Eternal Security a damnable heresy?

[Reformingstudent]

I know a lot of people who think they are secure in their practical un-belief who have no real love for Christ or His Word but think they are saved because they said a prayer 30
years ago and are now, in their mind, eternally saved.
How can a person who has never shown any love for Christ
or His Kingdom believe that they are secure? Doesn't the Holy Spirit convict them of their sins and unbelief? I do believe that a True child of God can never be lost again but only because a True believer perseveres of WCOF 17:1 They, whom God hath accepted in His Beloved, effectually called, and sanctified by His Spirit, can neither totally, nor finally, fall away from the state of grace: but shall certainly persevere therein to the end, and be eternally saved (Joh_10:28, Joh_10:29; Phi_1:6; 1Pe_1:5, 1Pe_1:9; 2Pe_1:10; 1Jo_3:9).

What exactly is the difference between so called Eternal Security and the Perseverance of the Saints and how do you explain it to those who think they are secure in their sin? Does the meaning depend upon the way it is used and who uses it rather than the idea that it represents?
Thanks.

[Edited on 6-23-2005 by Reformingstudent]

 

[satz]

I think Eternal security is completely biblical.

The issue is who exactly is eternally secure?

And the quality and quantity of evidence required to attribute that eternal security to yourself.

 

[Puritanhead]

ETERNAL SECURITY = PERSERVERANCE

 

[Reformingstudent]

Quote

Though Christians be not kept altogether from falling, yet they are kept from falling altogether.
"”William Secker

 

[Puritan Sailor]

Matt. 7

21"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' 23Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'
24"Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock. 25The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock. 26But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. 27The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash."

[Edited on 6-23-2005 by puritansailor]

 

[C. Matthew McMahon]

I would disagree, theologically.
Those who tout "Eternal Security" are the one who tell you that after you have made a profession, and write your name down on the card you'll carry in your wallet that say you have been born again, should never doubt your salvation. That, in their estimation, is being eternally secure. Its nonsense, and the term has been abused because of it.

It would be better to say "Perseverance of the saints / Preservation of the saint." We are justified by faith alone, but not by a faith that is alone (first part, i.e. you have to bear fruit). Then, election is the unchangeable purpose of God, whereby, before the foundation of the world, He has out of mere grace, according to the sovereign good pleasure of His own will, chosen from the whole human race, which had fallen through their own fault from their primitive state of rectitude into sin and destruction, a certain number of persons to redemption in Christ, whom He from eternity appointed the Mediator and Head of the elect and the foundation of salvation (second part, or preservation).

 

[Puritanhead]

Originally posted by webmaster
I would disagree, theologically.
Those who tout "Eternal Security" are the one who tell you that after you have made a profession, and write your name down on the card you'll carry in your wallet that say you have been born again, should never doubt your salvation. That, in their estimation, is being eternally secure. Its nonsense, and the term has been abused because of it...

That would be because they load their connotation of "eternal security" with Arminian and easy-believism inferences. I don't think Calvinists should feel compulsion to reject phraseology "eternal security" out-and-out... It might be prudent to qualify whatever statements we make by expounding upon doctrine. No one does expounding better than Calvinists. We are not obligated to articulate the doctrine like Charles Stanley or Jerry Falwell. Obviously, their doctrine of "eternal security" is not tantamount to "perseverance of the saints" properly understood.



[Edited on 6-23-2005 by Puritanhead]

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

Eternal Security would not be so bad if it wasn't for the Carnal Christian teaching that comes out of the Keswick movement and many Baptist Dispensational teaching churches. Assurance of salvation is not a bad understanding of certain scriptures such as 1John 5:13.

I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life.

But if we are not walking with God we need to examine ourselves to see if we are in the faith as 2Co 13:5 tells us.

Examine yourselves, to see whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Or do you not realize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?--unless indeed you fail to meet the test!

Here is a good little booklet on the subject.
Read it here.
What should we think of the Carnal Christian? by Earnest Reisinger
Buy it here.
What should we think of the Carnal Christian?

[Edited on 6-27-2005 by puritancovenanter]

 

[WrittenFromUtopia]

We're not eternally secure - no matter what. God makes His elect persevere.

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia
We're not eternally secure - no matter what. God makes His elect persevere.

Dispite your understanding, that would make one secure. Especially if the covenant of redemption has secured it. He is our surety.

 

[Me Died Blue]

If we are sure to clarify that we are referring to a true conversion of saving faith rather than the name-writing of Easy-Believism, and to clarify that our perseverance is rooted solely in God's preservation, then Perseverance of the Saints = Eternal Security + Lordship Salvation.

 

[RamistThomist]

What I find ironic is Norman Geisler defending the Dispensational understanding of Eternal Security in the book, Eternal Security: Four Views. Mike Horton (Reformed) and the three other Arminians refuted him!

[Edited on 6--27-05 by Draught Horse]

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

Jacob,

What is ironic about that? Dispensational eternal security goes along with the doctrine of the Carnal Christian. Their view of grace is messed up also. I would refute it also. Didn't you read what I wrote before.

Originally posted by puritancovenanter
Eternal Security would not be so bad if it wasn't for the Carnal Christian teaching that comes out of the Keswick movement and many Baptist Dispensational teaching churches. Assurance of salvation is not a bad understanding of certain scriptures such as 1John 5:13.

I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life.

But if we are not walking with God we need to examine ourselves to see if we are in the faith as 2Co 13:5 tells us.

Examine yourselves, to see whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Or do you not realize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?--unless indeed you fail to meet the test!

Here is a good little booklet on the subject.
Read it here.
What should we think of the Carnal Christian? by Earnest Reisinger
Buy it here.
What should we think of the Carnal Christian?

[Edited on 6-27-2005 by puritancovenanter]

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

Originally posted by Me Died Blue
If we are sure to clarify that we are referring to a true conversion of saving faith rather than the name-writing of Easy-Believism, and to clarify that our perseverance is rooted solely in God's preservation, then Perseverance of the Saints = Eternal Security + Lordship Salvation.

You got it Chris! It is up to the shepherd to get the sheep into the fold. He bought them. He will get them home. At the same time the sheep need to follow the shepherd.

[Edited on 6-27-2005 by puritancovenanter]