Is it odd how many Christians post that eternal security with Jesus isn't true?

[Blondepudding]

Well, I was raised in Catholicism, in which you're doomed to Hell if you have any mortal sins that you're not sorry for, so it doesn't seem strange to me that they don't think they've got a spot reserved up there...

Is that what limbo is about? Shucking off the sins that you're not sorry for as a Catholic?

It's actually very reassuring to me when a theist doesn't think they have a free pass to say/do whatever they want just because they're a "believer."

I wouldn't think that would be the right attitude for them to have. Christ like and all.

 

[Blondepudding]

salvation is (necessary) here and now, because there is an inevitable circle of life and existence - a natural, universal mechanism that transposes the souls periodically as to the(ir) eternal positions/personalities, because (the) eternity is both periodic and endless, for there was ever an end of life followed by a next beginning, so (the) eternity is like a perpetually revolving wheel that makes full revolutions endlessly rotating at a constant speed, and God is the controller of that process - the One Who sets it for the good of the souls so that they may have as good lives as possible for the longest possible time, because there is also "darkness" in the universe, which is the wicked "god" that also wants to reign over the souls and (to) rule the universe, and if God could uphold life in heaven/paradise for all the time's infinity so that it may never stop, then all souls that had to be born in this world and turned out to be under sin and impact of death would instead remain in heaven/paradise, but here is how so many of them have turned out to be down for the last about 5-6 millennia, and the true God is not guilty of that, because the cause of the end was not Him, for He also had (against His will) to go through an end, or as He Himself says: "I am the beginning and the end", i.e. the first one that arose in the beginning and the last one that will have to undergo a transition in the end, and ever after the end there is a next beginning when He again arises - the transition He undergoes, which happens (against His will) in the time between the end and the next beginning of (the) eternity, because He also has a lifespan, though there is no complete death for Him, so this means there is an end of eternal life in heaven/paradise, though one single (cycle of) eternity may turn out to be of thousands or even millions of calendar years, but this doesn't mean certain souls won't continue to live their eternal lives in heaven/paradise as from the beginning of the next (cycle of) eternity, which is possible for them (to have it) mostly in the form of Holy Angels of God, but the process of eternal shift in souls' position as to the(ir) eternal personalities little by little(eternity by eternity) makes some of those who won the eternal reward lose their eternal lives in the course of time, because they turn out to be in decline at some point of the eternal circle of life and existence

that is why there's a need that we work for overall salvation in the true God, the Heavenly Father, and His Son, Jesus Christ, otherwise, the more souls remain unsaved and suffer, the more we will be hurt in future eternities, because (the) eternity is like one movie that repeats for ever and ever, for all events of (the) eternity that already occurred remain the same for the next/future eternities and will repeat in exactly the same way and order like the scenes of one movie in its repeats, only the souls will alternate the(ir) (eternal) positions/personalities...

Blessings

Thank you.

 

[Cearbhall]

I wouldn't think that would be the right attitude for them to have. Christ like and all.

The belief is enough for some people. No attitude required. An analogy...when you believe you have a million dollar inheritance coming your way, there isn't as much incentive to go out of your way to be kind to your blue-collar coworkers and managers. Sure, you might feel bad if you're not, but it's not like you have anything at stake in the long run.

 

[FreeinChrist]

MOD HAT

This thread is closed. Threads that are discussion topics that are apologetics based need to be in Christian Apologetics. ​

 

[ViaCrucis]

I browse the forums where non-Christians aren't allowed to post. And I found quite a few threads making claims about eternal security in Jesus, or eternal salvation in him, isn't true?

Does anyone else find it odd that Christians would argue that is so? And how do they do that when they're saying that about themselves first?

I would think a Christian forum believes itself to at all times present the image of God and Christ to anyone who reads its pages. A ministry of sorts that is there to inform those who are not Christian about that faith should they happen on the site.

What impression does it give when Christians believe they are to preach the gospel so that all may be saved from their sins, and then post threads that tell people that should they accept Christ and be redeemed they're actually not secure in that salvation like they thought?

What do you mean by "eternal security"?

Are you referring to the Calvinist doctrine of Perseverance of the Saints? What is informally called "Once Saved Always Saved"? Or something else?

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Hikarifuru]

Whether or not a Christian can lose their salvation is a classic and much debate controversy between different denominations. It's pretty clear to me that Christians can and do go back to not being saved, according to the bible.

 

[Blondepudding]

What do you mean by "eternal security"?

Are you referring to the Calvinist doctrine of Perseverance of the Saints? What is informally called "Once Saved Always Saved"? Or something else?

-CryptoLutheran

I guess whatever someone believes is defined as they are eternally secure when a Christian?

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

... if you want something really mind blowing, some scholars believe the book of Daniel should be chopped from the Bible...

Meh, not mind-blowing at all; the original was a vetted selection of a larger number of books. I'm surprised they haven't chucked out more.

If you don't mind me asking, you were once a Catholic but somewhere down the line you stopped believing. Do you mind telling me how?

I was brought up Catholic, but I don't recall ever being a believer - I didn't experience anything to engender belief. I dutifully followed the practices, I had no recognisable communications from God, and by the time I could think for myself, it appeared to be little more than just another a social institution based on self-delusion and wishful thinking. In other words, the indoctrination didn't 'take'. Some of my friends became believers and some didn't. I've been curious ever since about the mental processes and psychology underlying magical thinking (e.g. superstition) and irrational belief systems. Why do some believe and some not?

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Why do some believe and some not?

You may be surprised, maybe not, at how many people found out what you found out.
Some of them never became believers, some did.
Why ?
God says that even FAITH (FAITH in HIM) (in JESUS) is a GIFT - sheer gift.
If you want or desire a gift,
if you want to know the truth,
be thankful you were delivered from all that you were delivered from,
and
turn to heaven (look up in the sky if you like)
and ASK THE GIVER OF LIFE
,
IF HE IS REAL (yes, really - tell Him "IF YOU ARE REAL" )
would HE GRANT you the gift of FAITH in HIM ?

Who knows.
He just might do that.

IF you would like a guarantee from Him, from His Word,
just pm me and IF He permits me to I'll show where it is in His Word.

Realize though - IF you take God up on HIS OFFER, and then ever turn back,

you will be many times worse off than if you never believed in Him at all.

Still, at this point (not having eternal life),

what God has to offer (eternal life)

looks and is pretty good. Just don't think you can play Him or double back or just try it for a while.

Eternal Life is forever, and those who turn back , those who don't endure to the end,

it would perhaps be better for them if they had never been born.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

You may be surprised, maybe not, at how many people found out what you found out.
Some of them never became believers, some did.
Why ?
God says that even FAITH (FAITH in HIM) (in JESUS) is a GIFT - sheer gift.
<word salad snipped>

Whatever; I'm interested in the psychological and neurological reasons for magical, paranormal, and supernatural beliefs. Christianity happens to be particularly accessible and has some personal relevance, but it's just one of many such belief systems.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I guess whatever someone believes is defined as they are eternally secure when a Christian?

Well if what you were confused about was seeing Christians not accept the distinctively Calvinist teaching of "Perseverance of the Saints" i.e. "Once Saved Always Saved", then it'd be a pretty easy explanation: Most Christians aren't Calvinists and don't subscribe to the five points of TULIP.

If that isn't the position you are inquiring about, then more information would be necessary in order to provide an adequate answer. Without knowing what you're talking about when you ask the question makes answering the question pretty difficult.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

Meh, not mind-blowing at all; the original was a vetted selection of a larger number of books. I'm surprised they haven't chucked out more.

That's at best an oversimplification of the ongoing debates over the Antilegomena, at worst just a wrong statement. Debate and discussion largely centered around the Antilegomena, the disputed writings, a rather small handful of texts which included the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Epistle of Jude, the Epistle of James, the Apocalypse of St. John, as well as the Epistle of Clement, the Epistle of Barnabas, the Shepherd of Hermas, among a couple others.

There's basically two equally wrong views that are prevalent in modern times about how the Bible came to be: one says that the Bible pretty much has existed in its current form since the beginning, and another that says the Bible was basically put together by someone (Constantine is the usual name mentioned) or group of someones (the Council of Nicea often is credited). As noted, both views are equally wrong. The Canon of Christian Scripture, in the strictest sense, has never been fixed. The closest to an officially fixed Canon that we can find, historically, comes from the 16th and 17th centuries, the Council of Trent on the Roman Catholic side, and various Protestant confessional statements on the Protestant side.

Prior to the 16th century there simply never existed anything resembling an official, fixed Canon--the Canon had always been in some kind of flux, though not to the degree which some who espouse "lost books of the Bible" like to imagine; basically certain regions of the Christian world had slightly different opinions about this or that, for example the Eastern Churches didn't come to fully accept the Apocalypse of John until the 7th century through the influence of St. John of Damascus. When John Wycliffe translated the Bible from Latin to English in the 14th century it included a book known as the Epistle of St. Paul to the Laodiceans, a short text which had been considered spurious since the late 2nd century but for some reason was found in at least some copies of the medieval Vulgate--and thus in Wycliffe's Bible. The Armenian Bible, if I recall correctly, contained a book known as 3rd Corinthians until the high middle ages, another old Pauline forgery. And then there's the Ethiopian Canon, which is probably the most peculiar of all biblical canons from the historic, traditional churches; containing books like Enoch and Jubilees, as well as distinctly Ethiopian texts which bear similarity to some kinds of ancient Christian literature but which exist solely within the Ethiopian Tawahedo tradition.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Job8]

What impression does it give when Christians believe they are to preach the gospel so that all may be saved from their sins, and then post threads that tell people that should they accept Christ and be redeemed they're actually not secure in that salvation like they thought?

Yes, you have a very good point. Why would any non-Christian believe the Gospel if salvation is not secure in Christ? The enemy of the Gospel and Christ has managed to brainwash a large number of Christians into thinking there is no such thing as eternal security. It all boils down to a shallow understanding of Christ and His finished work for our redemption (and that applies to many preachers as well).

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Yes, you have a very good point. Why would any non-Christian believe the Gospel if salvation is not secure in Christ? The enemy of the Gospel and Christ has managed to brainwash a large number of Christians into thinking there is no such thing as eternal security. It all boils down to a shallow understanding of Christ and His finished work for our redemption (and that applies to many preachers as well).

The ekklesia in the NT, Apostles, disciples,
some if not all were certain that they had not just ETERNAL LIFE in JESUS,
but also they LIVED IN UNION in JESUS, as ONE,
as it is written,
and still realized that if they did not endure to the end, by their own choice, they could be cast into the lake of fire, and warned each other (daily?) - not to be deceived by sin or by the devil.

Like joining the military, for a 'human' example - once signed up for four years,
that four years is almost unbreakably "guaranteed" ..... "secure" .....

but what happens
if they commit a courtmartial offense and also go awol ?

They lose or are liable to lose any and all benefits from being in the military,
and receive instead certain judgment,
exactly as written in the laws.

LIkewise God's Word covers all such occurrences concerning security for eternity and who it is for
and who loses it. Since it is written, and cannot be changed,
picking only the "secure benefits" sections
and ignoring the "endure to the end" sections
doesn't work.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Is that what limbo is about? Shucking off the sins that you're not sorry for as a Catholic?

Limbo is a speculative concept in Roman Catholicism--it has never been accepted as doctrine or dogma, but is entirely speculative as the deprivation of the beatific vision (the full experience and joy of God in "Heaven") and thus technically part of "Hell", but lacking punishment. One neither experiences the punishments associated with "Hell", but are nevertheless deprived of the joyous experience of the beatific vision of God. It is largely associated with medieval thinkers, beginning with Augustine, as an explanation for what happens to unbaptized infants--who lacking baptism therefore don't share in the beatific vision (in their opinion) but are not guilty of personal sins and thus do not receive any punishment. It's not official teaching in the Catholic Church, and only exists as speculation.

What you're thinking of is Purgatory, which is in Catholic teaching basically Heaven's waiting room. Purgatory is the place or state of existence where the temporal consequences of venial sins are purged and the soul is made read to experience the beatific vision of God.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Blondepudding]

Limbo is a speculative concept in Roman Catholicism--it has never been accepted as doctrine or dogma, but is entirely speculative as the deprivation of the beatific vision (the full experience and joy of God in "Heaven") and thus technically part of "Hell", but lacking punishment. One neither experiences the punishments associated with "Hell", but are nevertheless deprived of the joyous experience of the beatific vision of God. It is largely associated with medieval thinkers, beginning with Augustine, as an explanation for what happens to unbaptized infants--who lacking baptism therefore don't share in the beatific vision (in their opinion) but are not guilty of personal sins and thus do not receive any punishment. It's not official teaching in the Catholic Church, and only exists as speculation.

What you're thinking of is Purgatory, which is in Catholic teaching basically Heaven's waiting room. Purgatory is the place or state of existence where the temporal consequences of venial sins are purged and the soul is made read to experience the beatific vision of God.

-CryptoLutheran

Thank you for those details. And for indulging my curiosity. I know nothing of the teachings of your church.
Where do babies come from? Not the physical birth part but their spirits. Wouldn't they be pure when they're born? Being they just got here?

Purgatory. I do know that confession is part of Catholicism. Why doesn't the Catholic confess those venial sins and just avoid purgatory all together? Can they do that? Are there rules that would preclude confession of venial sins? If someone did do that every confession on whatever schedule is prescribed would that let them go straight to heaven?
Doesn't carrying sins like venial one's after passing away say that Jesus didn't die for all sins on the cross?
How is a Catholic saved by his death from their sins if they carry one's that have to be atoned for after death?

I appreciate your helping my understanding here. It is a curious thing.

 

[Dave-W]

I browse the forums where non-Christians aren't allowed to post. And I found quite a few threads making claims about eternal security in Jesus, or eternal salvation in him, isn't true?

Does anyone else find it odd that Christians would argue that is so? And how do they do that when they're saying that about themselves first?

I would think a Christian forum believes itself to at all times present the image of God and Christ to anyone who reads its pages. A ministry of sorts that is there to inform those who are not Christian about that faith should they happen on the site.

What impression does it give when Christians believe they are to preach the gospel so that all may be saved from their sins, and then post threads that tell people that should they accept Christ and be redeemed they're actually not secure in that salvation like they thought?

Wesleyan Arminianism is one of the largest segments of Protestantism. I suggest you study that theology and it should become abundantly clear how and why we say that.

 

[DeepWater]

Eternal security is the domain of a born again person.
Think of it like this.......there is a difference between existing forever and "eternal Life", as existing forever is the situation that faces all, as all are going to live forever, as only the body dies., but the real you, does not.
So, it all comes down to where you will exist, after you die.
THAT is the reason for the Cross and the Savior on it.
He is being offered so that your forever existence can be with the Father and the heavenly host.
So, to become a part of THAT, you have to change from merely living forever, to "Eternal Life".
See, Eternal Life is a separate eternal existence then just existing forever.
"Eternal Life" is a Person.....and that Person is Jesus The Christ, who IS Eternal Life.. So, when we have HIM, when we are a part of HIM.. (In Christ)....then we have Eternal Life.

1 John 5:

11 And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.

12 He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.

13 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

And I found quite a few threads making claims about eternal security in Jesus, or eternal salvation in him, isn't true?

Does anyone else find it odd that Christians would argue that is so? And how do they do that when they're saying that about themselves first?

I would think a Christian forum believes itself to at all times present the image of God and Christ to anyone who reads its pages.

Think of it this way, as it is written in the book of Revelation.
The whole world is doomed.
That's a given. It doesn't change. From Genesis to Revelation, that remains the same.
From the Garden of Eden,
until Jesus Returns, that doesn't change.
When Jesus Returns, He destroys the enemy armies (million plus? however many).
He doesn't save them.
When Jesus Returns, He requires obedience.
Later, after Jesus Returns, there is Judgment Day.
No mercy on that day for anyone who died apart from Jesus.
Only shame and humiliation and destruction. That doesn't change either. It is unchangeable.
Here's the clincher - shame and humiliation and destruction is not only for those who said that they willfully rejected Jesus. No. Not only for them. (surprised?)
That's why the book of Revelation is so important. Read it.

A multitude of people who are saying they have eternal security today,
when they see Jesus on Judgment Day,
are told something they don't want to hear. It is part of / it is in/ the Gospel.

What they thought "eternal", wasn't. (and isn't).

They believed something that wasn't true, and find out on Judgment Day.
Too bad.
Very bad.

Meanwhile, Jesus IS eternal. No change there. No problem for anyone WITH JESUS.
No one else besides Jesus has the words of eternal life.
Only Jesus.

Just some people say one thing, and Jesus says something else.

Jesus wins. Jesus is right.

People who are not with Jesus , well..... they cannot save themselves at all, eternal or even temporary.

That's why it is always best to believe Jesus, cling to Jesus' word, and trust Him.

HE is trustworthy, faithful and true.

Men fail.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Thank you for those details. And for indulging my curiosity. I know nothing of the teachings of your church

Just for the sake of clarity, I'm a Lutheran not a Roman Catholic. But I've tried to make it a point to understand different Christian traditions.

Where do babies come from? Not the physical birth part but their spirits. Wouldn't they be pure when they're born? Being they just got here?

That's a concept known as ensoulment, the historic Christian position is known as Creationism--which before being used to describe a belief in a young earth and a rejection of evolution in the modern period used to refer to the belief that the soul is created directly by God. When, precisely, ensoulment happened was debated in the ancient period.

Purgatory. I do know that confession is part of Catholicism. Why doesn't the Catholic confess those venial sins and just avoid purgatory all together? Can they do that? Are there rules that would preclude confession of venial sins? If someone did do that every confession on whatever schedule is prescribed would that let them go straight to heaven?

If one has confessed their sins, and done penance so that none of the temporal consequences of those sins remain, then sure they would go directly to Heaven; but chances are that between one's last confession and an unexpected death probably something happened. Purgatory isn't a bad thing in Catholicism, it exists for as a good to purify away whatever impurities remain in order that one can enjoy, fully, God's presence. Purgatory isn't a kind of "Hell-light" in Catholic thought.

Doesn't carrying sins like venial one's after passing away say that Jesus didn't die for all sins on the cross?

It is only because Jesus died for all sins that one can go and confess their sins and go to Purgatory (and then to Heaven) rather than condemned by their sins in Hell.

How is a Catholic saved by his death from their sins if they carry one's that have to be atoned for after death?

The Catholic doesn't atone for his or her own sins ever. Purgatory isn't about atoning for one's sins, it's about being made ready to enter the beatific vision of Heaven. Atonement was made by Christ; Purgatory deals with the temporal consequences of sins. The concept of temporal and eternal consequences is important here. An example of a temporal consequence is if I steal something from a store, I have broken the law and the consequences are that I return the stolen item, apologize for my actions, seek to make amends, and face whatever the civil courts of law say--so a fine, time in jail, prison, etc. If one dies with the temporal consequences of sin still on their soul, then it is necessary for that to be addessed in Purgatory, which is the point of Purgatory.

I appreciate your helping my understanding here. It is a curious thing.

Not a problem, and hopefully if I've misspoke on something, they'll correct me. Because, again, I'm not Roman Catholic so Purgatory, venial sin, etc aren't part of my belief system as a Lutheran; I'm going purely by what I've learned from speaking with Roman Catholics, reading Roman Catholic sources and theologians, etc.

-CryptoLutheran