What is the difference between eternal security, once saved always saved, and perseverance of the saints?

[praise_yeshua]

I just like to say what Jesus said: You will know them by their fruits. A good tree produces good fruit, a bad tree bad fruit.

No fruit of the spirit in ones life no roots in the tree/vine ( Jesus ). One should have the evidence of the new man, the new creation, the new birth, new life etc.....

Thats my take in a nutshell fwiw

Absolutely!

The issue to me is with who is beholding the fruit and where that fruit lives.

When David sinned... His sin hurt him and Israel. The "sword never left his house". His own son died a traitors death. Yet God saw how the heart of David was broken. Godly sorrow is fruit of the Spirit of God. David couldn't change what he had gotten himself into but God certainly doesn't require such in His relationship with His children. When God will not fix our mistakes and we can't even help ourselves, God still just keeps loving us.

 

[civic]

Absolutely!

The issue to me is with who is beholding the fruit and where that fruit lives.

When David sinned... His sin hurt him and Israel. The "sword never left his house". His own son died a traitors death. Yet God saw how the heart of David was broken. Godly sorrow is fruit of the Spirit of God. David couldn't change what he had gotten himself into but God certainly doesn't require such in His relationship with His children. When God will not fix our mistakes and we can't even help ourselves, God still just keeps loving us.

Yes as Paul said- godly sorrow produces repentance. We see in our modern day certain mainstream Pastors/Theologians who have no sorrow over their sin, have not repented when their sin was exposed. I can think of one prominent guy who was the dean at the Masters Seminary and was always one of the main speakers at the G3 conferences every year.

 

[Seabass]

Why can't they justify?

To be justified by the OT law of Moses, that law required the Jew to keep ALL of it perfectly sinless (Gal 5:3 do the WHOLE law).....which the Jew could not do.

--In Rom 1 Paul shows the Gentiles are sinners and Rom 2 he shows the Jews are sinners and concludes all (Jew & Gentitle) are under sin.

--People under sin are in need of justification.

----in Rom 3 Paul spends this first half of this chapter talking about that OT law which was given to the Jew. Though having that law was an advantage for the Jew over the Gentile, that law could not justifiy the Jew because of its requirement of sinless perfection, therefore it left the Jew as unjustified as the Gentile (Rom 3:9). Therefore the OT law is NOT how those under sin will find justification. Even the Hebrew writer points out in Heb 10:1-2 that if those OT sacrifices could justify then there would have been no need for them to cease. Yet they could not justifiy the Jew, it took the perfect sacrifice of a sinless man Jesus Christ which can justify one through faith and NT faith does NOT require perfect, flawless law keeping but a simple obedience to God's will.

----in Rom 3:21 Paul is saying but NOW there is a different way to find justification apart from perfect flawless law keeping and that way is by faith. Paul spends the rest of Rom 3 contrasting the difference between faith that can justify from the work of perfect flawless required by that OT law that cannot justifiy. Paul makes this contrast in Rom 8:1:
"There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus,"....NOW in the gospel dispensation there is no condemnation in Christ as opposed to back THEN under the OT where there was condemnation by the OT law for committing just one sin and that OT law showed no mercy.

 

[mailmandan]

I don't think the argument is hopeless at all. Although Paul leaves of "of the Law," it a few places, he uses it in more of them.

It's very clear in context that Paul is using works specifically concerning works of the Law in the context of salvation.

In Titus 3:5, we read that it is not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us.. and in 2 Timothy 1:9, we read that God saved us and called us with a holy calling not according to our works.. So once again, Paul is not merely limiting works only to specific works under the law and when it comes to the moral aspect of the law, one cannot dissect works of obedience/good works from the law. (Deuteronomy 6:5; Leviticus 19:18; Matthew 22:37-40; James 2:15-16)

 

[Seabass]

The problem you have is you're a legalist. As a "lawyer" of "Christianity", you can't see things for what they are. You always see faith solely in the context of your own efforts. It is you that began your faith and it is you that will complete your faith.

That is legalism. You live by your own standards. Vain traditions ruin any context of following God.

Php 1:6 Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ:

We are HIS WORKMANSHIP

Eph 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

Not our own. You're NOT a lawyer arguing against or for the acceptance of the servants of Jesus Christ. God's approval is what matters. Arminians have long rejected these facts. They all pretend they're better than what they actually are. God gives you mercy and longsuffering just like He does me. None of us are any less or greater than one another.




Most every translation mishandles ὑπακοή. Substitute "submission" instead of obedience and you'll understand that verse much better.

Sure. Christ submitted to suffering. You're dishonoring Christ with you false claims.





Noah got drunk. Remember that? What did God do when Noah disobeyed? It was the faith of Noah that sustained him when he sinned. The same is true of you. Nothing different.



You're living in defiance of God right now. Right now. One of these days you're going to realize you've been wrong for a very long time. Once you do, ask YOURSELF this question. Don't be a hypocrite.

Saints of God's sin are found throughout the Scriptures. It is why Paul wrote these words.....

Rom 4:2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.

You continue to throw around the word legalist for you have no valid argument here. Again, you make a legalist out of Christ and Noah because they obeyed.

The word 'legalist' is not even found in the BIble either in the original language or in the English. It is a word people define anyway they want to. If people do not agree with you, then have to call them a legalist using the term in a derogatory sense.


Yet if you ask me. legalism is a good thing, it's a great thing.

Are you a legalist P-Y?

Do you file your tax forms and pay your taxes to the IRS as the law requires? Then you're a legalist.
Do you follow the laws of the road and stop at red lights, have the required driver's license and auto insurance? Then you're a legalist.
If your employer says your work must meet certain specs else will fail inspection, therefore do you follow the instructions of your employer? Then you're a legalist.
Do you follow your doctors instructions, take certain amount of doses of medicines as prescribed? Then your a legalist.

Legalism in the world is a good thing, it's a great thing for it keeps from having social disorder and chaos, it keeps you out of jail, it lets you keep your job, it helps maintain your health following doctors orders. It is the ILLegalists that are the law breakers, the criminals, those who cause the problems.

Yet when it comes to the BIble and Christianity, the word 'obedience', which is a good, honest, clean word, is taken by some and dirtied up simply because it does not follow their man-made teachings.

Was Noah a legalists when he built the ark to God's specs? His obedience to God is why God saved him from destruction in the flood
Was Naaman a legalist when he obeyed God by dipping in the specified river the specified number of times? His obedience to God is why God cured his disease.
Were those in Acts 2 legalist when they repented and were baptized? There obedience to God is why God remitted their sins
Was Paul a legalist when he was baptized? His obedience to God is why God washed away his sins
Was Jesus a legalist Himself? Heb 5:8


Jesus would be the all time biggest promoter "legalism";
If you love Me, KEEP MY COMMANDMENTS, Jn 14:15
If you KEEP MY COMMANDMENTS, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commandments and abide in his love" Jn 15:10

And nowhere ever in the BIble is obedience called a work of merit or 'legalism" Lk 17:7-10

 

[Seabass]

Not true at all. Faith must be first and includes nothing more than belief in God. Everything begins with faith.

You're conflating and ignoring that God works with the smallest of faith.

Faith that does not include repentance cannot save for all the faith alone in the world can never save those who refuse to repent....repent or perish, Lk 13:3.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Faith that does not include repentance cannot save for all the faith alone in the world can never save those who refuse to repent....repent or perish, Lk 13:3.

Faith is not repentance. Faith is simply belief. You need to really dig into theology a little more before you start making claims like this.....

In Luke 13:3, Jesus was talking to people that already had faith in Messiah. Faith in the promises of God. They needed repentance.

Which is exactly what I needed when I was 17 years old. Faith took me to the moment that I was birthed into the family of God. Our entire lives post expression of "faith" leads us to God. Those that seek.... find. Faith begins our journey of seeking God.

So stop conflating. You must conflate to sell your beliefs.

 

[Seabass]

Faith is not repentance. Faith is simply belief. You need to really dig into theology a little more before you start making claims like this.....

In Luke 13:3, Jesus was talking to people that already had faith in Messiah. Faith in the promises of God. They needed repentance.

Which is exactly what I needed when I was 17 years old. Faith took me to the moment that I was birthed into the family of God. Our entire lives post expression of "faith" leads us to God. Those that seek.... find. Faith begins our journey of seeking God.

So stop conflating. You must conflate to sell your beliefs.

Faith MUST include repentance else it is a dead, worthless, useless faith alone that cannot save.

As hard as you may try, you will never get an impenitent person saved by belief alone.....never.

Lk 13:3 Jesus REQUIRED to repent or perish...simple to understand..no repentance = perish.

 

[Dizerner]

So once again, Paul is not merely limiting works only to specific works under the law and when it comes to the moral aspect of the law

Yes he is, your argument is invalid. You are taking the minority of places as the standard.

Please read James chapter 2.

 

[Dizerner]

NT faith does NOT require perfect, flawless law keeping but a simple obedience to God's will.

Isn't law keeping essentially God's will? Why would God give this law if it wasn't his will?

Are you saying that a certain percentage of law keeping must be kept now, just not 100%?

 

[Dizerner]

When a criminal keeps the law while he is being punished for his crime.....

Does that change the criminal?

If a tree falls in the forest, and no one is around...

Does it still make a sound?

 

[praise_yeshua]

If a tree falls in the forest, and no one is around...

Does it still make a sound?

I don't see the comparison here but it did make me chuckle.

Seriously... keeping commandments that are not our own is nothing more than faithless obedience to a superior power that we can not overcome. This is how lesser men see God. God is so much more than this. The power the mind is where the battle for the hearts of men take place.

 

[mailmandan]

Yes he is, your argument is invalid. You are taking the minority of places as the standard.

Please read James chapter 2.

No, he is not as I already showed you from Scripture. (Romans 4:2-6; 11:6; Ephesians 2:8,9; Titus 3:5; 2 Timothy 1:9) It's not about majority vs. minority but properly harmonizing Scripture with Scripture before reaching our conclusion on doctrine. If the apostle Paul wanted to teach that we are saved by works, then he would have clearly stated in Ephesians 2:8 that we are saved through faith and works and in Romans 5:1 he would have clearly stated that we are justified by faith and works, but that is not what Paul said.

I have read James 2 numerous times and James does not teach salvation by works. In James 2:14, we read of one who says/claims he has faith but has no works (to evidence his claim). That is not genuine faith, but a bare profession of faith. So, when James asks, "Can that faith save him?" he is saying nothing against genuine faith, but only against an empty profession of faith/dead faith. So, James does not teach that we are saved "by" works. His concern is to show the reality of the faith professed by the individual (James 2:18) and demonstrate that the faith claimed (James 2:14) by the individual is genuine. Simple! James 2 is a major stumbling block for those who promote works salvation.

Also, in James 2:24, James is not using the word "justified" here to mean "accounted as righteous" but is shown to be righteous. James is discussing the evidence of faith (says-claims to have faith but has no works/I will show you my faith by my works - James 2:14-18) and not the initial act of being accounted as righteous with God. (Romans 4:2-3) Works bear out the justification that already came by faith.

In James 2:15-16, the example of a "work" that James gives is: "If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, and one of you says to them, "Depart in peace, be warmed and filled," but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit?" To give a brother or sister these things needed for the body would certainly be a "work of obedience/good work" yet to neglect such a brother or sister and not give them the things needed for the body is to break the second great commandment "love your neighbor as yourself" (Matthew 22:39) as found written in the law of Moses. (Leviticus 19:18)

In Matthew 22:37-40, we read: Jesus said to him, 'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.' This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like it: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets. Now which good works could a Christian accomplish that are "completely detached" from these two great commandments which are found in the law of Moses? (Deuteronomy 6:5; Leviticus 19:18) So, like I said before, the saved by "these" works (works of obedience/good works) and just not "those" works (works of the law) argument is bogus.

 

[Dizerner]

It's not about majority vs. minority

So you just rip the term and phrase out from the majority of its context to fit your presupposed pet golden calf doctrine.

Yeah, not playing that.

 

[mailmandan]

So you just rip the term and phrase out from the majority of its context to fit your presupposed pet golden calf doctrine.

Yeah, not playing that.

Which term are you talking about?

 

[mailmandan]

Which term are you talking about?

 

[Dizerner]

Tick Tock?

I'm not going to engage with childish interlocutors, sorry.

If you can't comprehend what term I was talking about (the only term I was discussing this entire time), you cannot even understand simple sentences.

I'm wasting my time, so you go ahead and declare your little playground victory, while I spare myself some pain.

 

[mailmandan]

Tick Tock?

I'm not going to engage with childish interlocutors, sorry.

If you can't comprehend what term I was talking about (the only term I was discussing this entire time), you cannot even understand simple sentences.

I'm wasting my time, so you go ahead and declare your little playground victory, while I spare myself some pain.

Lighten up. There is no need for your condescending remarks or your sarcasm, and at least I have a sense of humor. You have been discussing works of the law with me. I have shown you from Scripture that the apostle Paul does not merely limit works only to specific works of the law but also includes works in general. Be sure to thoroughly read post #133.

I also showed you from Scripture in post #133 that the apostle Paul uses the term "justified" to refer to the legal (judicial) act of God by which He accounts the believer as righteous while James uses the term to describe those who would show or evidence the genuineness of their faith by their works. Did you carefully read through post #133?

 

[Seabass]

Isn't law keeping essentially God's will? Why would God give this law if it wasn't his will?

Are you saying that a certain percentage of law keeping must be kept now, just not 100%?

God does not require flawless law keeping to justifiy men as that OT law required.

Under the NT law, God requires men to have a faith obedience in doing his best to obey the NT and God gives the Christian a second avenue of pardon by repenting when the Christians do fail to keep the NT as he should.
Jesus said to STRIVE to enter the strait narrow gate that leads to life Lk 13:24; Mt 7:14. The way one strives to enter that strait gate is by striving to keep the NT as best as he can. The Greek word for strive looks and sounds like our English word agonize meaning following the NT is not to be taken lightly but is what one is to devote his life to and repent those times he fails to do so.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

The three different terms (eternal security, once saved always saved, and perseverance of the saints) are often used interchangeably.

The actual difference among them is right HERE:



Wanna see it again??