Perseverance of the Saints or Once saved always saved

My point is that people believe with all their heart that they are saved and going to heaven. They believe such because they are trusting in the good works, or baptism, or some such thing. Their assurance is complete and solid to them. They have "peace" (whatever that is) ... but they are not saved. I have talked to these people before and in fact, we disciplined one of them out of the church. They were (and probably still are) completely convinced they were saved. It is a false assurance.

If they fail to persevere then they have no basis for assurance. They may be saved (depending on what happens in their lives), but they have no basis for assurance.

I think part of your problem is that you seem to be confusing the objective fact of salvation with the subjective assurance. They do not always go together. One can exist without the other.

 

#1. I agree that the lost "can be" self-deceived instead of assured of salvation in the way that the Bible describes (in Rom 8:16 for example).

#2. I doubt that any of the self-deceived ones call themselves "self deceived" or claim "I am saved by works".

Christ said that the Peace He gives IS UNIQUE and is NOT possible to be found in the world. "NOT as the World gives". John 14.

Further - we know that in that lesser form of peace - the one that the world Gives - they are harrassed because "The Spirit CONVICTS the WORLD of sin and righteousness and judgment".

So even there - they have no peace.

The part where "all is clear" is where the person's works - their fruit SHOWS them to the church to be outside of Christ.

The more challenging part that this discussion was focused on was the part where someone like you says today "I AM saved" and then 10 years from now at some point "Fails to persevere" and then all your fellow 5-pointers retro-delete that assurance you claim "Today".

Surely you don't claim to be taking THAT kind of person out of your church - because until they "Fail to persevere" you have no clue that you need to retro-delete their assurance.

Agreed. Those people that you can clearly see today as being outside of Christ (yet inside the church) often are "self-deceived" on that point.

Isn't that the 4-pt position?

No - I agree that one can be saved and not assured. I also agree that one can be self-deceived and lost.

My point is that the Rom 8:16 principle "gets revoked" in the 5 pt Calvinist view (not in the 4-pt Calvinist view nor in the Arminian view)

In Christ,

Bob

 

Christians sin

the test for works through fire passage

I believe 1 Cor 3:11-13

gives reasonable evidence that a Christian can (extenuating circumstances, although should not (normally) live a fruitless life.

The thief on the cross - even he bore fruit - a single one of his works will be purified into a golden crown - but yet there will be some who will not even have that golden crown - but still be saved!

 

No to the first. Absolutely to the second. I have talked to many who are assured of heaven because of their works.

But he does not define what that peace is. And that is the problem. People accept counterfeits.

I don't "retro delete" anyone's assurance. Assurance can come and go. If someone fails to persevere, we say they give evidence that they were not saved.

We don't discipline based on assurance, but based on activity. To talk about assurance and church discipline in the same context has no bearing.

No. Assurance is completely separated from all but the last point where assurance is based on perseverance.

Honestly, I don't see how.

 

There is no test for "saved" thus question is moot.

 

We have all seen 5-pt Calvinists argue that someone who fails to persevere was never saved in the first place. However, that same Calvinist will claim that THEY are saved. Only to discover that 10 years from now when they TOO fail to persevere - they never were really saved either.

The cascading failure problem is "solved" in the Arminian model. It clings to BOTH the assurance of salvation AND perseverence. In the Arminian model we do NOT "retro-delete assurance" as do the 5pt Calvinists NEITHER do we "deny the reality of it where it exists" EVEN for those who FAIL to persevere.

We argue that LIKE ADAM - they WERE in a family relationship to God - (as is described in Heb 6) but they enter into the MAtt 18 problem of "forgiveness revoked".

To deny that forgiveness of Matt 18 was ever given in the first place - nullifies the argument of the King who argues "you should have forgiven your fellow slave AS I FORGAVE YOU".

If the king DID NOT forgive in the first place - his entire argument is nullified.

In Christ,

Bob