The Mysteries of the Kingdom
“The Doctrine of Christ or the Key for eternal Life”
Matthew
He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. “It is given to them who have ears to hear “
Mark 4:2 (KJV)
And he taught them many things by parables, and said unto them in his doctrine,
The Mysteries to the Kingdom are found in This Parable which is Jesus doctrine on Eternal Security
Matthew
But he that received seed into the good ground is he that heareth the word, and understandeth it; which also beareth fruit, and bringeth forth, some an hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty.
“Only The seed that fell on Good ground will inherit eternal Life so we must have Good Ground and bear fruit .”
· First - We must Hear the word of God
Even Gods Creation is enough it is his spoken Word.
· Second - We must Understand it. The only way we get an understanding of it is if the Father reveals it to us and he will to everyone that seeks the understanding from their heart.
Mark
And these are they which are sown on good ground; such as hear the word, and receive it, and bring forth fruit, some thirtyfold, some sixty, and some an hundred.
Same Parable but God adds one important part
· Third - We must receive . This is the Born again experience
Luke
But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart, having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience.
Fourth - So we must Keep it for eternal Life. They are hundreds more scriptures that tell us we have to live by Gods word to inherit Eternal life .Put the whole bible together We have to be spotless without sin .
God Bless
The Bible is full of promises, exhortations, and warnings. Promises emphasize God's work towards us, while exhortations and warnings are our responsibility towards God. The following word study is intended to stress the obligation of mankind in the salvation process. To limit this study to a reasonable scope, I will be dealing exclusively with God's exhortations and warnings from the New Testament.
HOLD defined: 1 a: to have possession or ownership of at one's disposal b : to have as a privilege or position of responsibility; 2 a: to have or maintain in the grasp b : to support or keep from falling or moving; 3 a: to prevent from leaving or getting away. Vi 1 a: to maintain position: refuse to give ground b : to continue in the same way or to the same degree.
For the sake of brevity I will limit the discussion to the preceding definitions.
"1 Timothy 6:12 Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses".
What is the meaning here of "lay hold on eternal life?" This epistle is written to believers as the verse in question and the surrounding context will prove. So, the eternal life of these individuals is not a possession that has not yet been in their grasp, but that which must be maintained or prevented from getting away.
Some have translated this phrase "lay hold" as "hold tightly to" (Living Bible), "keep your grip on" (Phillips), "take hold of "(
The interpretation of the "keeping" that Timothy is to ensure is a divided issue. Some say that this is an exhortation for Timothy himself to stay in the faith, and some say that it is a charge to Timothy to ensure that his flock is kept through the dangers of vain disputes or trust in riches. Either way, the facts remain the same concerning this "holding on". His hearers, including himself, must continue in the faith to lay hold on the promise of eternal life.
"But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end" Hebrews 3:6. The meaning of this passage is clear and unambiguous. If we do not hold fast to the end, there is no promise of eternal life.
" Hebrews 3:14 For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence steadfast unto the end". Holding on through to the end is our responsibility and not God's. Our being made partakers with Christ is conditioned upon our continuance in an obedient faith and trust in the atoning sacrifice of Christ.
" Hebrews 4:14 Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.".
The warnings in Hebrews were written to encourage Christians to stay faithful under intense persecution. They were in imminent danger of apostasy from the faith. If a believer has nothing else to do about his salvation once it has been given to him, why then, does the writer of Hebrews continually stress holding on if there is no danger of letting go ?
OTHER AREAS OF CHRISTIAN RESPONSIBILITY "IF "
The word "if" means "on the condition that," "allowing that," or "in the event that." I will allow the reader to research this word on their own. "If" is a small word, but if it is removed as a condition, we no longer have a Bible.
Gen. 4:3-7; Lev. 26:3-28; Lev. 26:40-42; Deut. 11:26-28; 30:17; Josh. 24:20; 1 Sam. 7:3; 12:14, 15; 1 Chron. 28:6-9; 1 Kings 11:11-13; Jer. 7:5-7; Matt. 6:14; 16:24-26; Jn. 8:31-51; 15: 6, 7, 10; Rom. 8:13, 14; 11:19-24; Col. 1:21-23; Heb. 2:1-3; 3:6,14; 6:4-8; 10: 26-31; 10:38, 39; 12: 7, 8; James 1:22-27; 2:8, 9; 2 Pet. 1:4-10; 1 Jn. 1:9; 2:3; 2:24; 3:7, 8.
If you do not complete the condition, you cannot enjoy the promise.
"ABIDE, CONTINUE, ENDURE"
More conditions! I was told that my security and salvation were unconditional! My friend, God cannot remain, abide, continue, or endure for us anymore than he can repent and believe for us! Proof that we have a conditional salvation will be shown by a study of verses containing these words.
ABIDE defined. To remain, continue, stay, or to be steadfast. As you read the following passages, ask yourself if God really does require us to remain faithful to be able to receive eternal life! Jn. 15:1-11; Rom. 11:23; 1 Cor. 7:24; 1 Jn. 2:6; 2:10; 2:24, 27, 28; 3:6; 3:14; 3:24; 2 Jn. 1:9.
CONTINUE defined. Abide, remain, stay, or be steadfast. As you read these passages you will see that there are no blessings to those who do not continue. Jn. 8:31; 15:9; Acts. 13:43; 14:22 (why exhort them if this were not possible?), Rom. 2:7; 6:1; Gal. 2:5; 3:10; Col. 1:23; 1 Tim. 2:15; 4:16; 2 Tim. 3:14; 1 Jn. 2:24.
ENDURE defined. Remain, continue, or be steadfast. Matt.
The point of this whole exercise is to show that an UES- unconditional Eternal security or once saved always saved is just a myth. Theological trickery may explain away these truths, but to those who desire to gain the prize of eternal life, no substitute for the word of God will do.
UES- “One walking in darkness has never actually accepted the salvation offered by Christ.” "This is in reference to 1 Jn. 1:7, "But IF we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin." I presented this verse in my reply to the original e-mail stating: "IF" we walk in the light....we have fellowship. And if we have "fellowship," the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sin. If we walk in darkness, we cannot have fellowship; and if we do not have fellowship, we are not cleansed from all unrighteousness."
EVG-TV- Answer: This is not so, and cannot be so. It is utter nonsense to believe that position because it would make the Scriptures to be full of utter nonsense. If Christians are exhorted to “walk in the light,” it makes no sense to exhort them to do it when they cannot do anything but walk in the light! Jude 21, exhorts believers to “keep yourselves in the love of God,” while many people say that a Christian cannot do otherwise. If we cannot do otherwise, then why does God waste His time informing us of the impossible? All the exhortations in the Bible become useless if we have nothing to "do," and they are the inevitable result of all who are in Christ. The word “IF” is a small word, but if we remove it from the Scriptures, we no longer have a Bible.
UES- “ “This is in line with the sometimes popular phrase "try Christ". There is no trial period where one can get one's "money" back if one wishes. Either there is complete repentance and salvation or there is very dangerous "playing at religion".
EVG-TV- Answer: I agree wholeheartedly with your statement. The fact that there are many unsaved people that claim to be Christians does not prove that there are not any genuine Christians that have fallen from grace.
UES- "Or is that secure?" Yes, I must confess that my statement was somewhat sarcastic because I was thinking that it is an irony if one is opposed to the doctrine of eternal security but secure in the doctrine of "saved today, lost tomorrow". That doctrine has no basis in scripture and is, indeed, contrary to the whole idea of crucifying Christ over and over again. He died ONCE, for all. However, I do apologize because a part of my thinking was sarcastic.”
EVG-TV Answer: No apology is needed, I just wanted to clarify what you said. The sarcasm was to make a point, and at times it is a strong exclamation made at the end of an argument. The comment “saved today, lost tomorrow,” and some add, “and everywhere in between,” is a common cliché, but does not represent what most people believe that do not accept the theory of Eternal Security. I know of no one, besides the Roman Catholic Church that contends for the idea of re-crucifying Christ “over and over.”
But the fact of the matter is that every time we sin we crucify him and when we deny that we must obey him and sin without repentance we trample on him as well.
This is the same straw-man argument that Charles Stanley uses to fight against an opponent that is easy to knock down, but does not really exist.
If you like wrestling with scarecrows, go ahead, but you are not fighting against a real cause. By your comments here, it has become evident that you are “reacting” to the purpose of this site, and not “responding” to anything that I have said. By this, I see that you raise arguments that have been answered with sufficient proof in my critique of Mr. Stanley’s book. I believe that it is an appropriate courtesy to actually read and consider someone’s position before rushing to judgment in rejecting it. You say that you have “sought for truth and, as a result, embrace the fact that my eternal destiny is secure in Christ,” but is it seeking for truth when you will not examine the objections to your position? Please read the response I made to Charles Stanley and consider what has been said. If you walk away being assured of your Eternal Security, you have done your duty to God. If you find that something I said is not the weight of the whole Bible concerning the issue, I welcome hearing the reason why, and will re-evaluate my position.
TWENTY TWO LIES NOT FOUND IN SCRIPTURE
1. Once saved always saved.
2. Christians are no different than other sinners, except they are saved.
3. God cannot see the Christians sin because they are covered by the blood of Christ.
4. We can be filthy as a barnyard in body and still be saved and holy in spirit.
5. We all sin in word, thought and deed, every moment and every day.
6. All who have ever fallen away were never saved in the first place.
7. That when one comes to Christ, their sins are paid for past, present and future.
8. You can only lose fellowship with God and not salvation.
9. God would never disown or damn one of His own children.
10. A sheep cannot become a goat.
11. If we sin we only lose fellowship and not relationship with God.
12. Salvation is unconditional.
13. If salvation cannot be earned it cannot be lost.
14. God will not begin a work that he will not finish.
15. Repentance is not required for salvation.
16. Christians who say we must remain faithful to stay saved preach a works salvation.
17. We can be "Sinning Saints" or "Backslidden Christians" and still be saved.
18. Only at death can we ultimately be saved from sin.
19. Christians are still sinners.
20. I am secure because Jesus paid my sin debt in full
21.The Old Testament saints were saved under the Law and We aren’t under the Law like the Old Testament saints we are under Grace.. 22.You cant be Perfect.
RESPONSE TO THESE TWENTY TWO LIES
(This response is inspired largely by an essay found on the web site of
It also acknowledges that God warns us against falling away, and sees these as legitimate warnings. Whereas the Calvinist and Arminian takes a side, the Lutherans remain the middle, content with the paradox. This paradox appears to me to be Scriptural. However, I do have a lot of sympathy towards the Reformed view, and that sympathy becomes obvious in the next 21 responses.
EVG TV Answer: This is a warmly presented argument against the twenty one propositions that are labeled “Twenty one Lies Not Found In Scripture,” The contention that I was arguing is that many of the arguments that are given by the Calvinist’s are not based on anything in Scripture, but their own imagination. Some are statements that are not things that antinomians would say, but sum up their argument without all the smoke and mirrors.
“Whereas the Calvinist and Arminian takes a side, the Lutherans remain the middle, content with the paradox. This paradox appears to me to be Scriptural.”
EVG TV Answer: While I admire an attempt in some areas to find a via media, truth is rarely to be found by splitting the difference and arriving at an average. While you may be more comfortable with things that appear to be a paradox, paradox is at times an excuse for not reconciling the Scriptures as a whole. While there are some things that remain a paradox or a mystery, I do not believe that we can put the basics about salvation into such a category. God is not the Author of confusion. On the issue of Eternal Security it is clear. I assert that the Scriptures contend for security, but not an unconditional security. I also assert that many things that are presented in defense of the doctrine of Eternal Security have no Biblical foundation at all.
1. UES- Once saved always saved
UES-1) To say once saved, always saved is a lie not found in Scripture is to say that there is no Scriptural foundation to hope that true Christians will endure to the end. To say this is nave, (naïve?) and it is harsh. Once saved, always saved, may be a mistaken interpretation, but its not an all out lie.
EVG TV 1) Answer: You may see it as harsh, but conditional security is the Scriptural truth. You may call such an accusation naïve, but I would say that that application should be used for those that believe that which is never stated in the Scriptures. Not all true Christians endure to the end. To say so is to render a large portion of the Scripture as useless. The Bible would not exhort us to that which is inevitable. If a “true” Christian can do no other than endure to the end, then why warn them to? Why speak of apostasy and falling away? If they are exhortations to those who are deceived into believing that they are Christians, then the passages still do not make sense. What good could come of enduring, continuing, or abiding in that which does not bring salvation?
You say that Eternal Security is not an all out lie. To contend for it then would be foolish, for it is not sensible to guide your life by a principle of a half-truth. This is the devil’s greatest tool. He knows that people will not believe an outright lie, but will buy-in wholesale if there this a shred of truth. Security of the believer is a truth. Unconditional security is a lie.
2. Christians are no different than other sinners, except they are saved.
UES-2) Christians are different, in the sense that they have Jesus Christ in their hearts, helping them to be new creatures. Even still, it is possible for Christians to fall into sin, and it is not Scriptural to assume that each fall results in loss of salvation.
EVG TV 2) Answer: I am glad that you can see that the Scriptures say that Christians are different. Now, I did not assert “each fall results in loss of salvation.” The Scriptures say clearly, “The wages of sin is death.” Rom.
3. God cannot see the Christian’s sin because they are covered by the blood of Christ.
UES-3) When a person trusts in Christ, their sin is transferred to him, and God considers their sin dealt with. God is satisfied with the atonement Christ has provided. Not only is our sin transferred to Christ, but his righteousness is transferred to us. When God sees us, he sees the righteousness of Christ. If this were not true, then none of us would have any hope in approaching God. We can come to God because we’ve been declared righteous through our union with Christ. We are not coming on our own merits or own righteousness. If we disbelieve in the imputation of Christ’s righteousness to the soul of the believer, we shatter any foundation of hope concerning a relationship with God. It’s not enough to have a clean slate; we must be righteous. Christ didn’t merely take away our sin. If he had only taken away our sin, we still wouldn’t have been able to have a relationship with God.
To interact with God, its not enough to be void of bad acts or neutral; one has to be totally perfect and righteous. If we do not possess that righteousness in ourselves, we must find it somewhere else. We must find it in Christ; we must not look for any righteousness outside of him.
EVG TV 3) Answer: To define “imputation” as meaning a mystical transfer is completely devoid of any Scriptural support. It is a myth, a theological fiction. I would suggest basing your belief on that which is asserted in Scripture, and not from that which created to fill the void in a flawed theology. You can no more impute righteousness than you can impute wisdom to a fool, or honesty to a thief. Character cannot be transferred. Mystical transfer is not a Scriptural principle.
“UES-We are not coming on our own merits or own righteousness.”
EVG TV Nothing in what I have ever written says that we must merit salvation in any way. This is a false suggestion.
“UES-If we disbelieve in the imputation of Christ’s righteousness to the soul of the believer, we shatter any foundation of hope concerning a relationship with God.”
EVG TV A “foundation of hope” that is not from the Scriptures is worth shattering. One would be better served by building a foundation for their hope from the Scriptures, not an unfounded theory.
“UES-We must find it in Christ; we must not look for any righteousness outside of him.”
EVG TV If you are saying that Christ is the cause of any good work that is in us, I fully agree. If you are saying that righteousness of the believer consists of only an imputed righteousness, then you are contending for antinomianism.
4. We can be filthy as a barnyard in body and still be saved and holy in spirit.
UES- 4) This fourth proposition is true, and all of Christendom agrees, including Calvinists. To accuse Calvinists/Reformed people of being antinomians is unbelievably ignorant of history. To look at the Puritans and accuse them of being licentious is merely stupid.
EVG TV 4) Answer: I am not ignorant of history concerning this matter. I can justly contend that Calvinism, especially the doctrine of UES-Once Saved Always Saved, has been the cradle of antinomianism in the church. I never accused all Calvinists of being licentious. These are your words that accuse all, not mine.
I openly admit that no antinomian or Calvinist would say that point #4 was coming from their own words. They are much more subtle. They say, “David committed adultery and murder, yet he was called a man after God’s own heart. The reason was because David fulfilled the will of God in his Life and he knew how to repent.
A Christian can commit murder and adultery and still be BORN AGAIN but in separation because of sin..” But they ignore the plain words of Scripture. David could not be "a man after God's own heart" while he remained unrepentant, for “ Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the
“UES- God cannot see our sin, all He sees is the blood of Jesus.”
EVG TV This is the same thing, just a different way of saying the same thing. Nowhere does the Bible say that the atonement blinds God to the sin of the unrepentant “christian.” but the opposite- Isaiah 59:2 (KJV) But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear.
5. We all sin in word, thought and deed, every moment and every day.
UES-5) To deny the Scriptural teaching that Christians still struggle with sin is self-righteous. Think for a moment. Sin is not merely a deliberate breaking of Gods law. It is failing to measure up to Gods standards. Perhaps we haven’t intentionally offended God today. But can we honestly say that we have rightly met Gods standards today? To say that I’ve not sinned today would be the same as saying that everything I’ve thought, said, and did today was totally righteous, as perfect as God, utterly altruistic, completely void of any self interest, 100% humble, and totally innocent.
This is a statement I’m not willing to make. God’s greatest commands are to love God totally, and to love our neighbors as ourselves.
If this is the greatest command given, then not loving God totally is the greatest sin that can be committed. If we love God with 99.9% of our hearts, we are still guilty of the most heinous sin imaginable. When you look at things from this perspective, you realize how false it would be for any of us to say we are already perfect.
EVG TV 5) Answer: “UES-To deny the Scriptural teaching that Christians still struggle with sin is self-righteous”
EVG TV There is no such “Scriptural teaching.” No passage says that a Christian must sin, and many say that they don’t.
“UES-To say that I’ve not sinned today would be the same as saying that everything I’ve thought, said, and did today was totally righteous, as perfect as God, utterly altruistic, completely void of any self interest, 100% humble, and totally innocent.”
EVG TV Nowhere in the Scriptures does God command or make the standard that you assert. God commands, “Be ye therefore perfect, as your Father in heaven is perfect.” Matt. 5:48. God does not command impossibilities. God does not damn anyone for not doing what is utterly impossible; He is a just God. “Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment.” 1 Jn. 4:17. God says our love can be perfect. Paul said, “Let us therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded:” Philippians
Just because you have not attained such a state, is no reason to decry the Scriptures as being false. We cannot lower the bar of Scriptural standards to fit your or our experience. Our experience, while valuable, does not give us the right to interpret the Bible in a way that it proves something it is not saying.
6. All who have ever fallen away were never saved in the first place.
UES-6) This is not without a foundation.
EVG TV 6) Answer: While it is a fact that there are many who wear the name of Christian are not really believers at all, this does not prove that those who defect from the faith were never genuine in the estimate of their salvation. While John was dealing with a specific problem in a specific church, it does not give us license to apply this as a blanket answer to any and all situations. The context of the verse in question is dealing with the false teachers who had infiltrated the church in which John is writing to. They wore the label "Christian," but it was the Gnostic version of Christianity.
Dr. Daniel Steele observed, "They were not of us." This means that they were not in sympathy with the church at the time of their withdrawal. It does not signify that they were never genuine Christians. The fact that there are withered and fruitless branches now in the true vine (John 15:2) does not prove that those branches were never alive, but, rather, it proves their former life. It is a case of manifest apostasy, beginning in the spirit and ending in the flesh."
The passage in John does not prove that these people who left the church were never truly Christians. It does prove that they were not in sympathy with the church at the time of their separation.
I concede that for the most part it is true that that church is full of people that are deceived into believing that they are saved when they are not. I just take exception with using this passage, with that singular understanding, to apply to all who ever apostatized from the faith.
7. That when one comes to Christ, their sins are paid for past, present and future.
UES-7) If Christ’s death didn’t fully atone for all sins ever committed (even sins that occur tomorrow) then none of us have any hope. If conversion only means our past sins are dealt with, then that still leaves us trying to live the rest of our lives after conversion sinless; it renders salvation a work, not a gift. Christ’s death didn’t just forgive me; it justified me. In Gods eyes,
I am pure through Christ. I can approach God because in Christ I’m not only forgiven, but declared righteous through the blood of Jesus.
If God hadn’t declared me righteous through the blood of Jesus, then I would have no basis to approach God.
EVG TV 7) Answer: Sin Separates one from God Isaiah 59:2 (KJV) But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear. None of us have any hope if we do not believe an unbiblical theory? This is absurd! Nowhere do the Scriptures say that the atonement of Jesus Christ “paid for sins.” I would go on in greater detail, but the burden of proof falls on the one that makes such an assertion.
“UES-If conversion only means our past sins are dealt with, then that still leaves us trying to live the rest of our lives after conversion sinless; it renders salvation a work, not a gift.”
EVG TV It does nothing of the sort! It only establishes the fact that the vast majority of the New Testament exhorts believers to be pure, holy, without blemish, in all righteousness. It proves it to be a gift, for one cannot be all these things without the work of Christ being within them, causing it to be a reality in their lives. “For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.” Col. 2:10. Anyone who claims to be saved without the fruit of righteousness is deceived about their salvation.
8. You can only lose fellowship with God and not salvation.
UES-8) This is a proposition I’ll have to think more about before addressing.
EVG TV 8) Answer-Sin Separates one from God Isaiah 59:2 (KJV) But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear.
9. God would never disown or damn one of His own children.
9) Jesus said, My sheep hear my voice and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish. The hope that none of God’s children will ever perish is not vain human reasoning; it is based on the words of Christ himself.
EVG TV 9) Answer: It is vain human reasoning to say that this verse asserts unconditional security. The passage says clearly who will never perish. It is only for those who hear (present tense) and follow (present tense).
Those that cease to hear and follow do not fulfill the conditions that Christ himself has set for this security. If one denies that one must be hearing and following in order to be a "sheep," then they are reading things into this passage, not gathering truth out of it. Satan was and is a son of God and he will wind up in the lake of fire along with all who obey him.
10. A sheep cannot become a goat.
UES-10) I do not understand what the point of this accusation is. If it is based upon Matthew 25, I do not see how it relates to the discussion at hand.
EVG TV 10) Answer: Many Eternal Security proponents assert that a saved person (a sheep) cannot become a goat, (lost). This is based on human reasoning from nature, and not the Scriptures. Surprisingly, they have no problems believing that a goat can become a sheep.
11. If we sin we only lose fellowship and not relationship with God.
UES-11) Again, I’ll have to think more about this one.
EVG TV 11) Answer -Sin Separates one from God Isaiah 59:2 (KJV) But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear. Ezekiel 33:12 (KJV) Therefore, thou son of man, say unto the children of thy people, The righteousness of the righteous shall not deliver him in the day of his transgression: as for the wickedness of the wicked, he shall not fall thereby in the day that he turneth from his wickedness; neither shall the righteous be able to live for his righteousness in the day that he sinneth.
12. Salvation is unconditional.
UES-12) If salvation is based on anything other than the free grace and mercy of God, purchased for us by Christ’s blood, then none of us have any hope. We are saved by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. To deny this is to embrace works righteousness instead of the righteousness God offers to impute to us through faith in Christ.
EVG TV-12) Answer: “UES-We are saved by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone.”
EVG TV The Scriptures never append the words “alone” to grace, or Christ. Luther added them to the plain Scripture statements. Faith alone is only found in one place in the entire Bible, James 2:17. "Faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone." A dead faith is not a saving faith.
Jesus says the same thing in John 15:5, “I am the vine, ye are the branches. He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit." Jesus declares without any doubt, that if we are truly in Him, we cannot but help bear good fruit. "Faith" that brings forth bad fruit, or no fruit, is not a saving faith. Even John Calvin could see this, as he is quoted as saying: " It is faith alone that justifies, and still the faith which justifies is not alone." Fruit (works) and salvation are inseparable. Not for merit, but the genuine fruit of the life of Christ working in and through us.
Salvation is conditional, you admit that by insisting upon faith. Faith is the condition. No faith, no salvation. The same condition that gets us saved, keeps us saved.
13. If salvation cannot be earned it cannot be lost.
UES-13) There is a very legitimate concern on the part of Reformed teachers that failure to teach God’s promise to preserve us is the same as watering down the grace of God. What separates Calvinists from Arminians is that Calvinists say that the power and ability to persevere comes from God and his mercy, whereas Arminians attribute the ability to persevere to human free will. This gives credit to free-will where credit is due to God alone. Human free will is enslaved to sin. It can only do good when God compels it to do so. If one is so totally opposed to the theology that came out of the Reformation, then why not just go on back to
EVG TV-13) Answer: The fact that some believers do not persevere has no effect of watering down the grace of God; it only waters down Calvinism.
Your statement of the beliefs of Arminianism shows a lack of understanding its position on this matter.
“UES - Arminians attribute the ability to persevere to human free will. This gives credit to free-will where credit is due to God alone.”
EVG TV The ability to persevere in Arminianism is based solidly on the grace of God. Grace however, does not destroy our freedom. Because of this, some do not persevere in the faith, not for lack of grace, but lack of Love for God and love of sin. They do not become lost as a little boy carelessly losing a ball. They make a deliberate choice against the conviction of the Holy Spirit.
“UES-Human free will is enslaved to sin.”
EVG TV To this I answer that this is true for the unregenerate. After one is born-again, they receive a new nature. This is not enslaved to sin, but gravitates towards the Savior and righteousness. What you are contending for is a conversionless conversion! Sin gets converted (since it can no longer damn,) and the believers free-will remains corrupt. This clearly goes against Scripture.
“It can only do good when God compels it to do so. If one is so totally opposed to the theology that came out of the Reformation, then why not just go on back to
14. God will not begin a work that he will not finish.
UES-14) Philippians 1:6 He who began a good work in you will be faithful to complete it. In another New Testament passage, the author of Hebrews calls Christ the author and finisher of our faith. Christ starts it, and he finishes it. Arminians say that Christ starts it but free-will must complete it. This is practically making an idol our of free-will.
If Paul was correct when he said in Romans 8, The natural mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God’s law nor can it do so, then we must conclude that free-will is a delusion, with no basis in Scripture.
EVG TV-14) Answer: You mock free-will as you yourself are worshiping at the altar of Gnostic fatalism. Your vision is not clear, for no Arminian would claim that they were the cause of their own salvation. We only wish to say at the end of the race with Paul, “I have fought the good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith.” 2 Tim. 4:7.
Nothing within this passage says that Christ has to finish a salvation that He started. It is just not there! The passage does not assert that Christ must finish (or save) the one that falters and does not continue in the faith. Paul had this confidence in them because they had "fellowship in the gospel from... The first day till now.” !! Take note that the Scriptures never state this kind of confidence for those who are lukewarm or "sinning saints." This promise is only for genuine, obedient believers! In verse 7, Paul says that he thought that it was "meet" or "just" for him to think this way about them. Paul said these words of confidence and assurance for a reason, and that reason was not in some doctrine of assurance, but in the grace of God on their behalf, and the track record of their faithfulness to Christ! They had given Paul absolutely no reason to doubt that they were genuine Christians. Would he say the same thing of you?
Paul was most certainly correct in saying that the natural mind is hostile to God. He said, "For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace." Rom. 8:6. "But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you." 8:9. Paul is not speaking of the evils of "free-will." He is speaking of the unconverted mind versus the spiritual mind in the one that is saved. God graciously offers, and enables us to believe and respond, but some resist the offer of God. "Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye." Acts
15. Repentance is not required for salvation.
UES-15) I will not address this accusation yet, because I don’t understand the point that is trying to be made.
EVG TV- 15) To remain saved one must repent of all sins after they are committed. It is not a one time event.
16. Christians who say we must remain faithful to stay saved preach a works salvation.
UES-16) Christians who attribute the ability to persevere to free-will, instead of Gods free grace, preach a works salvation. We persevere because God enables us, not because our own wills are so virtuous.
EVG TV-16) Answer: To this I agree. It is a free grace, not a forced grace. Salvation is possible because God enables us, but He does not save us against our wills. I do hold that the Scriptures do not state that continuance in faith is a works salvation. The Scriptures constantly exhort Christians to endure, continue, abide, and remain in the faith. The ability to do so is due to the grace of God. But God no more remains, abides, continues, or endures for us than He believes for us.
17. We can be "Sinning Saints" or "Backslidden Christians" and still be saved.
UES-17) To say that Christians never backslide is merely nave.(naïve?). Of course, it happens. It doesn’t have to happen, and it isn’t Gods will, but it does happen.
EVG TV-17) Answer: I never stated that people do not backslide. What I do state is that the Scriptures never use the word “backslider” and “Christian” in the same context. If you are a backslider, you are not a Christian.
18. Only at death can we ultimately be saved from sin.
UES-18) This is true. If we say we have no sin, we are claiming to already be as perfect as God, thoroughly righteous and in no need of further improvement. To say this is self-deception, Pharisaical, and unbelievably hypocritical. Read 1 John 1:8-10.
EVG TV-18) Answer: You conveniently rip John’s words out of their intended context to fit your theory. “If we say we have no sin, we are claiming to already be as perfect as God, thoroughly righteous and in no need of further improvement.”
Meaning we have no sin in our blood before we were saved. This is your assertion, and not the Scriptures. John is dealing with the Gnostic element within the church. They believed that you could sin, but the body sins and not the spirit. They were claiming that they had no sin to be cleansed of. V.8.They were saying the had not sinned, so they did not need a Savior. V.10. Verse 10 could no more apply to a Christian than verse 8. There is no such thing as a Christian that never believed that they had sinned.
Verse 8, never says that Christians do sin. It is just not there. In fact, how could John say in verse 7 that, “The blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.” If “all” sin is cleansed, then how could there be anything left? No Christian is “deceived” for believing that “all” sin is cleansed.
John does not contend for sin. He writes, “My little children, these things I write unto you, that ye sin not.” (Gk, a singular act of sin.) 2:1. “ And if any man sin”(not “when”). 2:1. “He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.” 2:4. He that loveth his brother abideth in the light, and there is none occasion of stumbling in him.” 2:10. “Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.” 3:6. “He that committeth sin is of the devil.” 3: 8. “ Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin;” 3:9. “Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.” 3:7. “For whatsoever is born of God overcommeth the world: and this is the victory that overcommeth the world, even our faith.” 5:4. “We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and the wicked one toucheth him not.” 5:18. “If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth.” 1:6.
John’s battle was with Gnostic license, not with any form of legalism as most Calvinistic commentators have erroneously applied to verse 8. They do so in defiance of everything else John said about sin. Death does not cleanse from sin. “The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.” 1 Cor. 15:26. Death is an enemy, not a sanctifier. To say that sin is cleansed in death is to replace the Holy Spirit with that which is called our enemy. No passage in Scripture says that anyone is sanctified in death.
All appeals to holiness and sanctification are directed to believers now. To hope in salvation from sin at death is to put your faith into a theory, and not Scripture.
19. Christians are still sinners.
UES-19) If we say that we are void of sin, we are saying that we are already as perfect as God. No Calvinist is as perfect as God, and no Wesleyan is as perfect as God. Anyone who says they are is the epitome of pride.
EVG TV-19) Answer: And no one will ever be as perfect as God, for we are not God! It is a flawed argument, for God never demands us to equal or exceed Him. Perfect is Love .God does not judge us as if we were angels, or even "Gods," but as men. It would be unjust to condemn someone for not being something that they could not possibly be. Paul writes, “Yet now hath he reconciled in the body of this flesh through death, to present you holy, and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight.” Col. 1:21-22.. “To the end he may establish your hearts unblameable in holiness before God, even our Father, at the coming of out Lord Jesus Christ with all his saints.” 1 Thes. 3:13. He also said of himself and others, “ Ye are witnesses, and God also, how holily and justly and unblameably we behaved ourselves among you that believe.” 1 Thes.
“Awake to righteousness, and sin not;” 1 Cor.
The Scriptures never call Christians "sinners."
20. I am secure because Jesus paid my sin debt in full.
UES- 20) I am secure because Jesus paid my sin debt in full. I have no other basis for security. I cannot base my security on my own righteousness or work. If I did, I would be denying my desperate need of Gods grace. My security is only the blood of Jesus, shed for me. His wounds are my hope. I have no other hope. God forbid that I would ever boast about anything except the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ.. (Galatians 6:14).
EVG-TV 20) Answer: “UES- I am secure because Jesus paid my sin debt in full. I have no other basis for security.”
EVG TV The scriptures give 3 Classes of people
1 Peter
And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?
1. Sinner –Those who have never been Born Again
2. Ungodly/Unrighteous/Disobedient-Those who have been born again but are disobedient and live in sin.
3. Godly/Righteous/Obedient – Those who are Obedient to Gods word and those who will reign with him in Heaven.
Unfortunately, your hope is built on sinking sand, the fables of men. There is not a single time in Scripture where it is said that Jesus “paid for our sins.” This may be good Calvinism, but poor Bible. Once again, I wish to set the record straight that Arminians do not put their faith in works for the meriting of salvation. Our faith is in Christ and His work on the cross on our behalf. Freely offered, and grace enabled to accept or reject the unfathomable love of God for us.
We both trust in the same Savior, and same atonement. My plea to you is to examine the Scriptures to see whether these assertions you make are true or not. The idea of payment for sins is not a Scriptural idea, it is a theological one. It is an invention that is designed to support and lead you to Calvinism. Do not draw your security from theories, but rather the Bible. Base your security on something the Scriptures do say, instead of something they never say.
21.The Old Testament saints were saved under the Law and We aren’t under the Law like the Old Testament saints we are under Grace .
UES- 21) We aren’t under the Law .We are under Grace we aren’t saved the same way the Old Testament saints were.They backslid but now Grace has come and God can Keep you.
EVG TV-21) Grace is in the Old Testament 36 TIMES its not a New Testament Thing.
The Law never saved anyone only faith unto righteousness did .The Old Testament saints were Begat or Born again just as we are they looked to the cross “see Born Again and the Abrahamic Covenant”
.
22.You cant be Perfect.
UES-22) we all sin a little day and one cannot be perfect.
EVG-TV 20) Answer: Jesus don’t lie he said we can and that’s the final answer. Perfect is Love walking in Love Loving the Lord with all our heart mind soul and strength and our neighbor as ourselves.
Conclusion continuously Walk in Love and you will be once saved always saved.
Expounding Key scriptures in Hebrews
In Mat.18:15-17 we have the method of discipline for the church. If a brother trespasses against us, we are to go to him first and tell him his fault with him alone. If he refuses to hear, we are to take two or three and go to him to try to make reconciliation between us. If he refuses to hear again, we are to bring the matter before the church. Then Jesus said in v.17, "But if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as AN HEATHEN MAN AND A PUBLICAN." DID THE HEATHENS AND PUBLICANS HAVE SALVATION? INDEED NOT. Likewise the BELIEVER who trespasses against his BROTHER, and wilfully refuses to repent and be reconciled, but becomes recalcitrant and irreconcilable, has denied the faith, and is no better than a HEATHEN AND A PUBLICAN. Strong words these! Who said it? Jesus himself! WHY IS IT SO? Because he failed to HOLD FAST and to CONTINUE in the doctrine,
I Tim.4:16. But Eternal Security tries to offset this by asking, "Are we saved by continuity or by the blood?" Our reply is, "By both." We are saved by the blood provisionally but we are saved experimentally thru CONTINUITY. The word 'salvation' itself is a term of CONTINUITY with glorification as its ultimate goal.
We note also that the writer of Hebrews not only exhorts them to HOLD FAST but he adds WITHOUT WAVERING. This word 'waver' is 'aklines' in the Greek and it means 'without bending or inclining' and it was for the benefit of those who were wavering that this epistle was written. Some had already forsaken Christ and had gone back to Judaism for in v.25 the writer said, "Not forsaking the assembling of yourselves together as the manner of some is." They were going through severe persecution and had gone back to the shadow, after having come to Christ, the substance.
In v.32 he speaks about a great fight of affliction; in v.33 he says they were a gazing stock by reproaches and afflictions; and in v.34 he mentions the spoiling of their goods. It was these severe trials that had caused some to go back and others were wavering, or 'inclining or bending,' as the Greek has it.
It was for this reason that in chap.Heb3: 12 he said, Hebrews
It is quite evident that a man cannot depart from the city of
The apostle Peter refers to these trials in I Pet.2: 19-20; 3:14-17 and we herewith quote I Pet.4:12-13: "Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial as tho some strange thing happened unto you. But rejoice inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ's suffering: that, when His glory shall be revealed, ye may be glad also with exceeding joy."
We now come to the most important part of this chapter which is vs:26-29 which we quote herewith:
Hebrews 10:26-29 (KJV) For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, [27] But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries. [28] He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses: [29] Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
There have been some strange and extraneous conclusions drawn from these four verses by Eternal Security, and also by their opponents.
Had they all realized that this subjects deals entirely with wavering JEWISH CHRISTIANS who were going back to Jewish sacrifices, they would not have advanced the unscriptural interpretations that they have. There is nothing here that refers to a fallen Christian who is usually called a backslider. When we sin we lose our fellowship. But when we repent and confess to God, He renews our fellowship. If we refuse to repent, and come back to God, we lose our sonship also, and if we die in that state, we will be eternally lost just like any other sinner.
But because Sonship and Fellowship has not been taught, many Christians when they fail God, feel that they have backslid as they call it. Had they realized that only their fellowship was marred unless they continue to walk in sin ,
they would not have been so discouraged in the times of their failures when overcome by some sin in the flesh.
"What should we call a man who fell from grace and has gone back into the world?" James said in James 5:19-20 (KJV) "Brethren, if any of YOU, do ERR from the TRUTH, and one CONVERT him, let him know that he which CONVERTETH THE SINNER - shall save a SOUL FROM DEATH." James called him a sinner, and that's just what he is, no more, no less.
Then there are others who have taken another extreme view and have seized the last clause of v.26 which reads, "there remaineth no more sacrifice for sin." They have taught if a man once was saved and fell away from God, he could not get back to God. Some called this the unpardonable sin, and some have even gone so far as to call this the blasphemy of the Holy Ghost. They said, "If we sin wilfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth NO SACRIFICE FOR SINS." But this is not what the writer said. The writer said, "NO MORE SACRIFICE FOR SINS," meaning NO MORE SACRIFICES or NO OTHER SACRIFICE; because Christ was the last sacrifice that God accepted. After Christ was crucified, the Jews kept up their temple sacrifices but they were no more accepted than was Cain's. The veil into the most holy was rent from top to bottom, showing that the power that did it came from above and not from earth. The rending of the veil was indicative of the fact that the way to God had been made open thru the death of Christ, and it was possible for all men to come unto Him by faith, and faith only. Conclusion of v26 is that if we sin willfully Jesus is the only sacrifice that can redeem us of our sin The Law cannot.
Then there are those who taught that if a man was once convicted of sin by the Holy Spirit, and refused to yield and be saved; that he had sinned against the light and there was no sacrifice for his sins. Such teaching is all nonsense and some sinners who have heard it, have been lost because they felt that there was no hope for them. The truth of the matter is, that there are some who fought off conviction at one time in a revival, and were gloriously saved in a subsequent revival at a much later date. This proves that such teaching is entirely erroneous.
The writer was endeavoring to press on the minds of the wavering Jewish Christians, that there would be NO MORE SACRIFICES for sins since Christ was the last one and the antitype of all previous sacrifices.
That is why he said, "There remaineth NO MORE SACRIFICE for sins." Since all the sacrifices pointed to Christ the substance, to go back to bullocks, goats and heifers, was to go back to the shadow, Heb.10:1.
The sin referred to in v.26 is not any common sin prevalent in many of God's people. The word 'wilfully' in this verse is 'hakousios' in the Greek and it means 'willingly, voluntarily', and it means a premeditated sin such as that of Judas and of Ananias. Many fall away from Christ but their sin is not voluntary or premeditated and therefore it is not wilful. They fall due to some weakness of the flesh or some temptation of Satan.
It is interesting to note here that this wilful sin is mentioned as happening, "After we have received the knowledge of the truth." This word 'wilfully' is mentioned only once in the New Testament and never mentioned outside of the book of Hebrews, which is very significant in itself. This expression, "the knowledge of the truth" is found only twice more in the New Testament. Once it is mentioned in the positive and once in the negative, and in both cases it refers to experimental knowledge, and not to head knowledge or knowledge from observation. We quote both passages for comparison with v. 26.
I Tim,2,3-4(KJV), "For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior: who will have all men to be saved and come unto THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE TRUTH."
II Tim.3-7(KJV), "Ever learning and never coming to THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE TRUTH."
In the last verse Paul speaks of some who learn but never come to THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE TRUTH. It is one thing to know the way TO CHRIST but it is entirely a different matter TO KNOW CHRIST. The waverers mentioned in.Heb.5:11-14 had indeed learned TO KNOW CHRIST, but they had not grown up in Him and were still babes and in need of milk instead of meat.
Unconditional Eternal Security would have us to believe that those referred to in v.26 refers to those Jews of Christ's and the apostles' days, who were convinced that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God; but after coming into this knowledge, they refused to go on and be saved. We do not doubt that there were some in those days that did come to that knowledge and did not go on, but we emphatically deny that this scripture refers to them in any way whatsoever. We also realize that there are some today in some churches who have never been born again and have dome to this realization. But owning to the necessity of giving up their profession, they refuse to go on and be saved for fear of losing their prestige. We likewise deny that this scripture refers to them in any way at all because church members of that caliber were unknown to the writer in that day. It is quite evident that church members who are unsaved have never come to THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE TRUTH.
Let us look at this word 'knowledge'. This usual word for 'knowledge' in the Greek is 'gnosis' but this is a different word, the word here is 'epignosis' which means 'full knowledge.' Not only is it 'epignosis' in Heb.10:26 but the same word is used in I Tim.2:4 and II Tim.3:7 which we quoted above. Likewise the word 'knowledge' in II Pet.2:20 is translated from this word 'epignosis' showing that those referred to by Peter, had a 'full knowledge' and not a superficial, auditory knowledge of the plan of salvation, as Eternal Security would have us to believe.
We also find that the expression "the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ", or its equivalent, is found five times in the New Testament as follows: Eph.1:17, 4-13; Phil.3:8; II Pet.1:8 and 2:20. Also the expression "the knowledge of God" is found five times as follows: Rom.11:33; II Cor.10:5; Col.1:10 and II Pet.1:2. In all these ten passages, it is experimental knowledge that is referred to and not head knowledge although Eternal Security refuses to accept II Pet.2:20 as it is too hard on their doctrine.
In taking a comprehensive view of Heb.10:26-29, we note that the plural pronoun 'we' is mentioned twice in v.26 whereby the writer includes himself with those written to in his warning and admonition. Then in vs.27-28 he places disobedience to New Testament light, on the same plane as disobedience to Old Testament light with the same penalty involved, which is death.
Continuing our comprehensive view of v.29, we note that the pronoun 'ye' is mentioned once which refers to those to whom he is writing. Then we note that the pronoun 'he' is mentioned twice. This is a very important item. This 'he' is a definite reference to those Jews as individuals or as a collective body, whom he refers to in v.25 to whom he said, "Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is." Those who had left their assembly, were those who had gone back to Judaism and to the Jewish sacrifices. It was for this cause that he said in v.26, "there remaineth NO MORE sacrifice for sins." The writer puts v.29 in the form of a question: "Of how much sorer punishment suppose 'YE', shall 'HE' be thought worthy WHO HATH TRODDEN under foot the SON OF GOD, and HATH COUNTED the blood of the covenant, wherewith 'HE' WAS SANCTIFIED, an unholy thing, and HATH DONE DESPITE to the Spirit of grace?" This 'HE' is accused of three things as emphasized above in capital letters. First 'HE' hath trodden under foot the Son of God; second, 'HE' hath counted the blood - an unholy thing; and third, 'HE' hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace. All three accusations are in the past tense showing that it really happened and was an accomplished fact. And not only so, but to clinch the matter the writer said in part, "the blood of the covenant, wherewith 'HE' was SANCTIFIED." This 'HE' was sanctified thru the blood indeed, and 'HE' certainly is a potential witness against Eternal Security.
"But" objects Eternal Security, "they were sanctified provisionally when Jesus died for the whole world." NONSENSE! Jesus died to JUSTIFY THE SINNER who believes, not to sanctify him. In John 17-17 Jesus prayed for His own and said, "Sanctify them (believers) thru thy truth; thy word is truth." In Rom.4:25 we read, "Who (Christ) was delivered for our offences and raised for our justification." In John 3:16 God gave His son to die for the WORLD that whosoever believeth might have everlasting life- being JUSTIFIED BY HIS BLOOD, Rom.5:9-11. But in Eph.25:26, Christ gave Himself for THE CHURCH that He might SANCTIFY IT - by the word. The book of Romans is the most wonderful treatise that we have on the plan of salvation, but neither the word 'sanctify' or it's derivatives is ever used with this subject. It is used once in the entire book and that is in chapter fifteen where it says that the Gentiles are sanctified by the Holy Ghost. It is believers who are sanctified and not sinners. Here 'HE' of Heb.10:29 had received experimental sanctification for the writer said, "the blood of the covenant, wherewith HE WAS SANCTIFIED."
But we hear Eternal Security object again and quote Heb.13:13 "Wherefore Jesus also, that He might sanctify the people with His own blood, suffered without the gate." They ask, "Does not this teach that the people were provisionally sanctified?" Yes, THE PEOPLE were provisionally sanctified indeed, but THE PEOPLE mentioned here are the justified ones who became believers and not those who never accepted the Lamb of God. There was no use to provide sanctification for the man who did not accept justification. In the Old Testament, the brazen altar was for the sacrifices of all the people but the brazen laver was only for the use of the priest. The brazen altar speaks of justification while the brazen laver speaks of sanctification. See notes Scofield Bible p.104, 111 and 1133.
The word 'sanctified' is found in Heb.ch.10 three times as follows: v.10, "By the which will we are sanctified thru the offering of the body of Jesus Christ;" v.14, "For by one offering He hath perfected forever them that are sanctified;" v.29, "who hath trodden under foot the Son of God and hath counted the blood of the covenant wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing." Thus in v.10 he says, "WE ARE SANCTIFIED", and in v.29 he say, "HE WAS SANCTIFIED." It is beyond comprehension how anyone can say that there is a particle of difference between these scriptures and how any one would make v.10 refer to experimental salvation and v.29 to provisional salvation or sanctification.
In The Life and Epistles of
"The preceding passage and the similar passage,Heb.6:4-6, have proved perplexing to many readers. Yet neither passage asserts the impossibility of the apostates' repentance. What is said amounts to this--that for the conversion of a deliberate apostate, God has (according to the ordinary laws of His working) no further means in store than those which already have been tried in vain. It should be remembered also, that the parties addressed are not those who had already apostatized, but those who were in danger of doing so, and who needed the most earnest warning."
Thus we see that this standard authority recognizes the fact that those referred to in Heb.6:4-6 and ch.10:26-29, had once been really saved but were in danger of going back to Judaism.
In Heb.10:32 the writer said, "But call to remembrance the former days, after ye were illuminated, ye endured a great fight of afflictions." No one, no not even Eternal Security would are to say that these Hebrews were not illuminated because the word 'illuminated' is in the past tense. This shows that it was an accomplished fact and of course they were the very ones to whom this epistle was written. This word 'illuminate' is 'photizo' in the Greek and this is the only place where the word 'illuminate' is used in the New Testament. But the word 'photizo' is twice translated 'enlightened' as follows:
Eph.1:18, "The eyes of your understanding being ENLIGHTENED; that ye might know what is the hope of His calling among the Gentiles."
Heb.6:4-6, "For it is impossible for those who were once ENLIGHTENED, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost - if they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance."
Thus Eternal Security makes the word 'enlightened' (gr.photizo) of Heb.6:4-6 to mean a mental or intellectual enlightment only, while acknowledging that the word 'enlightened' of Eph.1:18 is a spiritual enlightment. Likewise they admit that the word 'illuminated' of Heb. 10:32 means a spiritual enlightment, not knowing that the two words of Heb. 6:4 and 10-32 are both identically the same and both being 'photizo' in the greek, the same as