Security of the Believer Beliefs

On a Baptist only thread, I posted the following in response to an inquiry about different beliefs.

"I know of at least six different beliefs in the security of the believer. All believe that God is completely sovereign. All believe that the grace God provides is more than sufficient for salvation. The differences are in man's required response to God's grace.

The folowing are very abbreviated descriptions of the beliefs. Obviously more could be said about each one.

1. 4/5 Point Calvinist.
- God's elects, man has no choice.

2. Eternal Security (non- 4/5 point Calvinist).
- Man must accept grace, then cannot reject grace.

3, Arminius Belief
- Man must accept grace, but can later choose to forfiet grace by not believing.

4. Wesley' Belief
- Man must: accept grace, confess and be remorseful for known sins, and not have long term unforgiveness of others.

5. Santification Belief
- Wesley' belief plus man must continue on the path to santification.

6. Roman Catholic Belief
- Accept grace by faith plus have some good works."


I am interested in where the Seven Day Adventists, Church of Christ, and Luthern churches beliefs would fit into the very abbreviated descriptions in the table. I realize that there is bound to be small differences, but in the context of the abbreviated descriptions, where would they fit? Or do they need a separate very abbreviated description? If so, please provide.

 

Thank you for responding. Sometimes the denomination websites are not very clear on this issue. My intention is not to debate between the various beliefs, but to list and clarify them.

 

BobRyan writes:
"1. The sinner must accept the Gospel and is enabled to do so throug the supernatural drawing of ALL by God John 12:32 for God "stands and the door and knock" Rev 3... Christ is the light that coming into the world "enlightens EVERY man".

2. Having accepted the Gospel - the sinner is then "born again" and forgiven. The assurance of salvation is confirmed via the Romans 8:16 external objective transactional "Witness of the Holy Spirit" bearing witness with our spirit that WE ARE the children of God.

3. The "forgiveness revoked" lesson of Matt 18 and the branches cast out of the vine of Christ lesson of John 15 then argue for the born-again believer to persevere in that walk of justification and sanctification through the many warnings of the NT text. During that entire walk in perseverance - the Christian is abiding in Christ and is receiving daily the assurance of salvation via the witness of God the Holy Spirit as stated in Romans 8.

That is the SDA view."

Thanks for the response, Bob.

Are you saying that the SDA security of the believer is at least partially dependent on the believer's experience and/or witness (feeling)?

 

drfuss writes:
"Are you saying that the SDA security of the believer is at least partially dependent on the believer's experience and/or witness (feeling)?"

BobRyan writes:
"But the Romans 8:16 promise STILL remains for all saints. ALL saints CAN know for dead certainty by taking advantage of the fact that God Promises that Holy Spirit will indeed "bear witness with our spirit that WE ARE the children of God". It is a living transactional relationship experience that can be felt and WITNESSED by the born-again believer in Christ every day if they so wish."

Thanks Bob, I will take that as a yes.


The first four views are taken directly from a book entitled "4 Views On Eternal Security". The book was written by four seminary professors, each presenting his view and then commenting on the other's views. The sixth view is based on a debate on this subject between a Catholic Priest and a Baptist minister on a TV show. The 5th view is based on my experience many years ago and was memtioned in the 4 Views book, but not really discussed.

The four views book only addressed beliefs and did not include experience or personal witness as being any part of the security of the believer. The same was true for the Catholic belief.

I have no doctrine statement concerning the santification belief, but suspect some santification beliefs may include experience or personal witness. Santification views will vary because the definition of santification varies.

Based on the above, I think we should add the following to the six views in the very abbreviated format:

The SDA View
- Man must accept grace, continue belief and have personal witness.

My intention is not to debate, but to clarify differences in a brief, concise manner.

 

BobRyan writes:
"Belief 3-4-5 all look like the same thing to me."

To those of beliefs 3-4-5, the differences are very distinct. This is the problem with dividing Christians into either Calvinists or Arminians. The Calvinists and eternal security believers think all others are Arminians. The problem is they pick one of the other beliefs that they like to criticize and broad brush it to apply to all other beliefs. They never bother to find out just what the other beliefs really are.

A good example of broad brushing is in the New Ungers Bible Dictionary put out by Moody Press. Under Security (page 1153) is the following statement: "Arminian doctrines reject security, employing experience as a proof" It doesn't even include belief as a part of "Arminian" assurance. Except possibly the SDA, I know of no other "Arminian" beliefs that include experience as part of the believers security.

One should expect something coming out of the Moody Press to promote Calvinism and eternal security. But they totally misrepresent what the other beliefs are. The problem is that most Calvinist and eternal security believers trust the New Ungers Bible Dictionary as being very reliable. The Calvinists and eternal security misleading and false statements have been around for so long that they blindly believe them, and they even find their way into their Bible dictionaries.

 

bmerr writes:
bmerr here. I am a member of the Church of Christ. Without getting too deep into it, I'd say that the position taken by Arminius seems pretty much in line with Biblical teaching. I don't know much about Arminius, myself. We could look at it further if you like.

Darron writes:
"Having been among them, the Church of Christ position is #6. With rare exceptions, they specifically require completed vocalized confession, and completed baptism by immersion."

To me, security of the believer refers to security after one is a believer. I should have made that clear. In the COC, isn't baptism a part of becoming a Christian? Perhaps I am missing something.

 

Thanks Bob,

Perhaps I can ask it another way. After a person becomes a Christian (born again), On what does the SDA Christian rely on to know that he remains a Christian. For instance, the Non-Calvinist/eternal security belief relies on eternal security (OSAS) for salvation security; Arminius believed that continued belief by the Christian was required for salvation security; The Wesley belief relies on continued belief, confessed sins and forgiveness of others for salvation security; etc.

Does SDA depend on experience or personal witness in any way for salvation security in addition to 3, 4, or 5 beliefs above?

 

For purposes and the format of this thread, I believe Calvinism is adequately covered under belief #1. In order to avoid issues within the beliefs, we are describing them in a very abbreviated form.

We are primarily interested in the many different beliefs that Calvinists conveniently consider Arminian.

 

Bob,
Thank you for your patience.

One of the reasons I am asking these questions is a result of what is said in the New Ungers Bible Dictionary put out by Moody Press. Under Security (page 1153) is the following statement: "Arminian doctrines reject security, employing experience as a proof" The context is that eternal security believers rely on thier belief in eternal security as their continued salvation security. It doesn't even include belief as a part of assurance for those they call Arminians.

Obviously, it is false to say that experience is the believers continuing salvation security for most of what they call Arminians. None ot the views in the 4 View On Eternal Security book included experience as a factor. I am trying to determine is there is a denomination of significant size where believers experience (rather than belief or in addition to belief) is what provides their continuing salvation security. In other words, is continuing experience necessary for the believer to have continuing salvation assurance?

Most if not all believe that experience and personal witness is a benefit to the Christian life. But do you believe it necessary for continuing salvation assurance? That is what I am trying to find out.

I suspect the Moody Press people may have found a belief that required experience for continuing salvation security. They then broad brushed it to include all beliefs that they consider Arminian. I am trying to locate a denomination belief that they could have used or expanded on to make that statement.

One should expect something coming out of the Moody Press to promote Calvinism and eternal security. But they misrepresent what the other beliefs are. The problem is that most Calvinist and eternal security believers trust the New Ungers Bible Dictionary as being very reliable. These Calvinists and eternal security misleading or false statements about other beliefs, have been around for so long that they are blindly believed, and they have even found their way into their Bible dictionaries.