for eternal life to be gifted conditionally while it is simultaneously possible for it to be rejected by failure to keep faith through sin.

The sin issue was dealt with at the cross and for this reason the life that is gifted is eternal (everlasting).

Again, Scripture reveals in many places circumstances in which Christians are warned to persevere otherwise they will be cut off. You chose to ignore all of them based upon the Scripturally-unstated notion that they do not pertain to those with saving faith.

But then it could be that you choose not to believe that God has the power through Christ to save completely those who turn from unbelief to belief in Him (repentance). That there is such a thing as "saving faith"Rom. 1:16-17 "For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to every one who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; just as it is written, "But the righteous man shall live by faith."It is very plausible that the problem is not my hermeneutics but your faith.

I said nothing regarding my opinion of the verse.

Sure you did by your comment that Muslims believe Jesus to be a prophet.

I’m simply pointing out that the one verse that you keep retreating to in order to hold your position (while dismissing many to the contrary) doesn’t quite say what you want it to say, and Im sure some Muslims would consider themselves meeting the criteria that is set forth. That doesnt mean I would agree with them, of course, because you need to take all of Scripture into account - not just bits and pieces.

Yes, other Scriptures that reveal who Christ is and what He accomplished, in full, through His substitutionary, sacrificial death and subsequent bodily resurrection. Islam rejects all of it. Many who call themselves “Christian” reject some of it.

As far as the verse quoted, it sets forth two conditions for eternal life: whoever hears my word B) whoever believes in God the Father (ie “in the one who sent me”)

"…and believes Him who sent Me (1) HAS eternal life, (2) and does NOT come into judgment (3) but HAS passed out of death into life.John elaborates on this testimony of the Father in 1 Jn. 5:9-13. And this he writes that the one who believes may KNOW that he HAS eternal life.