From: gjm11@cus.cam.ac.uk (G.J. McCaughan)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Subject: Re: Security of salvation?
Date: 10 Oct 92 16:36:49 GMT
Organization: U of Cambridge, England

In article <CHRISTIA%92100906595370@ASUACAD.BITNET> Tom Brewer <NOTTMB@LSUVM.BITNET> writes:
>
>The above seems to be "contradicting." How can "people who believe the
>Gospel, have faith, and so forth," become UNregenerate? Only those who
>have been regenerated by God (born again) can believe the Gospel, have
>faith, and so forth. Are you saying that eternal life is not eternal?
>That one can have eternal life for a temporal amount of time?

The truth of a mathematical proposition is eternal, in the sense that
the proposition never stops being true, and that its truth is not bound
up with our perception of time. I can understand such a proof, perhaps
even find it for myself, and then later cease to understand it, if I
give up mathematics for long enough, or if I suffer some kind of brain
damage. The truth is still eternal, but I no longer have it.
The situation here is of course not identical, but it's close enough
that your reasoning, if valid, would prove that I could never stop
understanding a piece of mathematics, because it is "eternal". Eternal
life is a gift, and that gift can be taken away or thrown away. I do
not claim to have proved this; it may be false; what I mean is that
the above statement seems to be clearly reasonable a priori, and that
nothing in the nature of eternity prevents us from losing our share in
it.)

>Who keeps the believer in the faith: the believer by his works or
>Jesus Christ by His grace?

Jesus Christ keeps us; just as God keeps the whole universe running from
second to second. This does not mean that we are completely ignored. The
Bible often says things whose most natural reading is that our actions can
indeed affect our salvation; this is not "salvation by works" -- we can't
ever deserve our salvation, we can't ever be so good that God is obliged
to save us -- and it's no more a denial of the omnipotence of God than is
the fact that we can affect our earthly lives by things we appear to be
doing ourselves. Perhaps all our freedom is an illusion; but at any rate
it seems like our freedom to choose or reject God is not as different from
our other apparent freedoms as you imagine.
I am not saying that we can come to God without his enabling grace. I believe
that that grace is open to all. Without it, no one could come to God; with it,
anyone can.

>If no one can remove the believer from the hand of Christ, whose hand is
>in the Father's hand, then the believer is secure. Unless of course the
>believer is stronger than God and can pry the Father's hand open and
>remove himself, even though Christ said no one can do this.

Christ did not say that; at least, not in the sense in which he would have
to have meant it for what you just said to be valid.
We can't forcibly remove ourselves from God's salvation. But if we tell God
we've had enough and don't want it any more, perhaps he will hear us and do
as we ask. It's not a matter of being stronger than God, it's a matter of
God not keeping those who would rather reject him.

>False religion wants a man to think his salvation depends upon his efforts.
>False religion wants a man to think his security depends upon his efforts.
>False religion wants a man to think his justification depends upon his efforts.
>False religion wants a man to think his sanctification depends upon his efforts

It's not much of an argument to take what someone else believes, parody it and
stick the words "false religion" in front of it. That's just abuse, and it won't
do any good.
I can't speak for the Catholics on this list; but it sounds like "fals
religion" includes everything except strict "5-point" Calvinism. If that's
the case, then I should point out that although I disagree with many of the
things you have said, your caricature does not fairly describe my beliefs.
I'll repeat: We cannot force God to save us, nor can we force him to damn us.
If we are saved, it is by his grace and not because our works merit salvation.
However, the Bible teaches that if we accept Jesus as our Lord and saviour,
and obey his commands, we will be saved; and that if we completely reject God,
we will not be. Intermediate cases are less clear; there are indications in
both directions. Our salvation, security and so on are in God's hands, but
he seems to give us some say in the matter. I don't see anything obviously
"false" in that.

>Jesus Christ has restored the believer to communion with the Father.
>Jesus Christ has reconciled the believer to a right relationship and status of
>favor with God.
>Jesus Christ has redeemed the believer from the curse and bondage of the law
>and human efforts to work one's way to Heaven.

Amen! I couldn't agree more.

>"The greatest and most ancient Church known to God's people, founded and
> organized by the Father, Son and Holy Spirit at Jerusalem and spread to the
> hearts of believers everywhere, that Church which has the Word of God and
> faith which comes down to the elect after having been announced to men by
> the Prophets and Apostles. For with this Church, because of her divine
> origin, all men must agree ... and it is in her that the elect everywhere
> have maintained the Gospel of Jesus Christ."
>    ---St. Thomas, Against Catholicism, c. 1992 A.D.

Are you repeating this after all your posts for a constructive reason, or
just to annoy the Catholics? If the latter, I don't think that's a very
good way for a Christian to behave.

-- 
Gareth McCaughan     Dept. of Pure Mathematics & Mathematical Statistics,
gjm11@cus.cam.ac.uk  Cambridge University, England.    [Research student]