Why do people hate the doctrine of Eternal Security?

Well, I disagree with him. I also don't think a regenerated believer would convert to Mormonism unless he did not know their full beliefs. Once he knows the full beliefs, he would leave, I would think. I don't see a regenerated believer converting to Islam, though.

Nope. There is now an increasing number of Christian inclusivists who believe that unsaved people go to heaven if they have never rejected Christ. I think a few of these people might even be on the BB.

Someone posted a link on a thread here (maybe this thread?) to a book that endorses this view by a man named Neal Punt. Guess who wrote the Foreword? Richard Mouw of Fuller Seminary:
http://www.evangelicalinclusivism.com/

It's a real eye-opener.

A recent book that responds to this view is Faith Comes by Hearing by Christopher Morgan and Robert Peterson:
http://www.ivpress.com/cgi-ivpress/book.pl/code=2590

 

drfuss: Nicholas, we have not heard from you recently. Has you original question been answered? Most Non-eternal security Christians consider Charles Stanley to be a main spokeman for eternal security believers; hence, they think eternal security is a licence to sin.

 

The reason we advocates of conditional security are so passionate against eternal security is that it is an invitation to sin and a license to continue sinning. Consider the following remark which has been attributed to Charles Stanley: “No matter what you do as a child of God, you are forgiven. You say, ‘Murder?’ Forgiven. ‘Stealing?’ Forgiven. ‘Adultery?’ Forgiven. ‘Worshiping idols?’ Forgiven.” I know that runs counter to Romans 6:1-2, but the idea is still out there and it promotes a worldly and immoral lifestyle.

As an example, consider the problem (sin) of cheating on your taxes. This is a crime under our laws and it is also stealing, a clear violation of the Eighth Commandment. Let's say you are a pastor who does a funeral. Afterward, a relative of the deceased gives you an envelope containing $100 cash. This stipend is taxable as income under the Internal Revenue Code. However, there is no paper trail and the chances of getting caught not reporting it are zero. This is a secret between you and God.

If you believe in conditional security, you are not only fortified by a moral sense of right and wrong. You are also haunted by the possibility of going to hell if you should die with this unforgiven sin. The problem of sin and its impact on your eternal destiny is always at the surface of your rational thought process. You will in all probability report the $100 on your tax return.

If you believe in eternal security, you are still fortified by that moral sense of right and wrong. However, the temptation to cheat is greater because there are no eternal consequences for cheating or refraining from cheating. The problem of sin is probably buried somewhere beneath the surface of your conscious thought process. And that is why, in my opinion, there is so little said about sin in our Baptist churches today. With the doctrine of eternal security, it has no impact on your eternal destiny. Therefore, the condemnation of sin takes a back seat to evangelism and “feel good” topics.

I have had wide exposure to Church of Christ thought and a limited exposure to Catholic thought, both of which reject the doctrine of eternal security. Both of these groups are definitely a lot more concerned about sin than we Baptists are. The importance of avoiding sin is an integral part of their programs at all levels and I would assume it is because they take to heart passages such as Galations 5:19-21.

So, are believers in eternal security sinning by their belief? Certainly not. Are they more likely to take a lackadaisical attitude toward the problem of sin in their lives? Probably so. Unfortunately I fear many will avoid thinking about sin in their lives until it is “everlasting too late” (an old Church of Christ idiom).

 

How about Perseverance of the Saints instead of the worn out OSAS.

In perseverance, the so-called licence to sin has been removed. To dismiss eternal security on your arguments is to dismiss so many other connected doctrines.

Just as an aside, the gift money you speak of depends on the state in the USA and is totally exempt in Canada.

Cheers,

Jim

 

Completely false. David was forgiven, Moses, Paul.....

We all sin, even those that don't believe in eternal security. God disciplines those He loves.

And yet, you will still sin until the day you die. And you have no assurance of salvation because you will not die in a sinless state no matter how hard you try.

As a born again believer, I do not fear hell because I have put my trust and very life in the hands of Christ. But I am broken hearted when I sin, because I have His Spirit in me and I love Him much more than my sin, which is why I go to Him for forgiveness.

That must be why priests have such a probem with molesting little boys. They have such a fear of hell.

Even though they believe one can lose his salvation, the people in the COC or RCC are no more sinless or righteous than any other group of humans.

 

So, Amy, do you agree with the Charles Stanley school of eternal security?

 

No. I don't believe a born again believer can sin without conviction of the Holy Spirit. God will discipline him until he turns back to Him.

Hbr 12:11 Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.

 

This is interesting. Until Marcia raised the apparent difference in Stanley's approach on this thread, I had never seen anyone try to distinguish him from all the other OSAS Baptists. After all, he was a two-term president of the SBC, was the first hand picked president of the conservative resurgence and was probably the most prominent SBC spokesperson until he was eclipsed by Al Mohler some 7 or 8 years ago. Truth be told, I don't think Stanley's thinking on this subject is any different than my pastor or any other Southern Baptist pastor. It certainly conforms to the BF&M.

 

drfuss: Concerning perseverence, the SBC Baptist Faith and Message addresses perseverence by saying "All True Believers will endure to the end". Since Charles Stanley was president of the SBC for two years and is still part of the SBC, he is supposed to believe that "All True Believers will endure to the end". I always thought that endure to the end meant endure believing to the end. Since Stanley believes a True Christian can both stop trusting in Christ and then not trust in Christ to the end, any thoughts on what Stanley's definition of endure means?

 

But not everyone here is SBC. And as I said earlier, Stanley's views are not what I learned when studying this issue. And even though Stanley had those positions, that doesn't mean all So. Baptists would agree with him.

 

I disagree that the temptation to cheat is greater for someone who is OSAS. The reason is because one is convicted by the Holy Spirit to do the right thing. We are being sanctified by the HS. If I am not cheating so I won't go to hell vs. not cheating because I know that grieves God, which brings more glory to God?

We are constantly being shaped by the HS and the Lord wants us to yield to Him. If we do the right thing simply out of fear of going to hell, it becomes legalistic and external -- just like the Church of Christ and the Roman Catholics, which are both very legalistic.

Isn't it more glorifying to Christ to do the right thing because you want to please Him and because you are heeding the Lord rather than because you fear going to hell?

Do you really think if the pastor does not report the $100 he will go to hell?

 

Yes, but humans that we are, pain is a stronger motivator than pleasure.

Yes, unless he receives forgiveness for what he has done, or unless he did it out of ignorance and not scienter, e.g., Jim1999 in Post #24.

 

Do you really think if the pastor does not report the $100 he will go to hell?
----------------------------------------------

Wow! Think I will give up doing weddings and funerals....shucks,,they can bury themselves,,Too risky!

Never heard the likes and I thought I heard most of the cults.

S
shaking head,

Cheers,

Jim

 

Drfuss: Stanley's view does not conform to the BF&M unless you come up with an innovative definition of "endure", See post #29.

 

Jim, thanks for keeping them honest.

I too am appalled at the stench of legalism. It's one of those evils that I have no patience for.

 

But if one trusts in Christ, then one is made righteous in the sight of God. That is justification. In actuality, we still sin but are being sanctified by the Holy Spirit.

In your view, then, it seems that one is not made righteous upon faith in Christ. Is that correct? If so, that means your view of justification must be different than the norm.

 

One thing that Charles Stanley said in his book that I agree with is that people who don't believe in eternal security don't seem to understand what Christ did on the cross. He paid the price for all sin...past, present and future. He paid for our sins 2000 years ago, long before we were ever born. If we are able to lose our salvation, then there is no more sacrifice to be made. You cannot be born again, and again, and again......

 

Yes, that is correct. "There is none righteous, no not one." Romans 3:10. I think my view of justification is pretty much the norm. I just don't think we stay justified throughout our lives without working at it. I also believe 1 John 1:9 is there not just to get us back into fellowship with God, but to provide a means of forgiveness without which our souls would surely be damned.

 

The scriptural result of justification is just-as-if-I-never-sinned............but that is all in the work of my Lord Jesus.

If yours is a baptist church it is wrongly labelled and would make me ashamed to call myself baptist.

Cheers,

Jim

 

Rom 3:22 Even the righteousness of God [which is] by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:

All who believe receive the righteousness of God upon them.


Rom 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.


Rom 10:3 For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.


2Cr 5:21 For he hath made him [to be] sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.



Our righteousness is in Christ, not ourselves.

I only posted a few scriptures. There are many, many more that state that our righteousness comes from Christ and Christ alone, and that by faith in His shed blood on our behalf, not by works.