Q. What Is the Greatest of All Protestant “Heresies”? A. Assurance

  • Thread starter Thread starter nodelink
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

nodelink

Guest
See the article with this title hosted by Dr. R.C. Sproul and Ligonier Ministries: http://www.ligonier.org/blog/what-greatest-all-protestant-heresies/.

The answer to the question in the article is: Assurance

The greatest of all tragedies would be to be falsely assured of pardon and heaven during an earthly lifetime and then to find oneself separated from God and heaven for eternity. Jesus taught that “many” would be in this condition. See the passages on the Narrow Gate, False Prophets, the True Disciple and the Two Foundations in Matthew 7.

While the Scriptures do indicate that assurance is possible, we certainly do not fully know the mind of God. It is the Lord who knows them who will belong to God eternally (2 Timothy 2:19). It is not for us to know. Our duties are to become saints in heaven by living like saints on earth. We are called to depart from sin and iniquity on earth and to pursue holiness before seeing God.

Catholics do not believe in OSAS (Once saved, always saved) but that all of us remain capable of mortal sin and of losing graces earlier obtained.

For more on the topic, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assurance_(theology). There are entire Protestant books on assurance. For examples, see books by Thomas Brooks, William Guthrie, J.C. Ryle and more cited in the Wikipedia article on Assurance_(theology). Guaranteed assurance of eternal life is not so easily obtained.

Hypocrites are often falsely assured.
 
Last edited:
nodelink said:
See the article with this title hosted by Dr. R.C. Sproul and Ligonier Ministries: http://www.ligonier.org/blog/what-greatest-all-protestant-heresies/.

The answer to the question in the article is: Assurance

The greatest of all tragedies would be to be falsely assured of pardon and heaven during an earthly lifetime and then to find oneself separated from God and heaven for eternity. Jesus taught that “many” would be in this condition. See the passages on the Narrow Gate, False Prophets, the True Disciple and the Two Foundations in Matthew 7.

While the Scriptures do indicate that assurance is possible, we certainly do not fully know the mind of God. It is the Lord who knows them who will belong to God eternally (2 Timothy 2:19). It is not for us to know. Our duties are to become saints in heaven by living like saints on earth. We are called to depart from sin and iniquity on earth and to pursue holiness before seeing God.

Catholics do not believe in OSAS (Once saved, always saved) but that all of us remain capable of mortal sin and of losing graces earlier obtained.

For more on the topic, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assurance_(theology). There are entire Protestant books on assurance. For examples, see books by Thomas Brooks, William Guthrie, J.C. Ryle and more cited in the Wikipedia article on Assurance_(theology). Guaranteed assurance of eternal life is not so easily obtained.

Hypocrites are often falsely assured.
Click to expand...
I am intrigued by your last sentence for you seem to have the assurance that your viewpoint is the only correct one.
 
I read the article and said, boy this sounds awfully Calvinist. Then I looked up RC and discovered he is a Calvinist. Makes more sense now.

The author Mr. Ferguson’s argument, that he has 100% assurance of salvation seems to revolve around Hebrews 10:18-22 as proof of his assurance of salvation. If he would just keep reading…

26 For if we sin deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, 27 but a fearful prospect of judgment, and a fury of fire which will consume the adversaries. 28 A man who has violated the law of Moses dies without mercy at the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29 How much worse punishment do you think will be deserved by the man who has spurned the Son of God, and profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and outraged the Spirit of grace? 30 For we know him who said, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay.” And again, “The Lord will judge his people.” 31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

I’m sure a person with full assurance of salvation would claim they have this assurance because of their “knowledge of the truth”. Well my question would be how can they have full assurance that they might not deliberately sin 20 years from now? Verse 26 makes it crystal clear that Jesus sacrifice will no longer remain, if they deliberately sin. Perseverance to the end is the key. Only God foreknows who will persevere, to claim you have 100% assurance of salvation is to claim you know what God knows.

35 Therefore do not throw away your confidence, which has a great reward.

Why would a person with 100% assurance need a warning to not throw away their confidence?

36 For you have need of endurance, so that you may do the will of God and receive what is promised.

If we don’t endure and do the will of God do we still have 100% assurance that will we still receive what is promised?

38 but my righteous one shall live by faith,
and if he shrinks back,
my soul has no pleasure in him.”

Yet another warning, if he shrinks back, how can anyone have 100% assurance that a tragic event in their life might not make them shrink back and deny Jesus Christ.

Sorry Mr. Ferguson you need to read all of Hebrews 10, in context, and not just pull out the verses that fits your theology.

God Bless
 
nodelink said:
While the Scriptures do indicate that assurance is possible, we certainly do not fully know the mind of God. It is the Lord who knows them who will belong to God eternally (2 Timothy 2:19). It is not for us to know. Our duties are to become saints in heaven by living like saints on earth. We are called to depart from sin and iniquity on earth and to pursue holiness before seeing God.

Catholics do not believe in OSAS (Once saved, always saved) but that all of us remain capable of mortal sin and of losing graces earlier obtained.
Click to expand...
The Gospel itself is assurance, but that doesn’t mean we all receive the grace offered.
OSAS, a form of the Reformed/Calvinist Perseverance of Saints, is not a universal teaching among western non-Catholics. Lutherans and many Anglicans reject it, and perhaps others. Hence, the folly of saying protestants believe/do/say/practice something.
 
I don’t often quote Kenneth Copeland on these forums, but I do like his response when someone asked him, “What do you think about Once Saved, Always Saved?”

He said, “I don’t think about it at all. I’m not looking for a way out.”

😃

D
 
I think the greatest Protestant heresy was truncating the Bible to only 66 books, also removing significant portions of Esther and Daniel.

If Divinely inspired Sacred Writ can be simply disregarded, then nothing sacred is safe from further corruption.
 
The greatest protestant heresy is the heresy which is at the root of all of Protestantism. It is from this one heresy that the protestant theology arose. It is the protestant idea of Original Sin and the nature of fallen man. From a willful misunderstanding of this, that almost all protestant heresies arose. The total depravity of man is the axiom on which Luther and Calvin stand. If not for man’s total depravity he could cooperate with graces, he would work with grace and no longer does grace have to be irresistible, no more by faith alone, because without total depravity works become important. The whole mainline protestant soteriology rests on this axiom, therefore this is the greatest protestant heresy. Suddenly, since you now indwelled by the spirit feather and all you can interpret the bible for yourself, you do not need a church.
 
You are mistaken if you make the assumption that all protestants buy into the osas teaching. That is simply not the case. However, once you are genuinely converted you will be much bolder and courageous when you have assurance. How do you think the apostles and every other martyr endures to the end without a sense of assurance that only the redeemed can possess. James didn’t give up his head on an I think I can make it to heaven. You are correct and the Scriptures have examples of believers who turned and walked away. But God is certainly able to keep us from falling.
 
Last edited:
I’m not sure that’s the worst thing they got wrong, as even in the Catholic Church there is a clear outline of what you need to do to go to Heaven. One session in a confessional can erase decades of mortal sin. I’d think them renouncing the Heir to Saint Peter would be worse.

But even then Protestants aren’t the farthest from the mark because by and large they’re still Trinitarians. Ask a Lutheran and an Anglican who Jesus is and they’ll say “He is the Son of God, and he was also God”. As a Jehovah’s Witness or a Mormon who Jesus is and they’ll say “He was a mortal human, entirely separate from God”.
 
I hear Catholics talking more about how protestants believe in assurance far more than I’ve ever actually heard protestants themselves talk about it.

Honestly, how many actually believe in it? I’m pretty sure it’s a fairly small minority. I think most people grasp the common sense idea that a Christian who abandons Christ is in danger of hell.

The greatest protestant heresy is integrated into the word itself: a lack of recognition for authority. For that matter, it’s also the greatest problem among Catholics and the world in general.
 
Last edited:
That seems to be your viewpoint about my viewpoint. Jesus is my Judge.

Jesus’s comments on hypocrites include reasons why they may be falsely assured: 1) They don’t see everything. They see splinters and miss logs (Matthew 7); 2) They honor Jesus with their lips but their hearts are far from Jesus and they worship in vain (Matthew 15:7-9 quoting Isaiah 29).
Hypocrites, well did Isaiah prophesy about you when he said:
Code: 
     ‘This people honors me with their lips, 
     but their hearts are far from me; 
     in vain do they worship me, 
     teaching as doctrines human precepts.’ ”
New American Bible. (2011). (Revised Edition, Mt 15:7–9). Washington, DC: The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
nodelink said:
That seems to be your viewpoint about my viewpoint. Jesus is my Judge.

Jesus’s comments on hypocrites include reasons why they may be falsely assured: 1) They don’t see everything. They see splinters and miss logs (Matthew 7); 2) They honor Jesus with their lips but their hearts are far from Jesus and they worship in vain (Matthew 15:7-9 quoting Isaiah 29).
Hypocrites, well did Isaiah prophesy about you when he said:
Code: 
     ‘This people honors me with their lips, 
     but their hearts are far from me; 
     in vain do they worship me, 
     teaching as doctrines human precepts.’ ”
New American Bible. (2011). (Revised Edition, Mt 15:7–9). Washington, DC: The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.
Click to expand...
I like what you presented here. Jesus is also my judge. We must all remember that when we point a finger at someone else that there are three fingers pointing back at ourselves.
Click to expand...
 
itsjustdave1988 said:
I think the greatest Protestant heresy was truncating the Bible to only 66 books, also removing significant portions of Esther and Daniel.

If Divinely inspired Sacred Writ can be simply disregarded, then nothing sacred is safe from further corruption.
Click to expand...
Couldn’t an Orthodox Christian say the same about a 73 book canon?

Was it wrong for Christians throughout the history of the Church, from Eusebius to Cajetan to question the DC books?
 
Last edited:
DENIAL:

That logically
Morally
Theologically

THAT THERE CAN BE NOTING MORE [OR LESS]

THAN 1 TRUE GOD

WHO CAN HAVE ONLY 1 TRUE FAITH

AND FOR 4,000 YEARS CHOOSE JUST ONE CHOSEN PEOPLE [EXO 6:7 & MT 16:18]

Let us pray that this can and might be understood by th many

God Bless
Patrick
 
‘Sola Scriptura’ by far!

Once you remove the Magisterium to properly interpret and promulgate divine revelation, then you are left with with what Protestantism has evolved into: a 30,000-plus divided conglomerate that is only united in one thing, namely protesting the one office that keeps the full deposit of faith from error and schism, i.e. the Holy Pontiff and Papal Infallibility.
 
Last edited:
It seems this thread is built on the assumption that the doctrine of assurance and “once saved always saved” are one and the same thing. Assurance and “eternal security” are two different doctrines. You can believe in both or you can believe in assurance and reject eternal security. Many Protestants (Methodists, for a well known example) believe in assurance of present salvation, but also believe that salvation can be forfeited.

Assurance rests in the promises of Scripture, the inner witness of the Spirit, and the fruit of the Spirit resulting from sanctification. If Christ is indeed living within us (as the Scriptures tell us is true of those who have been truly regenerated, Romans 8:10, Galatians 2:20, Ephesians 3:17-19, 1 John 3:24), one would imagine we would be able to discern that. There has to be some discernible difference between being spiritually alive and spiritually dead.
 
Last edited:
ltwin said:
It seems this thread is built on the assumption that the doctrine of assurance and “once saved always saved” are one and the same thing. Assurance and “eternal security” are two different doctrines
Click to expand...
I do agree that these can be two different doctrines. However, I don’t think this thread is built on the “assumption” they are the same. If you read the article sited by the OP it states…

For we are justified in His righteousness, His justification alone is ours! And we can no more lose this justification than He can fall from heaven. This sure sounds like OSAS

The article goes onto equate this to “assurance of final salvation”, not just “assurance of present salvation” when the author says…The reason we can stand before God in full assurance is because we now experience our “hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and … bodies washed with pure water”

I think these two statements from the article is why the thread is equating the two doctrines.

If my reasoning is unsound and I am still assuming Maybe you could point out what I am missing from the article.

God Bless
 
MT1926 said:
If my reasoning is unsound and I am still assuming Maybe you could point out what I am missing from the article.
Click to expand...
No, I agree with you that someone who is a Calvinist (R. C. Sproul is a Presbyterian minister) will probably conflate these doctrines. For them, assurance is intricately wrapped up in eternal security.

I probably should have better clarified my original comment. I was just pointing out the need to distinguish between assurance as presented by Calvinism and assurance as presented by other Protestants. Assurance is not the same thing as eternal security, and many who believe in assurance do not believe in eternal security.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top