For some reason I feel like this series is turning into another presentation of the doctrines of Grace??

 

Jim, did I not openly state in the first post that I would be "articulating what I believe scripture teaches: the eternal security of the believer" ?

That being the "P" in the TULIP acronymn I am indeed presenting one facet of the doctrines of grace - but I can't say I am turning this into that, since it has always been that - and clearly described as such - from the beginning.

:)

 

You are funny Daniel...

Just curious, what does the perseverance of the saints have to do with our eternal security in Christ?

 

Jim, are you joking?

Please define what you think perseverance of the saints is, then define what you think eternal security is, compare the two, and tell me whether or not you see the one in the other?

 

Jim, and if you cannot see the one in the other - then please, tell me how you define them, as I am genuine interested.

 

Daniel, I am being somewhat facetious in this discussion; although it is to try and stimulate some thought.

I see eternal security as the life of God given to the believer as a sure, steadfast, unchanging and eternal gift that will not be taken aware by our Lord. We have this promise based upon the word of God which never changes. It is a fundamental truth imperative to learn in the infant stages of a new believers life, for it provides the foundation upon which to understand God's character and nature.

From my understanding there are two main interpretations of "perseverance of the saints", which really are not that different at all.

Arminian
Those who persevere to the end will be saved; those who do not will lose their salvation.

Calvinist
Those who persevere to the end prove their salvation; those who do not prove they were never saved to begin with.

Neither position guarantees "eternal security" to the believer, but is based upon the works of the individual and their relative degree of comfort with their spiritually and goodness.

From my study of scripture, I see persevering as keeping the faith, remaining faithful to Christ, finishing well, running the race; to ultimately claim the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus. Christ will reward His faithful children at His return according to their works. What this reward is I cannot tell you but it has nothing to do with the eternal life promised to us as a gift.


Let me know if I am coming across coherently.

 

Jim, that's coherent enough.

You describe (quite well) what the assurance of sonship looks like - and I wonder if you haven't smooshed together the doctrine of eternal security and the assurance of salvation into one?

 

Daniel, sorry I was too busy yesterday to check back.

I was hoping for a more "enlightened" response from you than this?

I am not quite sure what differences between the two you are thinking about?

 

Jim, no worries. I was going to drill down a bit in my previous reply, but had to go to bed for the night.

God alone guarantees our eternal security. Our theology either articulates that or fails to do so, but our theology doesn't change it. Our eternal security is in Christ, regardless of whether we are able to describe it to ourselves or others with precision and clarity.

Let us say that a bank decides to host "eternally secure" bank accounts. What would they look like? Well, you would put money in them, and thereafter, for all eternity, the money would remain yours. You wouldn't be able to close the account, since it is eternal, it cannot be closed. You wouldn't be able to disown the account, since it is eternally yours. In order for the account to be "eternally secure" - you wouldn't even be able to draw your own money out.

Eternal security, in the Christian sense, means that our salvation is eternally fixed - it is a constant, and unchangeable reality - the only salvation a man can lose is a non-eternal one. If a man is eternally secure, he cannot lose his salvation.

If a person believes salvation is something they themselves make happen (with divine assistance of course), and again something they themselves maintain through on-going (divinely assisted) self effort - they are only being logical and consistent when they conclude that one can lose this by failing to continue in the requisite "staying-saved" works, whatever they define them to be. In this system, whatever is labeled "eternal security" is certainly not eternal, nor is it secure - it would best be labeled "momentary security", or perhaps "eternal insecurity" since it is neither eternal, nor secure. This one sees the apostate as one who was secure, but who has since lost that security - was saved, but is now lost.

On the other hand, the one who regards eternal security as, well, eternal, and secure, says that salvation depends upon God's ability to keep us, and not our ability to keep ourselves. God doesn't fail, so those who are saved are saved forever. When a person falls away from the church, they demonstrate that it was they, and not God, who was maintaining them in the church - they didn't have a genuine faith in God, but were hoping (through the Christian religion) to gain the "fold" of eternal life by jumping over the fence into it, rather than coming through the "Door" - if you follow the metaphor (and you I know you do). They were "sheep" if you will, but they were never part of His flock because although they pressed themselves into the flock, they did not do so through the Shepherd of the sheep. They acknowledge Him as the Shepherd, and they may even go where He leads the flock and do what He tells the flock to do - they may eat where He leads the flock, and they may drink where He waters the flock - but they are not His sheep because ownership doesn't happen through hanging around with other sheep, it happens when a sheep presents itself to the Shepherd, and not before.


If I believe that I can lose my salvation, my security is going to depend upon what I believe will restore my salvation.

If I believe that faith can be had and lost then had again, it stands to reason that my hope is going to be that I happen to die during one of my fickle fits of faith.

My sanctification becomes a sort of spiritual insulation - the more sanctified I am today, the less likely I am to fall away tomorrow, the more likely I am to be "saved" on the day death finds me.

The whole focus of my Christian endeavor (under such a scheme) is on keeping myself saved. All my ministry, all my "love for the saints" - all my everything is a sacrifice on the altar of self - I do it all to ensure that my afterlife is everything it could and should be. My faith, and my walk are nothing more than sanctified expressions of my own perverse selfishness - dressed up in Christian clothing - and I am not serving Christ, but myself, not loving others even as I serve them, for I only serve and love them insofar as doing so secures for me a place in heaven. It is, perhaps the most holy seeming of deceptions - but that is why the tares look so much like the wheat.

On the other hand, If a person believes salvation is something that God brings about - they do not work to prove that God has done so, nor do they work to maintain what God has done - they work because God has done so, and after they are dead, their works, which were not performed to maintain their own salvation (which is just selfishness), but performed out of love from a true heart - an act of worship in spirit and in truth, and not in some selfish scheme to stay out of hell. The nature of the work they do testifies to their salvation, and not the work itself. The motive of their work, the impetus - these testify to the genuineness of their salvation - not the work itself.

Does that make sense, or should I rephrase it?

 

"God alone guarantees our eternal security. Our theology either articulates that or fails to do so, but our theology doesn't change it. Our eternal security is in Christ, regardless of whether we are able to describe it to ourselves or others with precision and clarity."

I agree completely!! Our assurance simply comes from understanding and believing this truth.

Please note Daniel that when I speak of works I am in no way inferring a means of attaining, keeping, preventing from losing, or otherwise jeapardizing the eternal life abiding in myself and every other believer in Christ.

Rather, the good works the NT speaks of are generated out of the abundance of my abiding in Christ and are the fruit of the life operating within me. I must however co-operate with the Spirit and not quench his moving in my life.

If I choose to set my mind on the flesh I will experience "death", but when I set my mind on the Spirit and I am infused with the life of God, which is the enabling factor to live pleasing to Him who called me.