Perseverance of the Saints

[cfrancis]

I am sorry, but that is not the meaning of my affirmations.

I affirm that true believers will endure unto the end.

I do not affirm, however, that the believer is unable to know for sure if he is a true believer until he endures unto the end - that was no where near what I said.

Did you not read my response to these questions:

Why yes I am!

And I praise the Lord!

Why yes I do!

Praise the Lord again!

So now that this is cleared up - shall we continue with our discussion? Do you have anymore assertions to make? I would be happy to dismantle them all now, if you don’t mind

The way that I prove my assertion that Judas was not truly saved, is by reminding you that he betrayed the Lord, hung himself, and went to hell. The apostle John teaches us plainly that true believers stay within the covenant community, but that false believers sooner or later depart, and thereby manifest that they were never saved to begin with. *“They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.” *(1 John 2:19)

You, and I, like Judas, have the ability to choose against God at any point before our death.
Your assertion re: Judas is that he did not repent and seek the forgiveness of Christ; he did not cross the finish the line, endure until the end.
What your assertion does not address is whether or not at any point prior to his falling away, was he saved; that is, at some point, Judas could have answered as you have, declaring himself saved.
The beauty of 1 Jn, from which you cite, is that only by the persevering to the end - actually crossing the finish line - or by falling away can the distinction be made between saved and unsaved.
How many times, in your theological world, have you spoken of someone who has fallen away as “not really being saved?” Yet, up until the falling away, the distinction was not, could not, be made.
Your position, stated in your own words, leads one away from the idea of “assured salvation.”

 

[Frontline]

The beauty of 1 Jn, from which you cite, is that only by the persevering to the end - actually crossing the finish line - or by falling away can the distinction be made between saved and unsaved. How many times, in your theological world, have you spoken of someone who has fallen away as “not really being saved?” Yet, up until the falling away, the distinction was not, could not, be made. Your position, stated in your own words, leads one away from the idea of “assured salvation.”

I agree that sometimes a person can get by on a false profession, however it does not follow that a true believer then cannot know that he is saved. That is a leap in logic.

I affirm that God knows the heart, and yet that other people cannot be too quick to judge the professing believer (until their fruit becomes clearly evident). However - the assurance of a man’s own salvation does not come from the approval of other men, but from God the Holy Spirit Alone. The Bible teaches that *“The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God.” *(Romans 8:16). Again, you are making a leap in logic, attempting to connect that which is not connected.

What your assertion does not address is whether or not at any point prior to his falling away, was he saved; that is, at some point, Judas could have answered as you have, declaring himself saved.

1st John is clear. If someone ever “falls away” - or manifests themselves to be lost, then this is evidence that they were never saved. Look at the passage: “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.” (1 John 2:19)

Clearly John teaches that if anyone is truly apart of the family of God, then they will continue therein. He teaches further that if they abandon the faith and the family of God, ultimately rejecting the gospel and Christ - then they were never a part of the family, and clearly never knew Christ.

This is what Jesus taught in Matthew 7. He made it clear that on the last day “many” professing Christians would come to him and say, "Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ (vv. 21-22). Jesus said that he will turn to them and respond that he “never knew them” - not that he knew them at one point, and then they lost their salvation and were cut off.

So clearly, the Scriptures testify against your position, and if you are to attempt to use Judas as an example, you must first prove that he was truly born again. Then you must prove that John did not mean what he meant, and that Jesus did not say what he said. Until you can establish this, you are relying on naked assertions that have no biblical foundation whatsoever.

But thank you for all your effort!

 

[Chancellare]

The apostle Paul made it very clear that not all of the children of Israel were truly the children of God when he said, “Not all of Israel is truly Israel.” (Romans 9:6) And again – if being an Israelite after the flesh makes you a born again child of God, then Jesus was blaspheming God’s children in John chapter 8, verses 33-45. (Read it)!

If you would understand that being a child of God is not according to the flesh, then you would realize that the Children of Israel was a mixed group of believers and non-believers – wheat and tares, sheep and goats. So when we learn that certain Israelites perished in the wilderness because of their “unbelief” – then how can we still assign them the title of “true children of God” – they are obviously not.

So you admit that the ‘warnings’ of the father to the son do not necessarily result in it being heeded. Therefore you cannot use the premise in your argument:

“But I know that my son will always heed my counsel, and will respond wisely to my warnings.”

 

[cfrancis]

I agree that sometimes a person can get by on a false profession, however it does not follow that a true believer then cannot know that he is saved. That is a leap in logic.

Not a leap in leap in logic, just a natural conclusion. Further in your post you introduce Mt 7:21, for which I thank you. Please note, those about whom the Lord is speaking had no idea they were not true believers; had you simply looked at their fruits - healing and other wonders, casting out demons, prophesying all in Christ’s name - you could not say they weren’t true believers.

I affirm that God knows the heart, and yet that other people cannot be too quick to judge the professing believer (until their fruit becomes clearly evident). However - the assurance of a man’s own salvation does not come from the approval of other men, but from God the Holy Spirit Alone. The Bible teaches that *“The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God.” *(Romans 8:16). Again, you are making a leap in logic, attempting to connect that which is not connected.

You are attempting to disconnect that which is intimately connected. I’d like to finish your quote of Rom 8:16:
16 The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God,
17 and if children, heirs also, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him so that we may also be glorified with Him
It is the parent/child relationship that testifies the loudest against your position. You and I, as fathers, can raise our children correctly, providing them every advantage (spiritually) and we still are not guaranteed they will follow the path they should. They have, always, the choice, the free will, to choose against us.
Should a child choose to leave, the child would have to be the one to initiate the return, first by a true contrition for the bad behavior, then by a firm decision to amend his ways, and finally a reconciliation with the father.

1st John is clear. If someone ever “falls away” - or manifests themselves to be lost, then this is evidence that they were never saved. Look at the passage: “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.” (1 John 2:19)
Clearly John teaches that if anyone is truly apart of the family of God, then they will continue therein. He teaches further that if they abandon the faith and the family of God, ultimately rejecting the gospel and Christ - then they were never a part of the family, and clearly never knew Christ.

Again, you miss the obvious. It is not until the turning away and the decision to not return that one can say that person was not truly part of the family. Any one of us could choose, based on our own free will, to turn away from God tomorrow.
Again, it comes down to, only until one crosses the finish line can one be asureede they will finish the race.

This is what Jesus taught in Matthew 7. He made it clear that on the last day “many” professing Christians would come to him and say, "Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ (vv. 21-22). Jesus said that he will turn to them and respond that he “never knew them” - not that he knew them at one point, and then they lost their salvation and were cut off.

Contrary to your assertions above, Scripture is in agreement with my position.
While you attempt to read into Scripture that which is not there, or attempt to fit your theology into prooftexts, both Scripture and Tradition attest to the need to reject presumption and persevere to the end.
Rom 11:22
Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness; otherwise you also will be cut off.
1 Cor 9
26 Therefore I run in such a way, as not without aim; I box in such a way, as not beating the air; 27 but I discipline my body and make it my slave, so that, after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified.
1 Cor 10
Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed that he does not fall.
Phil 2:12
So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your salvation with fear and trembling;
Matthew 13:18-23
18 "Hear then the parable of the sower.
19 "When anyone hears the word of the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what has been sown in his heart. This is the one on whom seed was sown beside the road.
20 "The one on whom seed was sown on the rocky places, this is the man who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy;
21 yet he has no firm root in himself, but is only temporary, and when affliction or persecution arises because of the word, immediately he falls away.
22 "And the one on whom seed was sown among the thorns, this is the man who hears the word, and the worry of the world and the deceitfulness of wealth choke the word, and it becomes unfruitful.
1 Corinthians 15:1-2
1 Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand,
2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain.
Finally, in Mt 25, each parable speaks against the idea of the “perseverance of the saints.”

 

[spoiltvictorian]

Does the truly in “truly saved” refer to the current state or the destination? If it refers to the destination, of course - whatever will get you into Heaven will get you into Heaven. If it’s the current state, how can anyone know? Frontline, your problem is you’re confusing salvation as current state with salvation as destination.

 

[cfrancis]

Does the truly in “truly saved” refer to the current state or the destination? If it refers to the destination, of course - whatever will get you into Heaven will get you into Heaven. If it’s the current state, how can anyone know? Frontline, your problem is you’re confusing salvation as current state with salvation as destination.

That’s an important distinction. Thank you for articulating it.

 

[Frontline]

So you admit that the ‘warnings’ of the father to the son do not necessarily result in it being heeded. Therefore you cannot use the premise in your argument:

“But I know that my son will always heed my counsel, and will respond wisely to my warnings.”

Good observation! I guess you are right, my phrase was a bit to absolute. We as believers know that we do not “always” heed the word of God our Father. But, as I said, the warnings are not the only means used to keep us from falling away.

 

[Frontline]

Part ONE of TWO

In your post you introduce Mt 7:21, for which I thank you. Please note, those about whom the Lord is speaking had no idea they were not true believers; had you simply looked at their fruits - healing and other wonders, casting out demons, prophesying all in Christ’s name - you could not say they weren’t true believers.

Again, I may not have known whether they were saved or not. But the passage clearly teaches that they were never saved, for Jesus “never” knew them. Whether they truly believed that they were saved is disputable, but still in no wise takes away from the assurance of the true believer. A man can believe himself to be saved and not be saved, but a man cannot be saved, (and therefore have the inner testimony and witness of the Spirit of God), and not know that he is saved. How you confuse these two is beyond me.

I’d like to finish your quote of Rom 8:16:
16 The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God,
17 and if children, heirs also, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him so that we may also be glorified with Him

Finishing the quote is not necessary for it proves nothing against my position. The phrase “if indeed we suffer with him” teaches that our suffering is yet another testimony that we will be glorified with him. All true believers suffer with Christ – 2 Timothy 3:12.

You and I, as fathers, can raise our children correctly, providing them every advantage (spiritually) and we still are not guaranteed they will follow the path they should. They have, always, the choice, the free will, to choose against us . . . Any one of us could choose, based on our own free will, to turn away from God tomorrow.

This is true in a mere human scenario, however, there is a lot more involved when we contemplate the divine provisions of God. Consider this biblical truth: All our thoughts and deeds proceed from our hearts (Mt. 15:18-19) and since God gives a ‘new heart’ in conversion (Ezk. 11:19; 36:26) - then what would make you think that we would ever even want to turn away from the Lord? What would be in us that would cause us to “will” to turn from God, when we have been granted a new heart by God Himself? Was it not God’s New Covenant Promise and purpose that ‘we shall not depart from Him’ (Jer. 32:40) ?? I think that you underestimate the promises of the New Covenant.

Rom 11:22
Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness; otherwise you also will be cut off.

When you read the term “If you,” you automatically interpret this in a meritorious sense, when it is clear that this turns the gospel into a works-based salvation. The term “If you,” should therefore be understood in a manifestative sense. This means that the “continuing in His kindness” is not the work that merits the perpetuality of salvation, but rather, the “continuing in His kindness” is the work that manifests the authenticity of salvation.

1 Cor 9
26 Therefore I run in such a way, as not without aim; I box in such a way, as not beating the air; 27 but I discipline my body and make it my slave, so that, after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified.

Again, Paul’s “disciplining his body” is the evidence that he is truly saved. It is the Spirit’s gracious work in him that gives him the grace to mortify the flesh. The only other way to understand this passage is that Paul’s own power to subdue his flesh is the grounds of his salvation, which turns the gospel into a works-based salvation, which is the anti-thesis of a grace-wrought salvation.

 

[Frontline]

Part TWO of TWO

1 Cor 10
Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed that he does not fall.

Yes, this is sound advice. A man ought not to think that he is immune to failure. True believers often fall, but again, Paul in this context assures us that true believers will not fall away fully and finally – and he bases this – not upon the strength of the believer, but upon the faithfulness of God. See the very next line: “There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted above that which you are able to bear; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, so that you may be able to bear it.”

Phil 2:12 So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your salvation with fear and trembling;

This is a great passage, and again, this passage demonstrates the manifestative principle very clearly. First let me just say that a person works “out” his salvation; he does not work “for” his salvation. Also - when a person “works out his salvation with fear and trembling” he is manifesting that God is at work within him. In other words, this “working out” does not earn salvation, but rather it evidences salvation. This is made very plain in the very next line; and I find it very convenient that you have left that line out. You may have gotten your information second hand, and acted too soon in presenting them to me – without first examining the context of these passages. Let me show you what I mean.

Philippians 2:12 AND 13 read, “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; FOR it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.”

Matthew 13:18-23
18 "Hear then the parable of the sower.

This is a great parable – but you have forgotten one thing. A man cannot change his own heart from rocky ground to good soil – this is a divine work of the Spirit in regeneration – “A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.” (Ezekiel 36:26).

Also – we must remember what Paul told the Corinthians about this very thing. “I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.” (3:6-7) This gives us more clarity to the issue, as we see that all fruit-bearing is of the Lord, and not of any man. The preacher cannot guarantee any growth, nor can he himself prepare the soil – God must do it all. This is another reason that all our fruit is called “the fruit of the Spirit.”

1 Corinthians 15:1-2
1 Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand,
2 by which also you are saved if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain.

Again, we see clearly the manifestative principle. Notice that Paul says a person “is saved” (present tense) if he holds fast. He does not say that a person “will be saved” (future tense) if he holds fast. Therefore this “holding fast” is not the work that merits one’s salvation, but rather, this “holding fast” is the work that evidences one’s salvation.

Finally, in Mt 25, each parable speaks against the idea of the “perseverance of the saints.”

If you examine the context of the parable, you will see the significance of what immediately follows. Jesus speaks about the separation of sheep from goats – again, the manifestative principle. Sheep do not turn to goats, and goats do not turn to sheep. They only manifest what they really are by what they ultimately do.

Thank you for your comments cfrancis, but if these are all of your objections, then I have to tell you – I am not at all convinced of your position. So far you have not demonstrated that a truly born again believer has or ever will abandon Christ and the gospel, to the loss of his salvation. Do you have any more passages to give me, before you begin to deal with the overwhelming evidence for the doctrine of the Perseverance of the Saints/Preservation of the Saints?

 

[Frontline]

Does the truly in “truly saved” refer to the current state or the destination? If it refers to the destination, of course - whatever will get you into Heaven will get you into Heaven. If it’s the current state, how can anyone know? Frontline, your problem is you’re confusing salvation as current state with salvation as destination.

The Reformed Faith affirms a three fold salvation: Past, Present, and Future. Allow me to touch the past tense realities of a believer’s salvation. The Scriptures - among presenting salvation as something to be experientially received in it’s fullness at a future time - also presents our salvation as something that has been accomplished by Christ on the cross 2000 years ago. Not only this - but also - the Bible teaches that our salvation was accomplished in the immutable purpose of God before the foundation of the world. There is a chain of components that are connected and cannot be broken - and this is proven in that they are all given in the past tense. (Romans 8:30). This is to demonstrate that although we have not experientially received the fullness of our inheritance, our salvation has indeed been immutably purposed, infallibly accomplished, irrevocably deposited (Eph 1:13-14) and therefore the fullness awaits us, being reserved for us - and we are being preserved for it (1 Pet. 1:5).

However, because you do not see a person as being ‘saved’ until he experiences all of his inheritance - you must cut out of your theological considerations - all that the bible says concerning the past tense aspects of our salvation. This is where I believe the Catholic position falls short, and therefore this is where you err. When we view salvation in a purely future aspect, the believer is robbed of his assurance, and God’s promises are disregarded, casting a shadow of doubt upon his word, work, and faithfulness to His elect. But thank you for your observations!

 

[cfrancis]

Again, I may not have known whether they were saved or not. But the passage clearly teaches that they were never saved, for Jesus “never” knew them. Whether they truly believed that they were saved is disputable, but still in no wise takes away from the assurance of the true believer. A man can believe himself to be saved and not be saved, but a man cannot be saved, (and therefore have the inner testimony and witness of the Spirit of God), and not know that he is saved. How you confuse these two is beyond me.

It seems you are accustomed to your assertions being wholly granted without evidence. The second part of your statement speaks against both Scripture and common sense. To refresh your memory, the issue at hand is whether or not someone can no, with God’s perfect knowledge, that they will end up in heaven.
One can, as a Christian, have assurance in God’s Word and promises - there is no chance of failure on that end.
The problem is on our end. It appears your theology dismisses free will once the person becomes a Christian. You’ll have to prove that to me.
Otherwise, we have the will and the capacity to choose against God at any point, and to remain cut off from Him.
So, a man can be saved - end up in heaven - without ever having 100% assurance of that end in the this life.

Finishing the quote is not necessary for it proves nothing against my position. The phrase “if indeed we suffer with him” teaches that our suffering is yet another testimony that we will be glorified with him. All true believers suffer with Christ – 2 Timothy 3:12.

The end of the quote is most necessary.
We have a truth: all those who suffer to the end, who persevere to the end, will be saved.
This reveals another truth: only at the end will one know they have persevered to the end, and are therefore saved.
So yes, again, all believers suffer with Christ; only those who will be saved will suffer to the end, and we have no way of knowing who that is.

This is true in a mere human scenario, however, there is a lot more involved when we contemplate the divine provisions of God. Consider this biblical truth: All our thoughts and deeds proceed from our hearts (Mt. 15:18-19) and since God gives a ‘new heart’ in conversion (Ezk. 11:19; 36:26) - then what would make you think that we would ever even want to turn away from the Lord? What would be in us that would cause us to “will” to turn from God, when we have been granted a new heart by God Himself? Was it not God’s New Covenant Promise and purpose that ‘we shall not depart from Him’ (Jer. 32:40) ?? I think that you underestimate the promises of the New Covenant.

I think you cast aspersions to quickly. Our ‘new heart’ from Christ certainly is given the means to access His grace to help us persevere, but we are not automatically free from troubles, temptation or sin itself; and we certainly do not lose our free will.
So, in short, sin is what can lead us to turn away from Him.
Of course, in your theology, those who turn away were never “saved” in the first place; yet prior to their turning away, you could not have said that. Which brings us back to the truth: only by corssing the finish line will one know they have finished the race.

When you read the term “If you,” you automatically interpret this in a meritorious sense, when it is clear that this turns the gospel into a works-based salvation. The term “If you,” should therefore be understood in a manifestative sense. This means that the “continuing in His kindness” is not the work that merits the perpetuality of salvation, but rather, the “continuing in His kindness” is the work that manifests the authenticity of salvation.

Throw up the straw man in defense? I suppose you must to defend your theology in the face of Scriptural refutation.
Rom 11:22
Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness; otherwise you also will be cut off. Please, feel free to post the whole section; it doesn’t change the truth it reveals: we the duty in our relationship to persevere. If we have no responsibility in our relationship with Christ, then we have no relationship, but a contract with an overseer.
All our good works come from Christ. But we must still choose to do them, to respond to His Grace. Otherwise, we are nothing more than robots, incapable of true love (self-giving), merely acting out that to which we’ve been programmed.

Again, Paul’s “disciplining his body” is the evidence that he is truly saved. It is the Spirit’s gracious work in him that gives him the grace to mortify the flesh. The only other way to understand this passage is that Paul’s own power to subdue his flesh is the grounds of his salvation, which turns the gospel into a works-based salvation, which is the anti-thesis of a grace-wrought salvation.

Again, another straw man to the rescue. Paul chooses to respond to Christ’s grace, from which the power comes to subdue the flesh; Christ does not force Paul to subdue his flesh, nor is Paul acting as a robot carrying out a program. He is choosing to respond to Christ. If He has that choice, he also has the choice to not to respond.

 

[cfrancis]

Yes, this is sound advice. A man ought not to think that he is immune to failure. True believers often fall, but again, Paul in this context assures us that true believers will not fall away fully and finally – and he bases this – not upon the strength of the believer, but upon the faithfulness of God. See the very next line: “There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted above that which you are able to bear; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, so that you may be able to bear it.”

Again, you cannot place words into Paul’s mouth. Notice Christ provides the means of escape from temtptation; notice also Paul does not say Christ leads us to the escape, forces us to escape. We must choose to respond to Christ, to tap into His grace, in order to overcome temptation. You and I, and Paul, are testimony to the fact we do not always choose Christ’s escape plan. And yes, once we sin, we can, with God’s grace, restore the relationship. But we are not forced to, otherwise we do not have true (or even imperfect) contrition; we would then be robots or workers, and not in a relationship. Likewise, we can choose to not restore the relationship, as Judas chose.

This is a great passage, and again, this passage demonstrates the manifestative principle very clearly. First let me just say that a person works “out” his salvation; he does not work “for” his salvation. Also - when a person “works out his salvation with fear and trembling” he is manifesting that God is at work within him. In other words, this “working out” does not earn salvation, but rather it evidences salvation.

That’s quite a bit of twisting and turning to fit your theology.
How can a man, on the one hand, know for certain he will end up in heaven in the beatific vision, and on the other hand, have to “work out his salvation” that he already has?
According to you, he already has attained heaven, so about what is there to “fear and tremb[e]?”
Rather, Paul speaks plainly to the role of man in his relationship with God. Everything comes from God’s grace, but man must still respond to that grace.

This is made very plain in the very next line; and I find it very convenient that you have left that line out. You may have gotten your information second hand, and acted too soon in presenting them to me – without first examining the context of these passages. Let me show you what I mean.

Philippians 2:12 AND 13 read, “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; FOR it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.”

Amen and Amen! And it changes not the truth of Paul’s words: we must still respond to His grace, and have the ability, the freedom to not respond. Paul is quick to tell us the good we do is not from us but Him. But Paul does not tell we will automatically and always do the good He wishes us to do, else there’d be no sin.
Further, Paul isn’t saying we can’t turn from Him.

This is a great parable – but you have forgotten one thing. A man cannot change his own heart from rocky ground to good soil – this is a divine work of the Spirit in regeneration – “A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.” (Ezekiel 36:26).

Also – we must remember what Paul told the Corinthians about this very thing. “I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.” (3:6-7) This gives us more clarity to the issue, as we see that all fruit-bearing is of the Lord, and not of any man. The preacher cannot guarantee any growth, nor can he himself prepare the soil – God must do it all. This is another reason that all our fruit is called “the fruit of the Spirit.”

And again we agree that all the good we do comes from God; and none of what you said refutes the idea we can choose to not do that good, and even choose to turn away from God.
Please note that Ezekiel doesn’t say, “like or not, want it or not, I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.” Otherwise, no Christian would ever have to profess Christ: Christ would just, automatically and without warning, give the person a new heart.
Further, the parable speaks to the duty of man, to respond to God’s grace, and his ability to not respond to God.

Again, we see clearly the manifestative principle. Notice that Paul says a person “is saved” (present tense) if he holds fast. He does not say that a person “will be saved” (future tense) if he holds fast. Therefore this “holding fast” is not the work that merits one’s salvation, but rather, this “holding fast” is the work that evidences one’s salvation.

Perhaps you received your information second hand, and acted too soon in presenting it…“saved” is present tense, but is literally an ongoing process: “YE-ARE-beING-SAVED” and not a one-time past occurrence, as in “you’re saved and have attained heaven.”
Paul is clearly aware of the responsibility of man to respond to God, and man’s ability to choose against God. After all, he’s writing to Christians at Corinth. If they are, as your theology suggests, already saved and have attained heaven, the warning mankes no sense.
If they are ones who think they are saved but aren’t, Paul makes no such mention or distinction in addressing “you” in vv1 and 2.
And as the verb tense portrays a process of being saved, you’ll need to explain when that process is done and when a man knows he is saved and has attained heaven.

 

[cfrancis]

If you examine the context of the parable, you will see the significance of what immediately follows. Jesus speaks about the separation of sheep from goats – again, the manifestative principle. Sheep do not turn to goats, and goats do not turn to sheep. They only manifest what they really are by what they ultimately do.

Again, you have missed the point. Yes, the goats were goats and the sheep were sheep, but neither knew who was what until the separation. This is illuminated by Mt 7:21.
And again, the only way the sheep knew they were sheep was at the end!

So far, you have not refuted the evidence that man can choose not to respond to God’s grace. Further, you’ve failed to present any evidence that a true believer knew with 100% assurance in this life that he had attained heaven and would not turn away from God.
What you have presented is an overwhelming ability to twist the Scriptures to fit your theology.
I think we can agree that those who persevere to the end are true believers and will be saved.
Our issue is whether or not we know who will persevere to the end and has therefore attained heaven.

 

[spoiltvictorian]

The Reformed Faith affirms a three fold salvation: Past, Present, and Future. Allow me to touch the past tense realities of a believer’s salvation. The Scriptures - among presenting salvation as something to be experientially received in it’s fullness at a future time - also presents our salvation as something that has been accomplished by Christ on the cross 2000 years ago. Not only this - but also - the Bible teaches that our salvation was accomplished in the immutable purpose of God before the foundation of the world. There is a chain of components that are connected and cannot be broken - and this is proven in that they are all given in the past tense. (Romans 8:30). This is to demonstrate that although we have not experientially received the fullness of our inheritance, our salvation has indeed been immutably purposed, infallibly accomplished, irrevocably deposited (Eph 1:13-14) and therefore the fullness awaits us, being reserved for us - and we are being preserved for it (1 Pet. 1:5).

However, because you do not see a person as being ‘saved’ until he experiences all of his inheritance - you must cut out of your theological considerations - all that the bible says concerning the past tense aspects of our salvation. This is where I believe the Catholic position falls short, and therefore this is where you err. When we view salvation in a purely future aspect, the believer is robbed of his assurance, and God’s promises are disregarded, casting a shadow of doubt upon his word, work, and faithfulness to His elect. But thank you for your observations!

As Christians we have faith in the work of Christ on the Cross, we hope for Christ’s return and abolition of sin, and in the meantime we love Him and others, and “do all things for the sake of the gospel, so that [we] might become a fellow partaker in it.”

 

[Frontline]

cfrancis - you have not dealt properly with the Scriptures. You accuse me of twisting Scripture, but the fact is, that is what you are doing. Your free will doctrine cannot be found in the Scriptures, whether before or after conversion. Free will is a myth of Paganism. I would like to ask you to demonstrate that men have the capacity to “cooperate with grace” without grace.

Also, show me where God has ever attempted to bring about a decisive event and because of someone’s free will, His purposes were thwarted.

Also, you still have not demonstrated from the Scriptures that a born-again child of God has ever -OR- can ever turn from the gospel and reject Christ to a loss of their salvation. All you have given me is a bunch of passages that lay out for us true but hypothetical propositions - all of which I affirm. Other than that, you have misunderstood the obvious manifestative principle, and turned the gospel into a salvation by human works.

Jesus said: “A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.” (John 13:34) You might interpret this passage also in the light of your works-based theology as Jesus teaching that because Jesus commands us to love one another, then we must love one another *in order to become *his disciples. But this is clearly the manifestative principle, as he makes clear in the very next line: “By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another” (v.35).

In other words - loving one another is the proof that you are truly a disciple of Jesus, and not the grounds of your discipleship. So it is with the perseverance of the saints. Enduring unto the end is the proof of having truly been born again. How you deny this is beyond me. You have not given me a single example from Scripture - but yet continue to make naked assertions.

Also - I do not restrict salvation to a past tense aspect; as I have also acknowledged the future aspect as well. The sad fact is that you have broken the chain of redemption, and have inserted into God’s perfect work - the possibility of failure. Show me how you can support this claim from Romans 8:30 - I would love to see how you deal with this text.

 

[spoiltvictorian]

In other words - loving one another is the proof that you are truly a disciple of Jesus, and not the grounds of your discipleship. So it is with the perseverance of the saints. Enduring unto the end is the proof of having truly been born again. How you deny this is beyond me. You have not given me a single example from Scripture - but yet continue to make naked assertions.

The Church at Ephesus had a Christian love that died out, and if they did not change their ways after receiving St. John’s letter, some of them did not endure to the end. Or else he didn’t actually mean they were in trouble?

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

Also, show me where God has ever attempted to bring about a decisive event and because of someone’s free will, His purposes were thwarted. .

Do you believe that God wanted Adam and Eve to disobey?

Do you believe that God wants us to sin?

Do you believe that God wanted the Jews to make a golden calf to worship?

You can’t seem to accept that God CHOSE to give us free will.

That choice is his purpose.

 

[spoiltvictorian]

Do you believe that God wanted Adam and Eve to disobey?

Do you believe that God wants us to sin?

Do you believe that God wanted the Jews to make a golden calf to worship?

You can’t seem to accept that God CHOSE to give us free will.

That choice is his purpose.

It’s even in the 1689 Confession, Chapter 9. vor.org/truth/1689/1689bc09.html That’s about as T.U.L.I.P. as it gets.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Great topic.

I think it is quite easy to disprove this doctrine with scripture.

I’ll provide some crystal clear scripture which I believe makes the case that we can lose salvation if WE don’t endure:

2 Peter 2:20-21 “They were made free from the evil in the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. But if they return to evil things and those things control them, then it is worse for them than it was before. Yes, it would be better for them to have never known the right way than to know it and to turn away from the holy teaching that was given to them.”

Who is made free from evil by knowing Jesus? The unsaved? I don’t think so.

Matthew 10:22 "And you will be hated by all for My name’s sake. But he who endures to the end will be saved.

Matthew 24:13 "But he who endures to the end shall be saved.

Matthew 7:21 “Not everyone who says to Me, Lord, Lord, shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father.”

Who must endure, God, or us?

Hebrews 10:29 “How much worse punishment do you think will be deserved by those who have spurned the Son of God, profaned the blood of the covenant by which they were sanctified, and outraged the Spirit?”

**Who has been sanctified? **

St. Augustine deals with all these pot-shots. IMWFO he is probably better equipped than any of us to form doctrine on the matter. Many objections to Reformed doctrine are also objections to his. Which is ironic, when some would have people believe that the Fathers are the last word in Biblical interpretation.​

BTW, that quotation of Hebrews 10.29 is a fatal objection only on Pelagian presuppositions. That would imply a completely unreal separation between the activity of men, & the activity of God’s grace.

As for those two verses out of Matthew 7, that quotation is convincing only if one ignores the inter-relation between doctrines. If we look carefully enough, we will find verses to deny that God exists, to deny that Christ is God, to deny Christ’s sinlessness, & a thousand other doctrines. For that is where quoting verses without theology leads.

As for Matt. 10.22 & 24.13 - they are no objection at all.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

There’s also a big difference between having a moral assurance of salvation, and presumption of salvation. What is wrong is the presumption, not the trust in God. Yes?

That is a caricature of the doctrine of assurance of salvation - as a reading of Reformed theologians would make clear. Otherwise, of course: for the sinfulness of presumption is not doubted by them.​

An example from John Murray:

• The abuses of the doctrine of predestination and the alleged conflict thereby instituted with other doctrines of Scripture are matters with which Calvin, Dordt, and ‘Westminster were compelled to deal. [Gap because of length] Hence the first five articles of the Canons are devoted to such aspects of the gospel. But, after the pattern followed by the Westminster Confession and in greater fulness, Dordt deals with the proper uses of the doctrine and warns against the distortions to which it is liable to be subjected. The way of attaining to the assurance of election is set forth in Article XII. The elect may attain to this assurance, ‘though in various degrees and in different measure . . . not by inquisitively prying into the secret and deep things of God but by observing in themselves with spiritual joy and holy pleasure the infallible fruits of election designated in the Word of God’. The consolations of the sense and certainty of election and the corresponding responses in humiliation, adoration, and gratitude are reflected on in Article XIII and the danger of carnal security, rash presumption, remissness in observing the commandments of God receives proportionate emphasis. Of particular and distinctive interest are Articles XIV and XVI, the former in setting forth the obligation to proclaim constantly, in due time and place to the glory of God’s most holy name, the doctrine of election and the latter for the concern that the proper response should be offered to the doctrine of reprobation. Those who do not yet experience living faith in Christ and its accompanying confidences ought not to be alarmed or terrified by the doctrine of reprobation or rank themselves among the reprobate, provided they persevere ill the use of the means of grace and earnestly desire to be turned to God. But it is a terror to those who are forgetful of the claims of Christ and indulge the lusts of the flesh.8
• In dealing with abuses of the doctrine of foreordination one objection that both Dordt and Westminster found it necessary to controvert is that it makes God the author of sin and exculpates the human agent. No one has exposed the fallacies underlying this objection with greater effect than Calvin…
• [http://www.the-highway.com/predestination_Murray.html (http://www.the-highway.com/predestination_Murray.html)
  And for the teaching of the Synod of Dordt on the perseverance of the saints:
• [The Canons of Dordt, Fifth Head of Doctrine (The Canons of Dordt, Fifth Head of Doctrine)