Did Abraham conjure up his own faith...

[Particular]

No, it's a radical invention of latter-day extreme Calvinists. It's just that SOME Baptists in the USA are Reformed Baptists, Baptists who largely embrace radical Calvinism but substitute the Anabaptist view of Baptism and the Zwinglian view of the Eucharist. There are "free will" Baptists and other Baptists who are not at all Calvinist in their theology.

Other than a loose embrace of the Anabaptist view on baptism, there is little that all Baptists have in common.

I still hold that OSAS is unbiblical (and terrible!) for reasons given already.




.

What is your definition of an "extreme Calvinist?" Is it someone who holds to the five tenets of Calvinism as expressed at the Synod of Dort?
https://www.monergism.com/five-points-calvinism-ebook-0

Baptist's who hold to OSAS are mixed between Arminian tenets and Calvinists tenets as I explained earlier.

I have no idea what tenets LCMS congregants believe. Is their a five points of Lutherans available for us to review regarding salvation?

 

[FredVB]

OSAS is actually a traditionalist Baptist view.

No, it's a radical invention of latter-day extreme Calvinists. It's just that SOME Baptists in the USA are Reformed Baptists, Baptists who largely embrace radical Calvinism but substitute the Anabaptist view of Baptism and the Zwinglian view of the Eucharist. There are "free will" Baptists and other Baptists who are not at all Calvinist in their theology.

Other than a loose embrace of the Anabaptist view on baptism, there is little that all Baptists have in common.

I still hold that OSAS is unbiblical (and terrible!) for reasons given already.

No, I have nothing from radical Calvinist belief. My belief that true believers who are in Christ are saved, and always saved, is not from them, or from Baptists. I have seen this from the Bible, there is enough for that showing from it. There is too much, that if it is all shown, it will numb one to it and it won't be considered. I don't even know what distinguishes radical Calvinists, all Calvinists are at an extreme on one side of faith, Arminianism is at another extreme. Biblical teaching shows the assurance of eternal life to true believers who are in Christ, Biblical teaching also shows baptism is for new believers who come to repentant faith in which they come to Christ for restoration to Yahweh God, confessing this. It is not for little ones or any others before they come to the faith.

It is terrible to teach others they might do things to lose salvation, salvation is then of works if that were the case. A faith that is lost isn't this true faith.

 

[Josiah]

No, I have nothing from radical Calvinist belief. My belief that true believers who are in Christ are saved, and always saved, is not from them, or from Baptists. I have seen this from the Bible, there is enough for that showing from it.

Okay.... so you came up with OSAS without any awareness that you were "beat to the punch" by radical later-day Calvinists, which SOME Reformed Baptists parroted. Okay. But it STILL is an invention of a few radical, latter-day Calvinists that a FEW Reformed Baptists accepted.

I find it VERY unbiblical (and horrible). But it 's a subject unrelated to the topic here; the issue here is not whether a person can be saved by RENOUNCED, FORMER faith, by one with no faith; whether one can be saved apart from faith.... the issue here is whether Abraham (who HAD faith, not who did NOT have faith) choose that faith or was given that faith.

Biblical teaching also shows baptism is for new believers who come to repentant faith in which they come to Christ for restoration to Yahweh God, confessing this. It is not for little ones or any others before they come to the faith.

I disagree. But we can't discuss that in this thread.


Check out these threads:

https://christianityhaven.com/showthread.php?7989-Is-Baptism-Just-an-Inert-Outward-Symbol
https://christianityhaven.com/showthread.php?6945-Lutheran-Perspective-on-Baptism

A faith that is lost isn't this true faith.

Just part of the HORROR of OSAS; it is based NOT on the object of faith (Christ) but on some unknowable QUALITY of faith - it must be "TRUE" in quality and it's impossible for any to know if the faith is TRUE. Nowhere does the Bible teach that faith saves IF it is of sufficiently high quality. The Bible teaches that faith in CHRIST saves. The Bible teaches it's the OBJECT of faith that is salvic (because Christ is the Savior) not the QUALITY of faith; indeed, Jesus speaks of faith as small as a mustard seed and the faith of a baby. There is no verse, "You gotta believe with sufficient quality and quantity of faith." Nope. If faith is IN CHRIST, it IS salvic. If it's not, it's not. That;s what the Bible says....




- Josiah



.

 

[Particular]

What in the world is a radical calvinist and where do they state OSAS? That claim made me chuckle.

 

[FredVB]

Okay.... so you came up with OSAS without any awareness that you were "beat to the punch" by radical later-day Calvinists, which SOME Reformed Baptists parroted. Okay. But it STILL is an invention of a few radical, latter-day Calvinists that a FEW Reformed Baptists accepted.

I find it VERY unbiblical (and horrible). But it 's a subject unrelated to the topic here; the issue here is not whether a person can be saved by RENOUNCED, FORMER faith, by one with no faith; whether one can be saved apart from faith.... the issue here is whether Abraham (who HAD faith, not who did NOT have faith) choose that faith or was given that faith.

I disagree. But we can't discuss that in this thread.
Check out these threads...

Just part of the HORROR of OSAS; it is based NOT on the object of faith (Christ) but on some unknowable QUALITY of faith - it must be "TRUE" in quality and it's impossible for any to know if the faith is TRUE. Nowhere does the Bible teach that faith saves IF it is of sufficiently high quality. The Bible teaches that faith in CHRIST saves. The Bible teaches it's the OBJECT of faith that is salvic (because Christ is the Savior) not the QUALITY of faith; indeed, Jesus speaks of faith as small as a mustard seed and the faith of a baby. There is no verse, "You gotta believe with sufficient quality and quantity of faith." Nope. If faith is IN CHRIST, it IS salvic. If it's not, it's not. That;s what the Bible says.

Of course, though, I have not thought that any of my thoughts about meaning of revelation from Yahweh God is ever only the first of any thinking them. I mean I don't base much of my understanding on what others have said before, but I have and continue to base them on what I read for myself, still being open to that. Certainly I heard of some things understood in Christianity before, such as the trinity of God. But I read the Bible itself for what I would conclude about such things. And the understanding I have of believers' promised security I had before being in fellowship with Baptists. You cannot demonstrate that it is unbiblical, though you accuse others of that. I know the Bible verses for it.

What you say we cannot discuss is what I believe you brought up, I was not the one first bringing it up.

For the issue of whether a person would ever be saved without testimony of any other saved person, I would say faith in response is truly needed for the salvation, but God can do anything for the revelation for what is needed for it. I came to faith just reading a Christian book. So Abraham came to such faith. And all in this world have some opportunity for that, though people generally are unresponsive, with their resistance, and there is obligation among us as believers to be testimony to faith in Christ for salvation and restoral to Yahweh God, with turning from sin.

And you are just wrong that those believing that believers once saved are always saved do not base the needed faith on Christ as the object of the needed faith. I never heard that from those of that position. Of course it is through Christ making it possible, who is revealed to those who respond to Yahweh's revelation.

What in the world is a radical calvinist and where do they state OSAS? That claim made me chuckle.

Josiah, you could answer this as well. I have only heard of these radical Calvinists distinct from other Calvinists from you.

 

[Josiah]

I mean I don't base much of my understanding on what others have said before, but I have and continue to base them on what I read for myself

I view that as an extremely dangerous approach, but exploring that needs a separate thread.

And if that is true, it's at least misleading to reference a tradition (such as "OSAS") if all that matters is what you happen to understand for yourself alone as you read Scripture by yourself for yourself. All then that matters is what YOU feel about what YOU read today.

have of believers' promised security I had before being in fellowship with Baptists. You cannot demonstrate that it is unbiblical, though you accuse others of that. I know the Bible verses for it.

There is that Gospel. And so far I'm the only poster here at CH that has posted very many of those Gospel verses. Thing is, none of them teach OSAS. And of course, there are also Law verses. And so far, I'm the only one at CH that has quoted a great many of those verses.

You didn't mention the certainty of the gospel, you mentioned a very specific Calvinist Tradition: OSAS. That is one has faith AT ANY POINT IN THEIR LIFE, they are saved for all eternity. ONCE saved, ALWAYS saved. This is very, very different than the Gospel of certainty (that John Calvin also taught), that where the Gospel is (Sola Gratia - Solus Christus - SOLA FIDE) is present, there is certainty, the whole point is that salvation exists where there ONCE was faith (the ONCE stresses "but not now") Of course, the application of this is impossible. And it just switches the entire issue of Christianity away from the quality of Christ's work to the quality of MY FAITH - was it (ever, even for a micro second) REAL, GENUINE, AUTHENTIC, sufficient
. Calvinists who hold to this will stress that one can have faith in Christ that isn't actually genuine or authenic or real - and thus doesn't save (regardless of being in Christ) whereas faith that (ever was) real DOES save even if there's no longer anything directed to Christ. REAL faith (and it is not possible for anyone - including self - to know if faith is genuine, authentic, sufficient) saves - even if existed only for a microsecond decades ago ("ONCE save") will save at death ("ALWAYS saved"). The issue is no longer Christ (and whether HE is real and sufficient) but MY FAITH (and whether it was ever real and sufficient).

I would say faith in response is truly needed for the salvation

IF you added, "faith in Christ" then I'd completely agree. Which is why I reject OSAS. Christ is real, authentic, genuine.... and HIS WORK is sufficient. His gift of faith to me (even as small as a mustard seed, even if shrouded with doubts) connects me to CHRIST and brings to me all the blessings of HIS work. The point is not whether MY faith is good enough but whether Christ is good enough. But where faith has been repudiated, there is no faith to grasp Christ and His work.

Josiah, you could answer this as well. I have only heard of these radical Calvinists distinct from other Calvinists from you.

I've read Calvinist theology books and have had this discussion with Calvinist apologists. Additionally, I married into a Calvinist family! Back hundreds of years. My wife was raised in a very conservative Reformed church, all her relatives are conservative, orthodox, confessional Calvinists. And to a person, they've told me that John Calvin and the Reformed Confessions did/do NOT teach OSAS. That this was an inventiion of a number of latter-day Reformed theologians, after Calvins' death, and never embraced by most Reformed Christians. Indeed, they all reject it. They hold the "security" issue of the "P" (remember, Calvin didn't develop TULIP, that too was an invention of latter-day radical Reformed theologians who held Calvin didn't go far enough) actually MEANS nothing more than, "Where faith exists, salvation exists" (a point no Protestant would disagree with) and add "God never takes back His gift of faith" (again, a point no Protestant disagrees with). But can faith be rejected? That's what the Bible says. Can we repudiate faith? The Bible is meaningless if that's not true since MUCH of it is directed to encouraging believers NOT to do that. These latter-day radical reinventors of Calvin just went too far, according to nearly every Reformed believer I know of. Lutherans uphold the CERTAINTY 0f the Gospel - we just agree with Calvin and not these latter-day reinventors that the CERTAINTY is because of the genuiness and sufficiecy of CHRIST, not my personal faith; Lutherans hold that there is no Gospel apart from faith IN CHRIST.


Now back to the issue: Do we give ourselves faith or does God give us faith? For 1700 years, historic Christianity has answered that in the Ecumenical Creed from 321 AD, ".... and we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and giver of life." We have always held that GOD is the GIVER of spiritual life, faith, the Holy Spirit.... no dead person gives self life (whether physical or spiritual). I hold to that ancient, ecumenical and biblical position.

 

[FredVB]

I mean I don't base much of my understanding on what others have said before, but I have and continue to base them on what I read for myself.

I view that as an extremely dangerous approach, but exploring that needs a separate thread.

And if that is true, it's at least misleading to reference a tradition (such as "OSAS") if all that matters is what you happen to understand for yourself alone as you read Scripture by yourself for yourself. All then that matters is what YOU feel about what YOU read today.

There is that Gospel. And so far I'm the only poster here at CH that has posted very many of those Gospel verses. Thing is, none of them teach OSAS. And of course, there are also Law verses. And so far, I'm the only one at CH that has quoted a great many of those verses.

You didn't mention the certainty of the gospel, you mentioned a very specific Calvinist Tradition: OSAS. That is one has faith AT ANY POINT IN THEIR LIFE, they are saved for all eternity. ONCE saved, ALWAYS saved. This is very, very different than the Gospel of certainty (that John Calvin also taught), that where the Gospel is (Sola Gratia - Solus Christus - SOLA FIDE) is present, there is certainty, the whole point is that salvation exists where there ONCE was faith (the ONCE stresses "but not now") Of course, the application of this is impossible. And it just switches the entire issue of Christianity away from the quality of Christ's work to the quality of MY FAITH - was it (ever, even for a micro second) REAL, GENUINE, AUTHENTIC, sufficient
. Calvinists who hold to this will stress that one can have faith in Christ that isn't actually genuine or authenic or real - and thus doesn't save (regardless of being in Christ) whereas faith that (ever was) real DOES save even if there's no longer anything directed to Christ. REAL faith (and it is not possible for anyone - including self - to know if faith is genuine, authentic, sufficient) saves - even if existed only for a microsecond decades ago ("ONCE save") will save at death ("ALWAYS saved"). The issue is no longer Christ (and whether HE is real and sufficient) but MY FAITH (and whether it was ever real and sufficient).

I would say faith in response is truly needed for the salvation

IF you added, "faith in Christ" then I'd completely agree. Which is why I reject OSAS. Christ is real, authentic, genuine.... and HIS WORK is sufficient. His gift of faith to me (even as small as a mustard seed, even if shrouded with doubts) connects me to CHRIST and brings to me all the blessings of HIS work. The point is not whether MY faith is good enough but whether Christ is good enough. But where faith has been repudiated, there is no faith to grasp Christ and His work.

I've read Calvinist theology books and have had this discussion with Calvinist apologists. Additionally, I married into a Calvinist family! Back hundreds of years. My wife was raised in a very conservative Reformed church, all her relatives are conservative, orthodox, confessional Calvinists. And to a person, they've told me that John Calvin and the Reformed Confessions did/do NOT teach OSAS. That this was an inventiion of a number of latter-day Reformed theologians, after Calvins' death, and never embraced by most Reformed Christians. Indeed, they all reject it. They hold the "security" issue of the "P" (remember, Calvin didn't develop TULIP, that too was an invention of latter-day radical Reformed theologians who held Calvin didn't go far enough) actually MEANS nothing more than, "Where faith exists, salvation exists" (a point no Protestant would disagree with) and add "God never takes back His gift of faith" (again, a point no Protestant disagrees with). But can faith be rejected? That's what the Bible says. Can we repudiate faith? The Bible is meaningless if that's not true since MUCH of it is directed to encouraging believers NOT to do that. These latter-day radical reinventors of Calvin just went too far, according to nearly every Reformed believer I know of. Lutherans uphold the CERTAINTY 0f the Gospel - we just agree with Calvin and not these latter-day reinventors that the CERTAINTY is because of the genuiness and sufficiecy of CHRIST, not my personal faith; Lutherans hold that there is no Gospel apart from faith IN CHRIST.

Now back to the issue: Do we give ourselves faith or does God give us faith? For 1700 years, historic Christianity has answered that in the Ecumenical Creed from 321 AD, ".... and we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and giver of life." We have always held that GOD is the GIVER of spiritual life, faith, the Holy Spirit.... no dead person gives self life (whether physical or spiritual). I hold to that ancient, ecumenical and biblical position.

It is not dangerous, it does not exclude what I learn others say. Your Catholic position has you believe that others of authority are needed to teach what is said for you in the Bible, rather than you looking. But so do Jehovah's Witnesses believe that about those they see in authority. There is danger with that, it is better to check them and anyone against what is said for us in the Bible.

The certainty is the certainty of believers' salvation, the certainty that they already have everlasting life. See it for yourself.

Don't accuse me of meaning faith without it necessarily in Christ. I made clear in context that it is faith in Christ. That was enabling strawman arguments.

Faith can be rejected by the unrepentant who did not come to essential faith.

Yahweh enables faith through the Spirit, but that in no way eliminates our responsiveness needed. There, that is the issue you wanted to go back to. It seemed that whether Abraham conjured his faith or was given it was the issue of this thread. It was not different with Abraham, he had to respond to God's enabling faith as well.

 

[Lamb]

It is not dangerous, it does not exclude what I learn others say. Your Catholic position has you believe that others of authority are needed to teach what is said for you in the Bible, rather than you looking. But so do Jehovah's Witnesses believe that about those they see in authority. There is danger with that, it is better to check them and anyone against what is said for us in the Bible.

He's not Catholic and doesn't hold to the Catholic position.

The certainty is the certainty of believers' salvation, the certainty that they already have everlasting life. See it for yourself.

Don't accuse me of meaning faith without it necessarily in Christ. I made clear in context that it is faith in Christ. That was enabling strawman arguments.

Faith can be rejected by the unrepentant who did not come to essential faith.

Yahweh enables faith through the Spirit, but that in no way eliminates our responsiveness needed. There, that is the issue you wanted to go back to. It seemed that whether Abraham conjured his faith or was given it was the issue of this thread. It was not different with Abraham, he had to respond to God's enabling faith as well.

Abraham's response doesn't make his faith more real. It's given by God. That's it. He has it.

 

[Josiah]

I view that as an extremely dangerous approach, but exploring that needs a separate thread.

And if that is true, it's at least misleading to reference a tradition (such as "OSAS") if all that matters is what you happen to understand for yourself alone as you read Scripture by yourself for yourself. All then that matters is what YOU feel about what YOU read today.

There is that Gospel. And so far I'm the only poster here at CH that has posted very many of those Gospel verses. Thing is, none of them teach OSAS. And of course, there are also Law verses. And so far, I'm the only one at CH that has quoted a great many of those verses.

You didn't mention the certainty of the gospel, you mentioned a very specific Calvinist Tradition: OSAS. That is one has faith AT ANY POINT IN THEIR LIFE, they are saved for all eternity. ONCE saved, ALWAYS saved. This is very, very different than the Gospel of certainty (that John Calvin also taught), that where the Gospel is (Sola Gratia - Solus Christus - SOLA FIDE) is present, there is certainty, the whole point is that salvation exists where there ONCE was faith (the ONCE stresses "but not now") Of course, the application of this is impossible. And it just switches the entire issue of Christianity away from the quality of Christ's work to the quality of MY FAITH - was it (ever, even for a micro second) REAL, GENUINE, AUTHENTIC, sufficient. Calvinists who hold to this will stress that one can have faith in Christ that isn't actually genuine or authenic or real - and thus doesn't save (regardless of being in Christ) whereas faith that (ever was) real DOES save even if there's no longer anything directed to Christ. REAL faith (and it is not possible for anyone - including self - to know if faith is genuine, authentic, sufficient) saves - even if existed only for a microsecond decades ago ("ONCE save") will save at death ("ALWAYS saved"). The issue is no longer Christ (and whether HE is real and sufficient) but MY FAITH (and whether it was ever real and sufficient).

I would say faith in response is truly needed for the salvation

IF you added, "faith in Christ" then I'd completely agree. Which is why I reject OSAS. Christ is real, authentic, genuine.... and HIS WORK is sufficient. His gift of faith to me (even as small as a mustard seed, even if shrouded with doubts) connects me to CHRIST and brings to me all the blessings of HIS work. The point is not whether MY faith is good enough but whether Christ is good enough. But where faith has been repudiated, there is no faith to grasp Christ and His work.

I've read Calvinist theology books and have had this discussion with Calvinist apologists. Additionally, I married into a Calvinist family! Back hundreds of years. My wife was raised in a very conservative Reformed church, all her relatives are conservative, orthodox, confessional Calvinists. And to a person, they've told me that John Calvin and the Reformed Confessions did/do NOT teach OSAS. That this was an inventiion of a number of latter-day Reformed theologians, after Calvins' death, and never embraced by most Reformed Christians. Indeed, they all reject it. They hold the "security" issue of the "P" (remember, Calvin didn't develop TULIP, that too was an invention of latter-day radical Reformed theologians who held Calvin didn't go far enough) actually MEANS nothing more than, "Where faith exists, salvation exists" (a point no Protestant would disagree with) and add "God never takes back His gift of faith" (again, a point no Protestant disagrees with). But can faith be rejected? That's what the Bible says. Can we repudiate faith? The Bible is meaningless if that's not true since MUCH of it is directed to encouraging believers NOT to do that. These latter-day radical reinventors of Calvin just went too far, according to nearly every Reformed believer I know of. Lutherans uphold the CERTAINTY 0f the Gospel - we just agree with Calvin and not these latter-day reinventors that the CERTAINTY is because of the genuiness and sufficiecy of CHRIST, not my personal faith; Lutherans hold that there is no Gospel apart from faith IN CHRIST.



Now back to the issue: Do we give ourselves faith or does God give us faith? For 1700 years, historic Christianity has answered that in the Ecumenical Creed from 321 AD, ".... and we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and giver of life." We have always held that GOD is the GIVER of spiritual life, faith, the Holy Spirit.... no dead person gives self life (whether physical or spiritual). I hold to that ancient, ecumenical and biblical position


.

It is not dangerous

This thread is not about OSAS. There are threads on that topic. This is not one of them. That invention of a tiny few latter-day Calvinists is NOT the issue here. I noted that it is rejected by nearly all Christians (including nearly all Protestants - as well as every Calvinist/Reformed Christian personally known to me) because it is unbiblical, horrible, a "terror to the conscience" and simply destroys the Reformation teaching of Sola Gratia - Solus Christus - SOLA FIDE (by noting Salvation can be without Christ or faith). But again, we can't explore that in this thread

. Your Catholic position has you believe that others of authority are needed to teach what is said for you in the Bible, rather than you looking.

ANOTHER irrelevant point, ANOTHER diversion.... why?


You have it backwards. The "Catholic position" is that God only speaks to SELF (in that case, that one individual singular denominatiion) and thus self is the sole authoritative interpreter and authority. Yes, it is also the position of the JW, CS, and every cult known to me.... as well as a lot of "Evangelicals." The Reformation was (in part) about that very issue. The Reformers view is that God speaks to US (not just ME - whether ME is an individual person or denomination).... they went back to the original position that the WHOLE CHURCH speaks (not just one man or cult or denomination - whether that be the RCC or Mary Baker Eddy or Jim Jones or Martin Luther or Pope Francis or any TV preacher or you or me) which is why Luther and Calvin stressed the ECUMENICAL Councils and Creeds, why they both spoke much of ECUMENICAL Tradition (not DENOMINATIONAL or PERSONAL tradition).

Faith can be rejected by the unrepentant who did not come to essential faith.

If you accept that a believer can fall from faith then you repudiate OSAS.

I reject your whole premise that it's the QUALITY of faith that matters ("essential" "real" "genuine" "sincere" - all the words used by OSAS folks) rather than the OBJECT of that faith. In that way too, they return to Rome and reject what Scripture says.

But again, why all the diversions?



Now back to the issue: Do we give ourselves faith or does God give us faith?

For 1700 years, historic Christianity has answered that in the Ecumenical Creed from 321 AD, ".... and we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and giver of life." We have always held that GOD is the GIVER of spiritual life, faith, the Holy Spirit.... no dead person gives self life (whether physical or spiritual). I hold to that ancient, ecumenical and biblical position.




.

 

[FredVB]

It is not dangerous, it does not exclude what I learn others say. Your Catholic position has you believe that others of authority are needed to teach what is said for you in the Bible, rather than you looking. But so do Jehovah's Witnesses believe that about those they see in authority. There is danger with that, it is better to check them and anyone against what is said for us in the Bible.

The certainty is the certainty of believers' salvation, the certainty that they already have everlasting life. See it for yourself.

Don't accuse me of meaning faith without it necessarily in Christ. I made clear in context that it is faith in Christ. That was enabling strawman arguments.

Faith can be rejected by the unrepentant who did not come to essential faith.

Yahweh enables faith through the Spirit, but that in no way eliminates our responsiveness needed. There, that is the issue you wanted to go back to. It seemed that whether Abraham conjured his faith or was given it was the issue of this thread. It was not different with Abraham, he had to respond to God's enabling faith as well.

He's not Catholic and doesn't hold to the Catholic position.

Abraham's response doesn't make his faith more real. It's given by God. That's it. He has it.

I did not check whether Josiah is Catholic or not. I am sorry I didn't. I was once Catholic, when I was a young boy. That is the position Catholics take. And Abraham did have faith because Yahweh gives people faith. This didn't mean that Abraham was not responding to God, and it was not because he had to and had no choice.

This thread is not about OSAS. There are threads on that topic. This is not one of them. That invention of a tiny few latter-day Calvinists is NOT the issue here. I noted that it is rejected by nearly all Christians (including nearly all Protestants - as well as every Calvinist/Reformed Christian personally known to me) because it is unbiblical, horrible, a "terror to the conscience" and simply destroys the Reformation teaching of Sola Gratia - Solus Christus - SOLA FIDE (by noting Salvation can be without Christ or faith). But again, we can't explore that in this thread.

And yet you keep stating that and provocatively stating that the eternal security believers trust is unbiblical, horrible, and a "terror to the conscience". I do not have to let that pass.

God is not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9). Those who have Jesus Christ the Son have life, those who do not have the Son do not have that life, this is for all of you who believe in Jesus Christ, that you may know that you have eternal life and may continue to believe (1 John 5:12-13).

There are so many verses of the Bible for this, I have no hope to compile all of them to show, and am not motivated to still gather more.

Since you state that provocative characterization to those of the position you oppose, I should be free to state my position that belief in people losing salvation is a terrible heresy, in which faith is a work, with which you might make it or might blow it, this makes possible false gospels. God is not willing that any would perish but would that all come to repentance, and no being can snatch any single one from God's hand. The salvation is not the work of any of us.

ANOTHER irrelevant point, ANOTHER diversion.... why?
You have it backwards. The "Catholic position" is that God only speaks to SELF (in that case, that one individual singular denominatiion) and thus self is the sole authoritative interpreter and authority. Yes, it is also the position of the JW, CS, and every cult known to me.... as well as a lot of "Evangelicals." The Reformation was (in part) about that very issue. The Reformers view is that God speaks to US (not just ME - whether ME is an individual person or denomination).... they went back to the original position that the WHOLE CHURCH speaks (not just one man or cult or denomination - whether that be the RCC or Mary Baker Eddy or Jim Jones or Martin Luther or Pope Francis or any TV preacher or you or me) which is why Luther and Calvin stressed the ECUMENICAL Councils and Creeds, why they both spoke much of ECUMENICAL Tradition (not DENOMINATIONAL or PERSONAL tradition).
If you accept that a believer can fall from faith then you repudiate OSAS.
I reject your whole premise that it's the QUALITY of faith that matters ("essential" "real" "genuine" "sincere" - all the words used by OSAS folks) rather than the OBJECT of that faith. In that way too, they return to Rome and reject what Scripture says.
But again, why all the diversions?

I show there is no intended diversion. You are just wrong to say that it was not about trusting others of authority. The Bible does not show there are those of authority for this, it shows we should trust the Bible with really looking through it. We can get it wrong with not looking enough. So we are to not stop looking at any of it, seeking to get all we can from the word of God. We can learn from others with measuring what they say with what the word of God says, but with really checking, not just looking at single verses.

Yet there are those who can fall from faith, there is basis to distinguish essential faith, and it is defined, with repentance being essential, that believers really come to Christ, indeed the object of our faith. This is the victory that overcomes the world, our faith (1 John 5:4). There are those who went out from among us, but they were not of us, for if they had been one of us, they would have continued with us, but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were really one of us (1 John 2:19). Those that repented, having faith being in Christ, do not fall away and continue, and their growth should show they are real believers with this faith.

Now back to the issue: Do we give ourselves faith or does God give us faith?

For 1700 years, historic Christianity has answered that in the Ecumenical Creed from 321 AD, ".... and we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and giver of life." We have always held that GOD is the GIVER of spiritual life, faith, the Holy Spirit.... no dead person gives self life (whether physical or spiritual). I hold to that ancient, ecumenical and biblical position.

To this issue, Yahweh supplies the faith through the work of the Spirit of God, there is still response from people needed, as God is not willing that any should perish but would that all come to repentance, and yet many still will perish. All have some opportunity in their life to not perish. Believers should still be testimony to others for them to have more of such opportunity.

 

[Josiah]

And yet you keep stating that and provocatively stating that the eternal security believers trust is unbiblical, horrible, and a "terror to the conscience". I do not have to let that pass.

I never said that. I said I repudiate OSAS and thus disagree with you on that. AND keep asking that the diversion be discontinued.

I should be free to state my position that belief in people losing salvation is a terrible heresy

And yes, I do disagree with that. I gave numerous Scriptures that are (at best) misleading and inappropriate if it is impossible to fall from faith. Yes, I reject that heresy that some later day Calvinists invented in the late 16th Century.

And yes. I also disagree that one can be saved by faith that ONCE existed but has been repudiated ("ONCE saved, ALWAYS saved")

The Bible does not show there are those of authority for this, it shows we should trust the Bible with really looking through it.

Agreed. And no where does it say that faith that no longer exists but has been repudiated and denounced saves; that there is salvation apart from faith. And nowhere does it say that it is impossible to fall away from faith (and thus all those MANY Scriptures that warn of us that are misleading and errant).

We can learn from others with measuring what they say with what the word of God says, but with really checking, not just looking at single verses.

I passionately agree. And note that nearly all Christians reject the late 16th Century Calvinist invention of OSAS. Indeed, I have not met in person a single Reformed Christian (and all my wife's family are conservative Reformed Christians) who holds to this; they all reject it.


But the issue of this thread is NOT of faith is irrelevant and whether one can be saved without it. The question is whether Abraham gave faith to himself or if God gave it to him. I gave my view (faith is ALWAYS a gift) but you seem to want to discuss OSAS instead. Not sure why. There are several threads on that topic; I believe I've participated in most of them. On the topic HERE, I suspect we're in agreement. On "eternal security" I suspect we are, too. But when I reject your OSAS ideas, well....

Yet there are those who can fall from faith, there is basis to distinguish essential faith, and it is defined, with repentance being essential, that believers really come to Christ, indeed the object of our faith. This is the victory that overcomes the world, our faith (1 John 5:4). There are those who went out from among us, but they were not of us, for if they had been one of us, they would have continued with us, but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were really one of us (1 John 2:19). Those that repented, having faith being in Christ, do not fall away and continue, and their growth should show they are real believers with this faith.

Your seeming OSAS/uber-Calvinist "take" here makes me extremely uncomfortable, as I've noted. Justification does not hinge on the QUALITY of our faith but on the OBJECT of our faith. Faith IN CHRIST the size of a mustard seed.... with doubts and problems... is salvic. Attempts to put the focus on the quality of MY faith is just another way of directing to the mirror rather than to the Cross. It was invented by the same later-day Calvinists who invented OSAS - as a way of getting around the reality that sometimes people HAVE faith and then don't. "Well, the faith wasn't good enough, pure enough, of enough quality." What a horror. How can ANYONE ever know if their faith is of "sufficient quality" of "sufficient purity?" I know my faith is IN CHRIST... and HE is sufficient!!!!


Since you seem to want to discuss OSAS and all the ideas that spin around that invention, again, I invite you to check out the various threads here at CH on that topic.




Now, back to the topic here: Did Abraham give himself faith?



.

 

[Josiah]

In a thread on OSAS, here is what I posted:

Here is a LUTHERAN response on this.....


Here is how a LUTHERAN approaches this topic.....


Gospel:


Romans 8:29-39, For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified. What, then, shall we say in response to this? If God is for us, who can be against us? He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all--how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things? Who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen? It is God who justifies. Who is he that condemns? Christ Jesus, who died--more than that, who was raised to life--is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us. Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall trouble or hardship or persecution or famine or nakedness or danger or sword? As it is written: "For your sake we face death all day long; we are considered as sheep to be slaughtered." No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

John 3:16, "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. "

Mark 13:22, "For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform signs and miracles to deceive the elect--if that were possible.

John 4:14, "but whoever drinks the water I give him will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life."

John 20:28, I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand.

1 Thess. 5:24, "The one who calls you is faithful and he will do it.

Hebrews 10:14, "because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.

Rev. 3:5, "I will never blot out his name from the book of life, but will acknowledge his name before my Father and his angels."



Law:

John 15:4-7, "Remain in me, and I will remain in you... If anyone does not remain in me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned."

Rev. 2:10, "Be faithful, even to the point of death, and I will give you the crown of life.

Matthew 10:22, "He who stands firm to the end will be saved."

1 Timothy 4:1, "The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons."

Luke 8:13, "They believe for a while, but in the time of testing they fall away."

John 8:31, "If you hold to my teaching, you are really My disciples."

Luke 21:19, "By standing firm you will gain life."

Hebrews 8:9, "They did not remain faithful to My covenant, and I turned away from them"

Gal. 5:4, "You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace."

Col. 1:23, "If you continue in your faith, established and firm, not moved from the hope held out in the gospel."

Hebrews 10:26, "If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God."

2 Peter 1:8-10, "But if anyone does not have them, he is nearsighted and blind, and has forgotten that he has been cleansed from his past sins. Therefore, my brothers, be all the more eager to make your calling and election sure."

2 Peter 3:17, "Be on your guard so that you may not be carried away by the error of lawless men and fall from your secure position."

Rev. 3:5, He who overcomes will, like them, be dressed in white.

Luke 12:8, "He who disowns Me before men will be disowned before the angels of God."




For LUTHERANS, this is a Law/Gospel issue. And we believe we are not to twist, confuse, blend or merge one with the other - but rather make a "proper distinction" and "proper application" of each.



Lutherans often approach theology with...

1. A deep humility, a willing embrace of MYSTERY, a willingness to embrace that what is is what is, an unwillingness to "connect the dots" and force them to "fit together" in conformity with the theories, opinions, thoughts, philosophies and theories of self.

2. "Pastoral" glasses. Luther was, above all, a PASTOR. Luther tended to evaluate everything from the standpoint of what he'd say to the church member in my office - struggling with something in his life and heart. I think Calvinism tends to run everything through "Logic" glasses. The result can be quite different.



For Lutherans, it's all in the application....

Joe comes to his pastor OVERWHELMED with a profound sense of his sinfulness, his unworthiness, his lack of deserving ANYTHING but eternity in hell. He looks at the Law and is (rightly) CRUSHED with it. He notes his lack of understanding of the things of God, his lack of pure piety, his lack of loving others as God loved him.... he admits he is sometimes pleagued with doubts that annoy him.... he fears he has let go of God's loving hand! He fears that on his deathbed, he may be in the grips of doubt and fear! What is the pastor to say? Lutherans would note the Gospel.... he needs to hear and know the Gospel... THAT is the context of all those Gospel verses!!!!

Jim comes to his pastor explaining why he's never in church, never receives the Sacrament, could care less about right living, and beats his wife nightly. Why it matters not that he has denounced his Christian faith. Why? Because he was Baptized, he was Confirmed, heck - once upon a time, a long, long time ago, he was a Christian and so was saved! And God never renigs on His promises.... God never lets go of our hands.... God really gets off on forgiving us so why not give Him more joy by sinning against Him more? God HAS to welcome Him into heaven cuz once upon a time, he had faith! What is the pastor to say? Lutherans would note the Law..... he needs to hear the Law..... THAT is the context of these Law passages.

The Lutheran approach is pastoral (rather than logical or dogmatic).... let the Gospel be the Gospel, and let it do what it is intended to do. And let the Law be the Law, and let it do what it is intended to do.



Pax Christi


- Josiah


.

MY "take": It's not the purity, quality and sufficiency of my FAITH that is key but rather the purity, quality and sufficiency of CHRIST and the CROSS that is key. It's the OBJECT of faith that matters, not the QUALITY and QUANTITY of my faith.

And I reject that it is impossible to fall from faith - and thus all the Law Scriptures above are misleading and inappropriate since they sternly warn of something that can't happen. I admit there is MYSTERY here since faith is always a gift, always ours because the Holy Spirit gave it to us and keeps us in the faith - YET it seems falling away is possible. How can that be? I don't know. I also don't know how the Trinity can be, or how the Two Natures can be, or how Scripture can be the words of man but the word of God... indeed, virtually every part of the Christian faith is mystery. Which is perhaps why theology was called "the mysteries of God" until the 16th Century.... why Scripture calls on us to be "protectors of the MYSTERIES of God." But just because I don't understand how it is possible to fall away does not make many Scriptures therefore wrong and in need of being spun 180 degrees (and replaced with a very unbiblical idea that it's the QUALITY of faith that matters rather than the OBJECT of faith).


To the topic: God gave Abraham faith.




.

 

[FredVB]

And yet you keep stating that and provocatively stating that the eternal security believers trust is unbiblical, horrible, and a "terror to the conscience". I do not have to let that pass.

I never said that. I said I repudiate OSAS and thus disagree with you on that. AND keep asking that the diversion be discontinued.

Yet you did, and it is dishonest that you say that you did not, I showed the quote of you even where I said you did. "Once saved always saved" is the eternal security, it is a false dichotomy if you are saying these are not the same. The promise that believers have eternal life shown in scripture means that for all who are believers, those cannot be distinct as separate things.

I noted that it is rejected by nearly all Christians (including nearly all Protestants - as well as every Calvinist/Reformed Christian personally known to me) because it is unbiblical, horrible, a "terror to the conscience" and simply destroys the Reformation teaching of Sola Gratia - Solus Christus - SOLA FIDE (by noting Salvation can be without Christ or faith).

This thread is not about OSAS.
But again, we can't explore that in this thread.
But the issue of this thread is NOT of faith is irrelevant and whether one can be saved without it. The question is whether Abraham gave faith to himself or if God gave it to him. I gave my view (faith is ALWAYS a gift) but you seem to want to discuss OSAS instead. Not sure why. There are several threads on that topic; I believe I've participated in most of them. On the topic HERE, I suspect we're in agreement. On "eternal security" I suspect we are, too. But when I reject your OSAS ideas, well...
Since you seem to want to discuss OSAS and all the ideas that spin around that invention, again, I invite you to check out the various threads here at CH on that topic.
Now, back to the topic here: Did Abraham give himself faith?
To the topic: God gave Abraham faith.

And I definitely did speak about Abraham or anyone giving himself faith, long ago, and I kept coming back, to that topic. You want to keep coming back to this "OSAS" topic, which you spoke of first, to be sure you still get the last word, and you keep doing that, telling me to just go back to that topic, which I spoke to with no response on that from you, and while your position on the "OSAS" topic is very wrong. I am on this thread, I don't have to go to another thread to say that you are wrong here, with there being plenty possible to show that. You are not someone with some entitlement to say the last word, and tell others not to speak on that topic in the thread which you are doing.

In a thread on OSAS, here is what I posted:

I don't care here that you said something in another thread, where others would respond to you, you are bringing that something that you said here to this thread. Still it is for the attempt to have the last word on that here. And still it is wrong, so it should not be left as the last word on it here.

And yes. I also disagree that one can be saved by faith that ONCE existed but has been repudiated ("ONCE saved, ALWAYS saved")

Here is where you made the error. We are not talking about anyone in whom the faith once existed but was repudiated. There is no case that can be shown that one actually had faith already and repudiated it. 1 John 2:19 shows they went out from us, but they were not of us, for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us, but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us.

Those ones, who repudiate the faith, are distinguished clearly and definitively from those who have an anointing from the Holy One. Those who repudiate the faith then never repented and had the faith, really trusting Christ in coming to him so as to be restored to Yahweh God. They may have known of doing that, but for whatever reasons they had they did not do so.

Agreed. And no where does it say that faith that no longer exists but has been repudiated and denounced saves; that there is salvation apart from faith. And nowhere does it say that it is impossible to fall away from faith.

I am not saying that, this is a strawman argument. Also nowhere does it say that it is possible to fall away from faith. That you think there are such passages saying that shows that you misunderstand such passages. In light of passages such as 1 John 2:19 those who overcome and continue to the end are the same ones who have an anointing from the Holy One, and are distinguished from such people who went out from us, but were not of us, that they might be made manifest that none of them were of us

Your seeming OSAS/uber-Calvinist "take" here makes me extremely uncomfortable.

What "OSAS/uber-Calvinist" "take"? I have never found a Calvinist who even called me a Calvinist.

Justification does not hinge on the QUALITY of our faith but on the OBJECT of our faith. Faith IN CHRIST the size of a mustard seed.... with doubts and problems... is salvic. Attempts to put the focus on the quality of MY faith is just another way of directing to the mirror rather than to the Cross.

Here is another strawman argument. I am not saying anything for that.

MY "take": It's not the purity, quality and sufficiency of my FAITH that is key but rather the purity, quality and sufficiency of CHRIST and the CROSS that is key.

I don't say anything differently for that.

And I reject that it is impossible to fall from faith - and thus all the Law Scriptures above are misleading and inappropriate since they sternly warn of something that can't happen.

That is your misunderstanding of those. Those who think they are right but do not yet come to Christ with this faith are warned.

I admit there is MYSTERY here since faith is always a gift, always ours because the Holy Spirit gave it to us and keeps us in the faith - YET it seems falling away is possible. How can that be? I don't know.

It can't be understood because it cannot be. Eternal life is eternal life, and Yahweh God is not mistaken, ever.

 

[Josiah]

Law...

John 15:4-7, "Remain in me, and I will remain in you... If anyone does not remain in me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned."

Rev. 2:10, "Be faithful, even to the point of death, and I will give you the crown of life.

Matthew 10:22, "He who stands firm to the end will be saved."

1 Timothy 4:1, "The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons."

Luke 8:13, "They believe for a while, but in the time of testing they fall away."

John 8:31, "If you hold to my teaching, you are really My disciples."

Luke 21:19, "By standing firm you will gain life."

Hebrews 8:9, "They did not remain faithful to My covenant, and I turned away from them"

Gal. 5:4, "You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace."

Col. 1:23, "If you continue in your faith, established and firm, not moved from the hope held out in the gospel."

Hebrews 10:26, "If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God."

2 Peter 1:8-10, "But if anyone does not have them, he is nearsighted and blind, and has forgotten that he has been cleansed from his past sins. Therefore, my brothers, be all the more eager to make your calling and election sure."

2 Peter 3:17, "Be on your guard so that you may not be carried away by the error of lawless men and fall from your secure position."


.

"Once saved always saved" is the eternal security

I disagree.

And I continue to hold to BOTH the truth of the Law and the truth of the Gospel on this point, as expressed before (but ignored). And I continue to hold this point is irrelevant to this thread; if you want to discuss Once saved ALWAYS saved - there are threads on that (I've provided links, ignored). "Eternal Security" has never been discussed here but I think none would have anything to add other than the Gospel verses I gave (but ignored).

You continue to accuse me of stating that "eternal security" is horrible but as everyone here knows, I never have. I said that Once Saved ALWAYS saved" is horrible. But if you want to discuss OSAS, there are threads on that. This one is not about that.

The promise that believers have eternal life shown in scripture means that for all who are believers

Again, yet again, still one more time, I agree with that. Which is why I reject OSAS.

But again, yet again, I continue to hold to BOTH the truth of the Law and the truth of the Gospel on this point, as expressed before (but ignored). And I continue to hold this point is irrelevant to this thread; if you want to discuss Once saved ALWAYS saved - there are threads on that (I've provided links, ignored). "Eternal Security" has never been discussed here but I think none would have anything to add other than the Gospel verses I gave (but ignored).

nowhere does it say that it is possible to fall away from faith

...and nowhere does it say one cannot.

And of course, every single one of the Law passages quoted (but ignored) is either WRONG, entirely irrelevant or horribly misleading if what they warn about isn't possible. And not one one of them mentions "enough" faith or "sufficient" faith or "genuine" faith or "sincere" faith or any of the other qualifiers you impute. And I disagree with the whole idea that it's not the object of faith that matters but the quanitity and quality of faith - it MUST be sufficiently genuine, sincere, and of enough quantity. Nope. Jesus is the Savior. Faith - of any quality or quality - that is in Christ thus means the Savior saves us. I hold to Sola Gratia - Solus Christus - Sola Fide.


I hold that Abraham had faith and that was the gift of God.




.

 

[hjhsjnsshdjdh]

I disagree.

And I continue to hold to BOTH the truth of the Law and the truth of the Gospel on this point, as expressed before (but ignored). And I continue to hold this point is irrelevant to this thread; if you want to discuss Once saved ALWAYS saved - there are threads on that (I've provided links, ignored). "Eternal Security" has never been discussed here but I think none would have anything to add other than the Gospel verses I gave (but ignored).

You continue to accuse me of stating that "eternal security" is horrible but as everyone here knows, I never have. I said that Once Saved ALWAYS saved" is horrible. But if you want to discuss OSAS, there are threads on that. This one is not about that.








Again, yet again, still one more time, I agree with that. Which is why I reject OSAS.

But again, yet again, I continue to hold to BOTH the truth of the Law and the truth of the Gospel on this point, as expressed before (but ignored). And I continue to hold this point is irrelevant to this thread; if you want to discuss Once saved ALWAYS saved - there are threads on that (I've provided links, ignored). "Eternal Security" has never been discussed here but I think none would have anything to add other than the Gospel verses I gave (but ignored).










...and nowhere does it say one cannot.

And of course, every single one of the Law passages quoted (but ignored) is either WRONG, entirely irrelevant or horribly misleading if what they warn about isn't possible. And not one one of them mentions "enough" faith or "sufficient" faith or "genuine" faith or "sincere" faith or any of the other qualifiers you impute. And I disagree with the whole idea that it's not the object of faith that matters but the quanitity and quality of faith - it MUST be sufficiently genuine, sincere, and of enough quantity. Nope. Jesus is the Savior. Faith - of any quality or quality - that is in Christ thus means the Savior saves us. I hold to Sola Gratia - Solus Christus - Sola Fide.


I hold that Abraham had faith and that was the gift of God.




.

"Looking unto JESUS, the AUTHOR and FINISHER of our faith, WHO for the joy that was set before HIM endured the cross, despising the shame and has sat down at the right hand of GOD." So we are the joy that was setting before our LORD as HE endured the agony on the cross. HE is also the AUTHOR of our faith, as we are convicted by the HOLY SPIRIT after hearing HIS WORD. At the moment of conviction and we receive CHRIST as our LORD and SAVIOR the HOLY SPIRIT permanently indwells and is our SEAL and GUARANTEE unto the day of redemption. There is no one and no way for us to break the KING's SEAL. Once truly born again/ saved by the WORD and the SPIRIT, we are eternally secure in CHRIST. If there is no security in CHRIST then all HIS assurance verses in SCRIPTURE are pie in the sky and we might as well toss the Scriptures to the wind - BUT I myself believe HIS WORD and HIS assurance verses that once a person has CHRIST dwelling within that there is nothing on earth nor in Heaven that can take us out of HIM or HE out of us.

 

[Particular]

"Looking unto JESUS, the AUTHOR and FINISHER of our faith, WHO for the joy that was set before HIM endured the cross, despising the shame and has sat down at the right hand of GOD." So we are the joy that was setting before our LORD as HE endured the agony on the cross. HE is also the AUTHOR of our faith, as we are convicted by the HOLY SPIRIT after hearing HIS WORD. At the moment of conviction and we receive CHRIST as our LORD and SAVIOR the HOLY SPIRIT permanently indwells and is our SEAL and GUARANTEE unto the day of redemption. There is no one and no way for us to break the KING's SEAL. Once truly born again/ saved by the WORD and the SPIRIT, we are eternally secure in CHRIST. If there is no security in CHRIST then all HIS assurance verses in SCRIPTURE are pie in the sky and we might as well toss the Scriptures to the wind - BUT I myself believe HIS WORD and HIS assurance verses that once a person has CHRIST dwelling within that there is nothing on earth nor in Heaven that can take us out of HIM or HE out of us.

Yes, as the author (the one who begins our faith) and the finisher of our faith, we are secured to persevere in faith to the end. This pathway may be filled with many trials and temptations, but He who began a good work in us is faithful to finish it.

 

[Josiah]

"Looking unto JESUS, the AUTHOR and FINISHER of our faith, WHO for the joy that was set before HIM endured the cross, despising the shame and has sat down at the right hand of GOD."

Amen! Of course it does not say, "It is impossible for one with faith to fall from faith so all the divine warnings about that are abused."


There is Gospel. And there is Law. Neither 'cancels" the other, but are true. And again, if all the Law verses are impossible, then they are misleading or irrelevant at best - or just wrong.


Law...

John 15:4-7, "Remain in me, and I will remain in you... If anyone does not remain in me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned."

Rev. 2:10, "Be faithful, even to the point of death, and I will give you the crown of life.

Matthew 10:22, "He who stands firm to the end will be saved."

1 Timothy 4:1, "The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons."

Luke 8:13, "They believe for a while, but in the time of testing they fall away."

John 8:31, "If you hold to my teaching, you are really My disciples."

Luke 21:19, "By standing firm you will gain life."

Hebrews 8:9, "They did not remain faithful to My covenant, and I turned away from them"

Gal. 5:4, "You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace."

Col. 1:23, "If you continue in your faith, established and firm, not moved from the hope held out in the gospel."

Hebrews 10:26, "If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God."

2 Peter 1:8-10, "But if anyone does not have them, he is nearsighted and blind, and has forgotten that he has been cleansed from his past sins. Therefore, my brothers, be all the more eager to make your calling and election sure."

2 Peter 3:17, "Be on your guard so that you may not be carried away by the error of lawless men and fall from your secure position."




.

 

[hjhsjnsshdjdh]

"Looking unto JESUS, the AUTHOR and FINISHER of our faith, WHO for the joy that was set before HIM endured the cross, despising the shame and has sat down at the right hand of GOD." So we are the joy that was setting before our LORD as HE endured the agony on the cross. HE is also the AUTHOR of our faith, as we are convicted by the HOLY SPIRIT after hearing HIS WORD. At the moment of conviction and we receive CHRIST as our LORD and SAVIOR the HOLY SPIRIT permanently indwells and is our SEAL and GUARANTEE unto the day of redemption. There is no one and no way for us to break the KING's SEAL. Once truly born again/ saved by the WORD and the SPIRIT, we are eternally secure in CHRIST. If there is no security in CHRIST then all HIS assurance verses in SCRIPTURE are pie in the sky and we might as well toss the Scriptures to the wind - BUT I myself believe HIS WORD and HIS assurance verses that once a person has CHRIST dwelling within that there is nothing on earth nor in Heaven that can take us out of HIM or HE out of us.

" Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the WORD of GOD." Sounds pretty clear to me !

 

[Josiah]

" Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the WORD of GOD." Sounds pretty clear to me !

Me, too. But it does not say, "No one can fall away from that faith." Nor does it say, "One can be saved by faith they once had but no longer do." Nor does it say, "Dead, unregenerate, atheistic enemies of God give faith to self - God has nothin' to do with it."

 

[Particular]

Me, too. But it does not say, "No one can fall away from that faith." Nor does it say, "One can be saved by faith they once had but no longer do." Nor does it say, "Dead, unregenerate, atheistic enemies of God give faith to self - God has nothin' to do with it."

Is Jesus promise invalid?

Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst. But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe. All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”
~ John 6:35-40