What is the doctrine of Eternal Security?

[makesends]

Why would be responsible for something you have no control over?

Why suppose that something someone does by nature means they have no control over it? Why even go there?

By nature a murderer kills people. He is responsible for each time he does so. He may have no control over his anger, or even realize that he is self-centered, self-important, and misguided in his precepts. Nevertheless, he is responsible.

By nature the lost are at enmity with God. God's enemies will be destroyed. By nature those with the mind of the flesh are unable to please God and will not submit to God's law. The disobedient will be punished.

 

[Mercy_Shown]

Straw man.

An argument stated without support can be dismissed without support. Typing "strawman" doesn't make it so. I find it is often used as a way to avoid confronting an argument.

If my neighbor claims he is a certified mechanic and can, therefore, can fix my car but it turns out he does not know what a wrench is, what torque is, what a not or threads are then EVERYONE has reason to believe all his claims are false. There's nothing circular about it. He was never a mechanic in the first place and the proof is his own conduct.

Your analogy has a series of concrete evidentiary incidents supporting the conclusion. If we want an actual analogy we might say that your neighbor says he is a mechanic. He works on your car but you find that the problem still exists. Does that mean that he's not a mechanic? Of course not. This type of thing happens with mechanics and cars. Would you say, "My neighbor is not a mechanic because my car is still broken?"

Matthew 7:21-23
"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven will enter. Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name cast out demons, and in your name perform many miracles?' And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from me, you who practice lawlessness."

NEVER! They NEVER knew him. It's not an invented doctrine. It is straight out of Jesus' own mouth. Many claim to know Jesus and do things demonstrating that knowledge, but they NEVER knew him. They may have had the appearance of salvation, but it NEVER actually existed.

Now you have overgeneralized a specific statement. There will be those whom Christ never knew but there will also be those who were at one time enlightened, who tasted the heavenly gift, and who have shared in the Holy Spirit but fell away from Grace. God's calling and grace are irrevocable but not unrejectable.

 

[donadams]

Eternal security is the promise that if God has saved you, then He will finish the salvific work He began in the person He is saving.

Nothing more that eternal security is included in the doctrine of eternal security and it is a commonly occurring mistake to make the doctrine of eternal security include more than it includes.

That depends on how "obtain" is defined. If the word is defined to mean get, procure, or secure by one's own effort than one does not obtain eternal security. If "obtain" is defined as receive, then eternal security is received as a gift from God, and God alone. Human effort cannot obtain eternal security apart from God's work. It is God who is at work in the one He is saving, both to will and to work for His good pleasure (Php. 2:13). Apart from Christ we can do nothing (Jn. 15:5).

You're welcome.

One thing at a time, they are large and confusing subjects

That is the whole point, where does this idea or doctrine that we are saved come from?

Thks

 

[donadams]

Eternal security is the promise that if God has saved you, then He will finish the salvific work He began in the person He is saving.

Nothing more that eternal security is included in the doctrine of eternal security and it is a commonly occurring mistake to make the doctrine of eternal security include more than it includes.

That depends on how "obtain" is defined. If the word is defined to mean get, procure, or secure by one's own effort than one does not obtain eternal security. If "obtain" is defined as receive, then eternal security is received as a gift from God, and God alone. Human effort cannot obtain eternal security apart from God's work. It is God who is at work in the one He is saving, both to will and to work for His good pleasure (Php. 2:13). Apart from Christ we can do nothing (Jn. 15:5).

You're welcome.

What about our free will and our participation? We must believe and continue in a state of perpetual belief Jn 3:16 believes (present tense) and abide in Christ thru his grace, Jn 15:4 and obey the commandments all of them, enduring to the end! Matt 24:13

“If” big if! If we do our part!

Hebrews 3:6
But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if wehold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end.

2 Timothy 2:12
If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us:

Thks

 

[donadams]

Attacking posters with insinuations of ignorance is a lame argument..... and ignorant. Can you stick to the subject of your own op, or not?

Not attacking anyone, just stating an old cliche!

 

[Arial]

Straw man.

If my neighbor claims he is a certified mechanic and can, therefore, can fix my car but it turns out he does not know what a wrench is, what torque is, what a not or threads are then EVERYONE has reason to believe all his claims are false. There's nothing circular about it. He was never a mechanic in the first place and the proof is his own conduct.

Matthew 7:21-23
"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven will enter. Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name cast out demons, and in your name perform many miracles?' And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from me, you who practice lawlessness."

NEVER! They NEVER knew him. It's not an invented doctrine. It is straight out of Jesus' own mouth. Many claim to know Jesus and do things demonstrating that knowledge, but they NEVER knew him. They may have had the appearance of salvation, but it NEVER actually existed.

Slight correction. He never knew them. Which if we look at John 10:25-29 we see why. Jesus answered them, "I told you, and you do not believe because you are not among my sheep. My sheep here my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father , who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand.

And not only do we see why He did not know them, but we see that who Jesus saves unto eternal life is saved unto eternal life. Eternal means eternal.

 

[donadams]

Death of what?

I could lie to someone and get a way with it...Yet, I could lie to a person and they could kill me for telling the lie. Both are lies and both are sins...but both don't put me in an early grave.

The life of grace in our souls.

Only the serious sin causes separation from God and His grace.

Until we repent and confess.
1 John 1:9
If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

 

[donadams]

Really??? How does the verse oppose faith alone?

The doctrine of Salvation is by faith alone, therefore the first moment one believes that person is saved, but this verse say’s salvation is nearer than when we first believed
Thanks

 

[donadams]

You left out John 3:16....Why???? It says if you believe you have eternal life...will not perish. Period.

No it does not say that, you are reading into it, Jn 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Believes is present tense, you must believe and continue in a state of perpetual belief until death, abiding in Christ and in his grace and righteousness apart from sin, Matt 6:33

Everlasting life is God’s life of grace in us!

Thanks

 

[donadams]

Heb 3:14 For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end;

Heb 6:11 And we desire that every one of you do shew the same diligence to the full assurance of hope unto the end:

The big “IF”

Romans 11:22 – God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness

Colossians 1:21-23 – holy and blameless, if you continue in the faith"

Colossians 2:5
For though I be absent in the flesh, yet am I with you in the spirit, joying and beholding your order, and the stedfastness of your faith in Christ.

Hebrews 12:22-25: "we shall not escape if we turn away from Him"

Hebrews 4:1-3, 9-12: "strive to enter the rest of God"

Hebrews 6:4-9 – those who became partakers of the holy spirit and fell away

Hebrews 10:23-29, 35-39: "if we sin willfully", "if anyone draws back".

Hebrews 3:4-6: Holding fast our confidence firm until the end

John 2:24-25 – "if what you heard from the beginning abides in you"

John 8-9 : to "everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ

Galatians 5:2-4 "Severed from Christ"

Galatians 5:5
For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith.

2 Timothy 2:11-13: "if we deny him, he will also deny us"

 

[donadams]

The grace Mary was full of was grace given by God, not His throne.

God’s throne is the great white throne not the throne of grace!

 

[donadams]

Which you say the bread becomes and the wine becomes. It can't be both His flesh and not His flesh. You are almost about to see the wisdom of Calvin. Be careful or you will be in trouuuuble.

Not human flesh but the risen glorified body of Christ!

 

[Arial]

Not human flesh but the risen glorified body of Christ!

Does He have flesh or not? You are not going to find a way out of this.

 

[Arial]

God’s throne is the great white throne not the throne of grace!

And yet Hebrews tells us to come boldly before HIS throne of grace. Not Mary's throne of grace.

 

[Josheb]

An argument stated without support can be dismissed without support.

Non sequitur. I provided support. You, ironically, did not.

Typing "strawman" doesn't make it so.

No, what makes it a straw man is its misrepresentation of what was posted.

Your analogy has a series of concrete evidentiary incidents supporting the conclusion. If we want an actual analogy we might say that your neighbor says he is a mechanic. He works on your car but you find that the problem still exists. Does that mean that he's not a mechanic? Of course not. This type of thing happens with mechanics and cars. Would you say, "My neighbor is not a mechanic because my car is still broken?"

No, that is a false analogy. The reason why my analogy is correct is because I couched both the claims made AND the knowledge and efficacy of the "mechanic" in the mechanic. You couched it in the vehicle. Failed analogy. Christians and non-Christians do not work on others; they work on themselves and a person who does not know the basics (like nuts, bolts, wrenches, torque, etc.) cannot work on anything AND that is self-evident to all.

What's a God?
What's a Christ?
What's a sin?
What's a salvation?


That person has no security, eternal or otherwise. You screwed up. Thrice.

Now you have overgeneralized a specific statement.......

Never happened.

 

[Josheb]

One thing at a time, they are large and confusing subjects

Yeah, okay. If you're going to pretend to be that obtuse or start the conversation ignoring the basest predicates of the topic you brought up then count me out of the conversation.

Eternal security is - by definition - a doctrine held specifically within the larger doctrine of soteriology, or the doctrine of salvation. Scripture states there are three things from which a person is saved: sin, death, and wrath. I'll happily provide the scriptures stating these facts but for you - the author of this op - to pretend like you do not already know this is thoroughly disingenuous and - after so many arguments in so many threads where you've asserted your RCC views - we ALL know you know. There is no confusion. Feigning it is wretched practice.


The Reformed Protestant soteriological view pertaining to the doctrine known as "eternal security" (or perseverance of the saints) is very simple, very specific, and easy to understand. If a person is in fact saved, then that saved person has eternal security; God will work in that person's life for God's salvific purpose until God is finished and completed God's work. It's not "large" or confusing."

That is the whole point, where does this idea or doctrine that we are saved come from?

I have already answered that question and do not appreciate you pretending that did not happen, or unnecessarily asking an already answered question.

Thks

Normally I am a big fan of appreciation and often express my appreciation for appreciation. In this case, however, Post 63, 64, and 65 waste everyone's time (under the guise of sincere interest).

What about our free will and our participation?

Eternal security has nothing to do with humanity; free will or otherwise. It's non sequitur. It's a red herring I will not be entertaining - especially not until you learn to stick to the topic at hand: eternal security. Reformed soteriology is monergistic. That means God is viewed as THE sole causal agent in and of salvation. The doctrine of eternal security says nothing about the creature being saved, free will or any other will. Free will is irrelevant because eternal security is about God, not man. Focus. Stay on topic.


And a note to all the other monergists: don't be baited. Don't be baited into discussions that have nothing to do with monergistic eternal security. Hold fast until there is evidence of sincere inquiry and genuine understanding.

@donadams, when you're there the posts will reflect it. Do the work or count me out of this conversation.

 

[Mr GLee]

Any scripture verses for this doctrine?

Yes all of the scripture "sola scriptura" No cherry picking. . .no taking the living word of God of context of the whole.

How much scripture do you think is needed to rightly divide the word according to the Loving commandment 2 Peter 2:15?

Will you today obey the loving commandment ? Not for you? Would it cause shame if you rightly divide ?

2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.(sola scriptura)But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.an

 

[Mr GLee]

Eternal security is - by definition - a doctrine held specifically within the larger doctrine of soteriology, or the doctrine of salvation. Scripture states there are three things from which a person is saved: sin, death, and wrath. I'll happily provide the scriptures stating these facts but for you - the author of this op - to pretend like you do not already know this is thoroughly disingenuous and - after so many arguments in so many threads where you've asserted your RCC views - we ALL know you know. There is no confusion. Feigning it is wretched practice.

Eternal security of the living word is simply made to no effect to those who say they only received a unknown remnant of saving Grace and not the fullness the whole cost of salvation. and they in Limbo must suffer and wonder, suffer and wonder with no end in sight ( The suffering and wonderings their eternally security)

2 Thessalonians 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

Peter our brother in the lord refused to obey that loving commandment above .As a law of the fathers dying mankind he went to town to start a new oral tradition of dying mankind . Jesus again rebuked him and exposed the lie that John would not die.

He then informs given words from the Father. if every time he had to dismiss the lies of father of lies the oral tradition of mankind. We would need a bigger planet to hold the volumes upon volumes . More volumes then that of the Vatican library in Rome .

Nosey (what is that to thee) jealous Peter got his mind off Jesus set his goal to go to town and add another oral tradition of dying mankind .

John 21: 22-25 Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me. Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die: yet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true.
And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

You would think one example would be enough like in Mathew 16 when Peter started the new tradition of rebuking the Lord and preventing the Son of man Jesus from doing the eternal will of the father and again .Peter our brother in the Lord again denied Christ when confronted with 3 little girls.I know him not. Sorry you got the wrong guy.

Peter first place as a slow learner.

 

[Mercy_Shown]

Non sequitur. I provided support. You, ironically, did not.

Come on. Responding with “strawman” is an unsupported argument and you know that.

 

[Mercy_Shown]

No, what makes it a straw man is its misrepresentation of what was posted.

Nonsense! The circular reasoning I described is self evident Within the doctrine. I’ve heard it 1000 times. If you quote Hebrews 6:4-6 To anyone who holds that doctor and they will simply tell you well those people were never saved in the first place. Of course, this is something they cannot know. So if you ask him how they know that’s when the circle starts.