Meranda Watlington: 22, Charged with assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill.
Read more: http://www.wxii12.com/news/local-news/north-carolina/images-who-got-arrested/-/10622650/11800396/-/hrcnx6z/-/index.html#ixzz2p4NO32GE
Tuesday, December 31, 2013
Deadly Burgers
Read more: http://www.wxii12.com/news/local-news/north-carolina/images-who-got-arrested/-/10622650/11800396/-/hrcnx6z/-/index.html#ixzz2p4NO32GE
Saturday, December 28, 2013
XP support will soon end
If you are using windows XP then you might consider upgrading. Windows has announced that April 14, 2014 will be the last day Microsoft will be providing security patches for Windows XP. If you love XP or just can't afford to upgrade then you have few options. One is to stay off the internet and the other is to find a safe way to access the internet. Without security updates, XP will fall prey to hackers quickly.
The one program I have used in the past with success is called Sandboxe. It creates a box you work out of and no data actually enters your computer. The only drawback I discovered is that no data can be downloaded. If someone sent you a picture you want to keep or you want to download an update to a program you have to turn Sandboxe off in order to do so thereby leaving your computer vulnerable to attack.
I have actually intentionally used a program in which I would get a virus while in Sandboxe and as soon as I exit, the virus goes away.
In order to continue to use XP one either has to stay off the internet, use Sandboxe, or be really lucky.
The one program I have used in the past with success is called Sandboxe. It creates a box you work out of and no data actually enters your computer. The only drawback I discovered is that no data can be downloaded. If someone sent you a picture you want to keep or you want to download an update to a program you have to turn Sandboxe off in order to do so thereby leaving your computer vulnerable to attack.
I have actually intentionally used a program in which I would get a virus while in Sandboxe and as soon as I exit, the virus goes away.
In order to continue to use XP one either has to stay off the internet, use Sandboxe, or be really lucky.
Thursday, December 26, 2013
Why do the wrong ones die?
A volunteer firefighter who was among the first to arrive at the scene of a deadly crash in New Hampshire unknowingly helped pull his daughter from the wreck.
BROOKLINE, N.H. — A New Hampshire volunteer firefighter who was among the first to arrive at the scene of a deadly crash unknowingly helped pull his own daughter from the wreckage.
Thirty-year-old Katie Hamilton of Brookline was killed in the accident around 9 a.m. Christmas Eve at the intersection of Routes 13 and 130. The mother of three young daughters worked as a plumber for her father Steve Whitcomb's business.
Brookline Police Sgt. Douglas Barnett said Hamilton was southbound on Route 13 preparing to turn left when a truck driven by 31-year-old Greg Cullen of Milford hit the rear of her car and sent it into the northbound lane. She was then broadsided by a Ford F-250 pick-up truck driven by 37-year-old James Ciprotti of Weare. Neither man was injured.
___
It just seems too often the person who caused the accident walks away and it is the truly innocent who die. Who thinks life is fair should read stories like this.
Join MSN News on social
Thirty-year-old Katie Hamilton of Brookline was killed in the accident around 9 a.m. Christmas Eve at the intersection of Routes 13 and 130. The mother of three young daughters worked as a plumber for her father Steve Whitcomb's business.
Brookline Police Sgt. Douglas Barnett said Hamilton was southbound on Route 13 preparing to turn left when a truck driven by 31-year-old Greg Cullen of Milford hit the rear of her car and sent it into the northbound lane. She was then broadsided by a Ford F-250 pick-up truck driven by 37-year-old James Ciprotti of Weare. Neither man was injured.
___
It just seems too often the person who caused the accident walks away and it is the truly innocent who die. Who thinks life is fair should read stories like this.
Join MSN News on social
Friday, December 20, 2013
Christmas should be for Christians
Christ has officially been removed from Christmas. At least that was the case at one middle school on Long Island, New York, where its holiday-concert chorus sang a version of "Silent Night" that had all references to "the savior" and "holy infant" removed by school administrators. But the effort to avoid alienating people seems to have backfired.
If you don't believe in Christ then don't celebrate Christmas. I know Walmart and other retailers will have a fit but Christmas isn't about turning a profit. Christmas is about celebrating the birth of ?Christ. If the school had done to a Muslim what they did to Christians, then there wouldn't be a school anymore. There most likely would have been scores of dead besides the burned out school structure, not only in New York but all across the country.
Either celebrate Christmas as what it really is or don't celebrate it at all but just don't go changing things to appease non believers.
If you don't believe in Christ then don't celebrate Christmas. I know Walmart and other retailers will have a fit but Christmas isn't about turning a profit. Christmas is about celebrating the birth of ?Christ. If the school had done to a Muslim what they did to Christians, then there wouldn't be a school anymore. There most likely would have been scores of dead besides the burned out school structure, not only in New York but all across the country.
Either celebrate Christmas as what it really is or don't celebrate it at all but just don't go changing things to appease non believers.
Bad attitude abounds
A person who belongs to the same organization I do is what I call a "taker". It may be true that this person is crippled and lives on disability and lives in subsidized housing and has to depend on friends and family to do things but others are in that situation and are not takers. My mother is 89, legally blind, and almost deft, but she is a giver. She has a positive attitude, does a greeting card ministry as a way of offering comfort and encouragement to others, and has a positive outlook on life. She is willing to help out family and friends.
The person I referred to as a taker, on the other hand, only gives to the person that can do the most for them. She asks others for a ride and then harasses them via constant phone calls "are you coming" "you didn't forget', etc. to the tune of making one want to disassociate themselves from the organization. If there is something free to be had, not only is this person always there but so is their entire family. And not only do they take that which is free to them but they want to take away as much as thy can. This person doesn't support the organization nor any of its programs but wants to be included in the benefits of any program, even if the program isn't intended for them.
But don't show any displeasure or they will complain about your bad attitude or try to destroy you and your organization through word of mouth and through the social media. Instead of apologizing and promising to correct their offensive behavior, their reaction is to request that stuff be mailed to them because they aren't coming back for awhile while attacking the organization via word of mouth and the internet. Wow, that is unbelievable.
The person I referred to as a taker, on the other hand, only gives to the person that can do the most for them. She asks others for a ride and then harasses them via constant phone calls "are you coming" "you didn't forget', etc. to the tune of making one want to disassociate themselves from the organization. If there is something free to be had, not only is this person always there but so is their entire family. And not only do they take that which is free to them but they want to take away as much as thy can. This person doesn't support the organization nor any of its programs but wants to be included in the benefits of any program, even if the program isn't intended for them.
But don't show any displeasure or they will complain about your bad attitude or try to destroy you and your organization through word of mouth and through the social media. Instead of apologizing and promising to correct their offensive behavior, their reaction is to request that stuff be mailed to them because they aren't coming back for awhile while attacking the organization via word of mouth and the internet. Wow, that is unbelievable.
Tuesday, December 17, 2013
Why is Santa Claus being white now controversial?
It seems now that being Caucasian is anti-social and if the being is a figure to be looked up to, being white is somehow racist. I realize that most portrayals of Christ as a good-looking blond and blue-eyed white dude is neither accurate nor scriptural. The bible says he was comely so that no man would desire him and he was Jewish of middle-eastern descent so he had olive skin and dark hair and eyes. But why, after all this time, are people upset that Santa Claus is a big fat white guy?
I know Saint Nick is a fictional character who is a magical being reverenced by millions of kids the world round but he is imbedded in folklore and has real life models from whom the character grew into the modern day concept. Much of what we know about Santa Claus came from a poem written by a white man to his children. While I agree that it is perfectly okay is some heroes for children to be people of color I just don't understand why it is now wrong for a white person to be a children's hero or a religious symbol.
I know Saint Nick is a fictional character who is a magical being reverenced by millions of kids the world round but he is imbedded in folklore and has real life models from whom the character grew into the modern day concept. Much of what we know about Santa Claus came from a poem written by a white man to his children. While I agree that it is perfectly okay is some heroes for children to be people of color I just don't understand why it is now wrong for a white person to be a children's hero or a religious symbol.
Sunday, December 15, 2013
Courtney Stodden Dyes Hair, Goes Brunette: "I Feel Born Again"
It takes more than changing the color of ones hair to be "born again". Back when Carter was President, people started throwing that term around without understanding what it really means. Maybe she picked up that term from her youth without having a clue to the serious nature of that statement. It isn't an obscure term meaning to feel different about one self, rejuvenated, or refreshed.
She should be happy that Christians do not react the way Muslims do. A British doctor was arrested for reading the Quran, accused of "pretending" to be a Muslim. If "born again" had been an Islamic term, she may have been beheaded for that offhand comment. But chances are more likely that any Christian that points out her error will be the one criticized in America.
But, I'd rather live under our system than the other.
She should be happy that Christians do not react the way Muslims do. A British doctor was arrested for reading the Quran, accused of "pretending" to be a Muslim. If "born again" had been an Islamic term, she may have been beheaded for that offhand comment. But chances are more likely that any Christian that points out her error will be the one criticized in America.
But, I'd rather live under our system than the other.
Wednesday, December 11, 2013
How to Budget
In Sunday School we are studying about managing finances. Personally, my credit rating was the pits after my manager at my main store embezzled enough money to leave me $40000.00 in debt and without my business. I was fifty-seven years old without a place to live, no money or property of any kind and $40000.00 in debt. I didn't even own a vehicle. I retired at 63 and had $51000 in the bank, no debts, owned a new car and an old pick-up truck, and I have my own house and I owe no one anything.
The first thing I did was get a second job and then I made a budget. I paid myself first, then I paid my creditors, then I paid for those things that were necessary for survival. My budget for food was $35.00 a week and if I spent to much this week I had to reduce what I could spend the following week. I had to learn to stick to the budget.
Being broke teaches a person valuable lessons. One of the first and best lessons I learned was to take care of what one has. Back when I didn't worry about money I only changed the oil in my vehicles when I could spare the time. Most things I drove for 100,000 to 120,000 before they broke down. Being poor, I changed my oil and did any and all required maintenance on time. I had 198,500 miles on my truck and have never spent a dime on any of my other vehicles for repairs outside of normal wear and tear.
Another lesson I learned is to purchase quality. I had a weed eater, a basic model, that was hard to start, did a fair job, and came with a one year warranty and no one could repair it. (I ordered the parts I could and made the ones not available and it still works like new) I bought another one, spending twice on it as the first one cost but it starts easier, works faster and more efficient, and came with a seven year warranty. Value for the money.
The same goes for furniture. When I was first out of the service I purchased a bed room set and a coffee table and I still own both and they look as good as new. The cheaper the stuff, the worse they look and the quality is so poor in a year or so they are junk. In the long run one will spend more on junk than they will if they purchased quality to begin with. The only time junk makes sense is if the item is intended for limited or short term use.
In the past two years the value of my savings have increased 25% and my profit has been around 5%. For those who don't understand the difference, let me explain. For example, say you purchased a piece of property for $10,000 and rented the property. After all expenses, at the end of the year you had $500.00 free and clear then you made a profit of 5%. If the value of the land was $12,500.00 then the value of you asset has increased 25%.
What one has to do is make a budget, give back to God what is his, pay yourself first, and then divide the rest of you money into sections, paying what you have to first, and then paying for what you need, and then buying what you want. It is wise to own a credit card but wiser still to only use it whenever needed to keep an account open or when its use will save you money (it will only save you money if you pay it off in full each month). Never ever carry a balance. The only exception is in an emergency. Purchasing a bedroom suit you really want is not an emergency. To free up money so you can make your house payment is not an emergency. You can always find another place to live. What would constitute an emergency is if you car broke down and you were away from home and had to get it fixed. But make sure you did all maintenance of the vehicle as required and as the vehicle ages, make sure you join an auto club. Plan for these kind of things and you will save lots of money.
If you aren't knowledgeable enough to make a workable budget, you might want to consider Quicken or Mint.com. I don't know much about either but I do know that America's number one financial advisor recommends Mint.com, it's free (if you can stand all the ads), and budgets work if you follow them.
The first thing I did was get a second job and then I made a budget. I paid myself first, then I paid my creditors, then I paid for those things that were necessary for survival. My budget for food was $35.00 a week and if I spent to much this week I had to reduce what I could spend the following week. I had to learn to stick to the budget.
Being broke teaches a person valuable lessons. One of the first and best lessons I learned was to take care of what one has. Back when I didn't worry about money I only changed the oil in my vehicles when I could spare the time. Most things I drove for 100,000 to 120,000 before they broke down. Being poor, I changed my oil and did any and all required maintenance on time. I had 198,500 miles on my truck and have never spent a dime on any of my other vehicles for repairs outside of normal wear and tear.
Another lesson I learned is to purchase quality. I had a weed eater, a basic model, that was hard to start, did a fair job, and came with a one year warranty and no one could repair it. (I ordered the parts I could and made the ones not available and it still works like new) I bought another one, spending twice on it as the first one cost but it starts easier, works faster and more efficient, and came with a seven year warranty. Value for the money.
The same goes for furniture. When I was first out of the service I purchased a bed room set and a coffee table and I still own both and they look as good as new. The cheaper the stuff, the worse they look and the quality is so poor in a year or so they are junk. In the long run one will spend more on junk than they will if they purchased quality to begin with. The only time junk makes sense is if the item is intended for limited or short term use.
In the past two years the value of my savings have increased 25% and my profit has been around 5%. For those who don't understand the difference, let me explain. For example, say you purchased a piece of property for $10,000 and rented the property. After all expenses, at the end of the year you had $500.00 free and clear then you made a profit of 5%. If the value of the land was $12,500.00 then the value of you asset has increased 25%.
What one has to do is make a budget, give back to God what is his, pay yourself first, and then divide the rest of you money into sections, paying what you have to first, and then paying for what you need, and then buying what you want. It is wise to own a credit card but wiser still to only use it whenever needed to keep an account open or when its use will save you money (it will only save you money if you pay it off in full each month). Never ever carry a balance. The only exception is in an emergency. Purchasing a bedroom suit you really want is not an emergency. To free up money so you can make your house payment is not an emergency. You can always find another place to live. What would constitute an emergency is if you car broke down and you were away from home and had to get it fixed. But make sure you did all maintenance of the vehicle as required and as the vehicle ages, make sure you join an auto club. Plan for these kind of things and you will save lots of money.
If you aren't knowledgeable enough to make a workable budget, you might want to consider Quicken or Mint.com. I don't know much about either but I do know that America's number one financial advisor recommends Mint.com, it's free (if you can stand all the ads), and budgets work if you follow them.
Tuesday, December 10, 2013
A word of caution
In the Assurance dissertation (next post down) I failed to mention a crucial point. In the Catholic position the include quotes from the Olivet discourse Matthew chapter 24 &25. Christ lived during the age of the law and his life reflects that. The age of grace does not begin until the resurrection and that period ends with the rapture of the church. The end times that Jesus speaks of during the Olivet discourse where he says that we must endure until the end is a state we are all in after the church age, or dispensation of grace.
When studying scripture one has to determine to whom the scripture is speaking and of what period of time is referenced. Some scripture is written to Israel only, some to the lost, some to the saved, some during the period of the law and faith some during the period of grace and some during the end times after the church has been removed.
When studying scripture one has to determine to whom the scripture is speaking and of what period of time is referenced. Some scripture is written to Israel only, some to the lost, some to the saved, some during the period of the law and faith some during the period of grace and some during the end times after the church has been removed.
How Does One Know for Sure?
Know what? I’m sure you are asking. How do we know that we will go to heaven when we die? Can we know positively while we are yet alive that we have assurance of our salvation? The Free Will Baptist and the Roman Catholic Church say no while fundamental Christians say yes. If highly educated religious leaders don’t know then how can anyone else know for sure? I know I’m supposed to consult the Bible but so do the various churches and they can’t figure it out so how am I to do so? Besides, ther
There are few more confusing topics than salvation. It goes beyond the standard question posed by Fundamentalists: "Have you been saved?" What the question also means is: "Don’t you wish you had the assurance of salvation?" Evangelicals and Fundamentalists think they do have such an absolute assurance.
All they have to do is "accept Christ as their personal Savior," and it’s done. They might well live exemplary lives thereafter, but living well is not crucial and definitely does not affect their salvation.
Kenneth E. Hagin, a well-known Pentecostal televangelist from the "Word Faith" wing of Protestantism, asserts that this assurance of salvation comes through being "born again": "Unless one is born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God" (John 3:3). Though much of Hagin’s theology is considered bizarre in Protestant circles, his explanation of being born again could be endorsed by millions of Evangelical Protestants. In his booklet, The New Birth, Hagin writes, "The new birth is a necessity to being saved. Through the new birth you come into the right relationship with God."
According to Hagin, there are many things that this new birth is not. "The new birth is not: confirmation, church membership, water baptism, the taking of sacraments, observing religious duties, an intellectual reception of Christianity, orthodoxy of faith, going to church, saying prayers, reading the Bible, being moral, being cultured or refined, doing good deeds, doing your best, nor any of the many other things some men are trusting in to save them." Those who have obtained the new birth "did the one thing necessary: they accepted Jesus Christ as personal Savior by repenting and turning to God with the whole heart as a little child." That one act of the will, he explains, is all they needed to do. But is this true? Does the Bible support this concept?
Scripture teaches that one’s final salvation depends on the state of the soul at death. As Jesus himself tells us, "He who endures to the end will be saved" (Matt. 24:13; cf. 25:31–46). One who dies in the state of friendship with God (the state of grace) will go to heaven. The one who dies in a state of enmity and rebellion against God (the state of mortal sin) will go to hell.
For many Fundamentalists and Evangelicals it makes no difference—as far as salvation is concerned—how you live or end your life. You can heed the altar call at church, announce that you’ve accepted Jesus as your personal Savior, and, so long as you really believe it, you’re set. From that point on there is nothing you can do, no sin you can commit, no matter how heinous, that will forfeit your salvation. You can’t undo your salvation, even if you wanted to.
Does this sound too good to be true? Yes, but nevertheless, it is something many Protestants claim. Take a look at what Wilson Ewin, the author of a booklet called There is Therefore Now No Condemnation, says. He writes that "the person who places his faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and his blood shed at Calvary is eternally secure. He can never lose his salvation. No personal breaking of God’s or man’s laws or commandments can nullify that status."
"To deny the assurance of salvation would be to deny Christ’s perfect redemption," argues Ewin, and this is something he can say only because he confuses the redemption that Christ accomplished for us objectively with our individual appropriation of that redemption. The truth is that in one sense we are all redeemed by Christ’s death on the cross—Christians, Jews, Muslims, even animists in the darkest forests (1 Tim. 2:6, 4:10, 1 John 2:2)—but our individual appropriation of what Christ provided is contingent on our response.
Certainly, Christ did die on the cross once for all and has entered into the holy place in heaven to appear before God on our behalf. Christ has abundantly provided for our salvation, but that does not mean that there is no process by which this is applied to us as individuals. Obviously, there is, or we would have been saved and justified from all eternity, with no need to repent or have faith or anything else. We would have been born "saved," with no need to be born again. Since we were not, since it is necessary for those who hear the gospel to repent and embrace it, there is a time at which we come to be reconciled to God. And if so, then we, like Adam and Eve, can become unreconciled with God and, like the prodigal son, need to come back and be reconciled again with God, after having left his family.
You Can’t Lose Heaven?
Ewin says that "no wrong act or sinful deed can ever affect the believer’s salvation. The sinner did nothing to merit God’s grace and likewise he can do nothing to demerit grace. True, sinful conduct always lessens one’s fellowship with Christ, limits his contribution to God’s work and can result in serious disciplinary action by the Holy Spirit."
One problem with this argument is that this is not even how things work in everyday life. If another person gives us something as a grace—as a gift—and even if we did nothing to deserve it (though frequently gifts are given based on our having pleased the one bestowing the gift), it in no way follows that our actions are irrelevant to whether or not we keep the gift. We can lose it in all kinds of ways. We can misplace it, destroy it, give it to someone else, take it back to the store. We may even forfeit something we were given by later displeasing the one who gave it—as when a person has been appointed to a special position but is later stripped of that position on account of mismanagement.
The argument fares no better when one turns to Scripture, for one finds that Adam and Eve, who received God’s grace in a manner just as unmerited as anyone today, most definitely did demerit it—and lost grace not only for themselves but for us as well (cf. also Rom. 11:17-24). While the idea that what is received without merit cannot be lost by demerit may have a kind of poetic charm for some, it does not stand up when compared with the way things really work—either in the everyday world or in the Bible.
Regarding the issue of whether Christians have an "absolute" assurance of salvation, regardless of their actions, consider this warning Paul gave: "See then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God’s kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness; otherwise you too will be cut off" (Rom. 11:22; see also Heb. 10:26–29, 2 Pet. 2:20–21).
Can You Know?
Related to the issue of whether one can lose one’s salvation is the question of whether one can know with complete certainty that one is in a state of salvation. Even if one could not lose one’s salvation, one still might not be sure whether one ever had salvation. Similarly, even if one could be sure that one is now in a state of salvation, one might be able to fall from grace in the future. The "knowability" of salvation is a different question than the "loseability" of salvation.
From the Radio Bible Class listeners can obtain a booklet called Can Anyone Really Know for Sure? The anonymous author says the "Lord Jesus wanted his followers to be so sure of their salvation that they would rejoice more in the expectation of heaven than in victories on earth. ‘These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God (1 John 5:13).’"
Places where Scripture speaks of our ability to know that we are abiding in grace are important and must be taken seriously. But they do not promise that we will be protected from self-deception on this matter. Even the author of Can Anyone Really Know for Sure? admits that there is a false assurance: "The New Testament teaches us that genuine assurance is possible and desirable, but it also warns us that we can be deceived through a false assurance. Jesus declared: ‘Not everyone who says to me, "Lord, Lord" shall enter the kingdom of heaven’ (Matt. 7:21)."
Sometimes Fundamentalists portray Catholics as if they must every moment be in terror of losing their salvation since Catholics recognize that it is possible to lose salvation through mortal sin. Fundamentalists then hold out the idea that, rather than living every moment in terror, they can have a calm, assured knowledge that they will, in fact, be saved, and that nothing will ever be able to change this fact.
But this portrayal is in error. Catholics do not live lives of mortal terror concerning salvation. True, salvation can be lost through mortal sin, but such sins are by nature grave ones, and not the kind that a person living the Christian life is going to slip into committing on the spur of the moment, without deliberate thought and consent. Neither does the Catholic Church teach that one cannot have an assurance of salvation. This is true both of present and future salvation.
One can be confident of one’s present salvation. This is one of the chief reasons why God gave us the sacraments—to provide visible assurances that he is invisibly providing us with his grace. And one can be confident that one has not thrown away that grace by simply examining one’s life and seeing whether one has committed mortal sin. Indeed, the tests that John sets forth in his first epistle to help us know whether we are abiding in grace are, in essence, tests of whether we are dwelling in grave sin. For example, "By this it may be seen who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not do right is not of God, nor he who does not love his brother" (1 John 3:10), "If any one says, ‘I love God,’ and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen, cannot love God whom he has not seen" (1 John 4:20), "For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome" (1 John 5:3).
Likewise, by looking at the course of one’s life in grace and the resolution of one’s heart to keep following God, one can also have an assurance of future salvation. It is this Paul speaks of when he writes to the Philippians and says, "And I am sure that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ" (Phil. 1:6). This is not a promise for all Christians, or even necessarily all in the church at Philippi, but it is a confidence that the Philippian Christians in general would make it. The basis of this is their spiritual performance to date, and Paul feels a need to explain to them that there is a basis for his confidence in them. Thus he says, immediately, "It is right for me to feel thus about you all, because I hold you in my heart, for you are all partakers with me of grace, both in my imprisonment and in the defense and confirmation of the gospel" (1:7). The fact that the Philippians performed spiritually by assisting Paul in his imprisonment and ministry showed that their hearts were with God and that it could be expected that they, at least in general, would persevere and remain with God.
There are many saintly men and women who have long lived the Christian life and whose characters are marked with profound spiritual joy and peace. Such individuals can look forward with confidence to their reception in heaven.
Such an individual was Paul, writing at the end of his life, "I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith. Henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, will award to me on that Day" (2 Tim. 4:7-8). But earlier in life, even Paul did not claim an infallible assurance, either of his present justification or of his remaining in grace in the future. Concerning his present state, he wrote, "I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not thereby justified [Gk., dedikaiomai]. It is the Lord who judges me" (1 Cor. 4:4). Concerning his remaining life, Paul was frank in admitting that even he could fall away: "I pummel my body and subdue it, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified" (1 Cor. 9:27). Of course, for a spiritual giant such as Paul, it would be quite unexpected and out of character for him to fall from God’s grace. Nevertheless, he points out that, however much confidence in his own salvation he may be warranted in feeling, even he cannot be infallibly sure either of his own present state or of his future course.
The same is true of us. We can, if our lives display a pattern of perseverance and spiritual fruit, have not only a confidence in our present state of grace but also of our future perseverance with God. Yet we cannot have an infallible certitude of our own salvation, as many Protestants will admit. There is the possibility of self-deception (cf. Matt. 7:22-23). As Jeremiah expressed it, "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately corrupt; who can understand it?" (Jer. 17:9). There is also the possibility of falling from grace through mortal sin, and even of falling away from the faith entirely, for as Jesus told us, there are those who "believe for a while and in time of temptation fall away" (Luke 8:13). It is in the light of these warnings and admonitions that we must understand Scripture’s positive statements concerning our ability to know and have confidence in our salvation. Assurance we may have; infallible certitude we may not.
For example, Philippians 2:12 says, "Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling." This is not the language of self-confident assurance. Our salvation is something that remains to be worked out.
What To Say
"Are you saved?" asks the Fundamentalist. The Catholic should reply: "As the Bible says, I am already saved (Rom. 8:24, Eph. 2:5–8), but I’m also being saved (1 Cor. 1:18, 2 Cor. 2:15, Phil. 2:12), and I have the hope that I will be saved (Rom. 5:9–10, 1 Cor. 3:12–15). Like the apostle Paul I am working out my salvation in fear and trembling (Phil. 2:12), with hopeful confidence in the promises of Christ (Rom. 5:2, 2 Tim. 2:11–13)."
The Apostle Paul said it best when he declared that "all things are lawful but not all things are expedient" (I Corinthians 10:23) Those Christians who acknowledge assurance of their salvation do not look upon this assurance as a license to sin but rather that even though our salvation is assured our rewards in heaven nor our close relationship with the holy trinity is not. Miserable indeed is the true child of God who are in willful disobedience and is living with a loving relationship to his savior.
If I didn’t have assurance that I was saved I would be frozen in fear that any action or thought could condemn me to hell. The premise that I’m okay unless I commit a big sin is neither scriptural nor reassuring. Jesus makes it plain that to break the law in the least of things makes one guilty of violating the entire law. There is no distinction made anywhere in the scriptures between different types or sin nor does the scriptures talk about different degrees of sin. Sin is sin, plain and simple. The bible makes it clear that even the saved will commit sin but that sin is covered by the blood and we will not be charged with it.
There are however rewards to be given out in heaven and if we fail to run well or to finish our course, the it is the rewards we will lose, not our salvation. The Pharisees focused their lives on obedience to the laws do they could remain holy but Jesus said that they had their reward here on earth. It is our relationship to God that we must protect and nor adherence to procedures, rules, regulations, and laws. When Christ declared "It is finished" from the Cross he was referring to the plan of salvation. He did not come to do away with the law but to fulfill the law. That doesn’t mean we are still bound by the law for if we were then we are still condemned to die but if we give ourselves completed to Christ then He has paid the penalty for our sin.
A person cannot be born but twice: once physically and the other spiritually. I know some have made a logical argument against this point of view but the bible is not a book of logic and I do believe Christ rather than the logic of man. There are so many scriptures, both old and new testament, that give of assurance of our salvation that one just cannot deny that truth. The argument against assurance uses the logic of man that it just doesn’t seem right that a person can claim to accept Christ, go back out into the world and live as any sinner, and still go to heaven. But I’m not willing to put my faith and trust in the logic of man but in the Lord Jesus Christ who declared through Paul in Romans 34-39 that he is able to keep us secure.
e are too many interpretations, or translations as they like to refer to themselves, for me to know which bible to use as a basis of my study. So how do I proceed?
First we have to set some study guidelines. Without rules and boundaries then we have no assurance that our study methods are sound and that we are still on the correct course to arrive at the truth. First we have to settle on a definition of truth. John 1:17 states "For the law was given by Moses but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ." John 8:32 says "And ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free", and John 14; 6 says " Jesus saith unto him "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father but by me".
John 1:1 maintains that Jesus is the word and the word is God. ‘In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." I believe it should be apparent that Jesus and God are the same being and that if God says that Jesus is truth then we must judge all statements using Jesus as the standard of measurement.
As to which translation of the Bible to use I do believe the one that served many mighty men of God for hundreds of years will suffice. I am aware that many claim not to be able to understand the King James version but I do believe the Bible is foolishness ( I Corinthians 1:18) to those that don’t believe as the book is spiritually discerned. God sent the Holy Ghost to be our teacher so with reliance on God and much prayer and study( 2 Timothy 2:15) the truth will be revealed. We will use Christ as our standard to determine the correct interpretation of scripture and not rely on the logic of men. In I Corinthians chapter 3 and verse 19 the bible says "For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness."
God’s plan of salvation was established from the beginning although it was hidden for many years. Jesus was introduced in Genesis 3:15 "And I will but enmity between thee and the woman and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head and thou shalt bruise his head."
Some will argue that the sin of Eve and Adam is proof that we cannot have assurance of our salvation. Their logic is that the couple sinned and therefor lost their salvation and needed to be saved again. That logic assumes some facts not in evidence, and fact one is that Adam and Eve had salvation to lose. But before the first sin they had no need of salvation as death only came into being because of their sin and a plan of salvation was only introduced because the two were condemned to die. In other words, Adam and Eve did not have salvation to lose. They had a physical life to lose and they had to die because their nature was now corrupt. Their sin nature was passed down because God makes it clear in the account of creation that "like begats like, each after its own kind". One has to be careful not to read things into scripture that isn’t there and to guard against faulty logic. While there is no scripture to declare the eternal state Adam and Eve there is evidence that they obeyed God’s commands. Genesis Chapter 4 verse one and verse four.
God destroyed the world by water because the inhabitants of earth had become wicked. Even though God judged them wicked and the concept of sin had been introduced into the world, there was no measuring stick by which to determine what was or was not a sin. What we had was a world system that operated by the logic of men. A person had to determine what was important to himself and how to best survive and still satisfy his own needs and wants. Noah delivered a message to the people from God urging them to follow God and not their own desires and Noah was faithful to preach that message for 120 years.
The story of the Ark is a perfect illustration of the plan of salvation. The plans for the Ark was God’s plans. Noah didn’t have to do anything in order to get the plans but he did have to work because he had the plans.
Philippians 2:12 states"Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling." Some would have you believe this scripture means in order to be saved one much work but when we use lessons already taught us in the bible and view this scripture from the life and teachings of Christ, then that view doesn’t seem as logical. Noah lived before the age of grace yet because of his faith, he found grace with God. (Genesis 6:8). It was because of his faith that he built the ark. And his salvation was established by the grace of God. His faith is evidenced by the fruit it produced. In Noah’s case the fruit of his physical labor produced a ship. But we must remember it was God who furnished the plans and material for that ship. Even if Noah had become so discouraged that he gave up working on the Ark and drowned as everyone else did, that is only proof that he lost his physical life. We can make no judgements about his soul, and after all, salvation is all about the soul, not our physical bodies.
After the Ark was finished and everyone was aboard, the door to the Ark was shut. Genesis 7:16 states that the Lord shut him in. In other words, the door was closed from the outside. Noah could not get out and if he had, he could not close the door again because the door would have to be shut from the outside and would have to be sealed from the outside to make the Ark waterproof.
The plan of salvation cannot be made any clearer than in this illustration. God provided the means (Jesus Christ) through whom we can be saved and we are sealed unto the day of redemption by God. According to Ephesians 4:30 "And grieve not the holy Spirit of God whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption."
To those that believe that we don’t have assurance we will be saved, is that belief based on a thorough and unbiased study of the word of God or on what you have been taught? We have a tendency to accept as truth the things we first learned from others. It may not have been their fault but we must find the truth for ourselves. Do not ever allow others to determine your eternity for you. Paul is recorded in I Corinthians 9:27 as stating "But I keep under my body and bring it unto subjection; lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway." There are those who would have you believe that Paul here is stating that he is fearful of losing his salvation if he doesn’t do well enough in his ministry to please God. Really? Could it not be true that Paul was not fearful of losing his salvation but his testimony? Paul doubting his salvation and yet he says (Ephesians 2:8) By grace are ye saved through faith and that not of yourselves; for it is the gift of God (9) and not of works lest any man should boast.
I do believe that based on the story of the Ark and this verse along with what Jesus says in John 10 28-29. "And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me is greater than all and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand." Are we greater than God? Is Jesus a liar? Jesus says he gave us eternal life. What part of eternal is based on our ability to keep God’s law. Didn’t the scriptures tell us that salvation is a gift of grace through faith and that not of ourselves? It isn’t our faith that saves us but the faith that Christ has in God’s ability to keep us for him.
There is a difference between confession and repentance. Some people realize they need a savior and do accept Christ as their savior, confess their sins, and vow to do better. They may even serve at church for awhile but sooner or later they get discouraged and quit. I realize it is hard for some to grasp the concept of once saved, always saved believing that if that is true then a person can claim Christ as his savior and then live their lives without any devotion to Christ and die and go to heaven. Well, it doesn’t work that way either. Christianity is not a set of rules, regulations, laws, or edicts that if we obey we’ll go to heaven and if we disobey we will go to hell. If that were true then the law would have been sufficient and there would have been no need of Christ to be born and even less need of him to die upon the cross.
God promised Adam and Eve if they sinned they would surely die and they did. We all will. God says we will and that makes it so whether I believe it or not. Romans 3:23 says "For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God’ There are some that would have you believe that it is only the big sins that condemn a person. But where is the scripture that backs up that view? Exactly when does a lie get big enough for one to lose their salvation over? The law was necessary to show that we are all sinners. It was given not as a means for salvation but as the vehicle for condemnation.
Christianity is not obedience to a set of rules. The Pharisees were strict adherents to the law and yet Christ referred to them as a generation of vipers. Jesus says that the greatest commandment is to love God with all the heart and with all thy soul and to love thy neighbor as thyself. This statement is the entire ten commandments boiled down to one short statement. It isn’t about the law. It is about our relationship to God.
Some people do confess and then fall by the wayside. The problem is they only confessed and never repented. Repentance is a turning away from where one is going and turning towards the cross. If we are truly born again, we are born into the family of God and we becomes sons. Whom God loves he also chastises. If we are not chastised then we are not children. No, if a person claims they are saved and yet live their lives without evidence of Christ then they are not children. Fathers love their children and expect them to obey and will punish and correct them if they get out of his will. But the father loves his children not because they obey but because they are his blood. His children obey because they love the father. Sure, they will make mistakes but will not stray for long. Even the Christian who goes back out into the world and appears to live his life without the thought of Christ will return if he is truly God’s child.
There are few more confusing topics than salvation. It goes beyond the standard question posed by Fundamentalists: "Have you been saved?" What the question also means is: "Don’t you wish you had the assurance of salvation?" Evangelicals and Fundamentalists think they do have such an absolute assurance.
All they have to do is "accept Christ as their personal Savior," and it’s done. They might well live exemplary lives thereafter, but living well is not crucial and definitely does not affect their salvation.
Kenneth E. Hagin, a well-known Pentecostal televangelist from the "Word Faith" wing of Protestantism, asserts that this assurance of salvation comes through being "born again": "Unless one is born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God" (John 3:3). Though much of Hagin’s theology is considered bizarre in Protestant circles, his explanation of being born again could be endorsed by millions of Evangelical Protestants. In his booklet, The New Birth, Hagin writes, "The new birth is a necessity to being saved. Through the new birth you come into the right relationship with God."
According to Hagin, there are many things that this new birth is not. "The new birth is not: confirmation, church membership, water baptism, the taking of sacraments, observing religious duties, an intellectual reception of Christianity, orthodoxy of faith, going to church, saying prayers, reading the Bible, being moral, being cultured or refined, doing good deeds, doing your best, nor any of the many other things some men are trusting in to save them." Those who have obtained the new birth "did the one thing necessary: they accepted Jesus Christ as personal Savior by repenting and turning to God with the whole heart as a little child." That one act of the will, he explains, is all they needed to do. But is this true? Does the Bible support this concept?
Scripture teaches that one’s final salvation depends on the state of the soul at death. As Jesus himself tells us, "He who endures to the end will be saved" (Matt. 24:13; cf. 25:31–46). One who dies in the state of friendship with God (the state of grace) will go to heaven. The one who dies in a state of enmity and rebellion against God (the state of mortal sin) will go to hell.
For many Fundamentalists and Evangelicals it makes no difference—as far as salvation is concerned—how you live or end your life. You can heed the altar call at church, announce that you’ve accepted Jesus as your personal Savior, and, so long as you really believe it, you’re set. From that point on there is nothing you can do, no sin you can commit, no matter how heinous, that will forfeit your salvation. You can’t undo your salvation, even if you wanted to.
Does this sound too good to be true? Yes, but nevertheless, it is something many Protestants claim. Take a look at what Wilson Ewin, the author of a booklet called There is Therefore Now No Condemnation, says. He writes that "the person who places his faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and his blood shed at Calvary is eternally secure. He can never lose his salvation. No personal breaking of God’s or man’s laws or commandments can nullify that status."
"To deny the assurance of salvation would be to deny Christ’s perfect redemption," argues Ewin, and this is something he can say only because he confuses the redemption that Christ accomplished for us objectively with our individual appropriation of that redemption. The truth is that in one sense we are all redeemed by Christ’s death on the cross—Christians, Jews, Muslims, even animists in the darkest forests (1 Tim. 2:6, 4:10, 1 John 2:2)—but our individual appropriation of what Christ provided is contingent on our response.
Certainly, Christ did die on the cross once for all and has entered into the holy place in heaven to appear before God on our behalf. Christ has abundantly provided for our salvation, but that does not mean that there is no process by which this is applied to us as individuals. Obviously, there is, or we would have been saved and justified from all eternity, with no need to repent or have faith or anything else. We would have been born "saved," with no need to be born again. Since we were not, since it is necessary for those who hear the gospel to repent and embrace it, there is a time at which we come to be reconciled to God. And if so, then we, like Adam and Eve, can become unreconciled with God and, like the prodigal son, need to come back and be reconciled again with God, after having left his family.
You Can’t Lose Heaven?
Ewin says that "no wrong act or sinful deed can ever affect the believer’s salvation. The sinner did nothing to merit God’s grace and likewise he can do nothing to demerit grace. True, sinful conduct always lessens one’s fellowship with Christ, limits his contribution to God’s work and can result in serious disciplinary action by the Holy Spirit."
One problem with this argument is that this is not even how things work in everyday life. If another person gives us something as a grace—as a gift—and even if we did nothing to deserve it (though frequently gifts are given based on our having pleased the one bestowing the gift), it in no way follows that our actions are irrelevant to whether or not we keep the gift. We can lose it in all kinds of ways. We can misplace it, destroy it, give it to someone else, take it back to the store. We may even forfeit something we were given by later displeasing the one who gave it—as when a person has been appointed to a special position but is later stripped of that position on account of mismanagement.
The argument fares no better when one turns to Scripture, for one finds that Adam and Eve, who received God’s grace in a manner just as unmerited as anyone today, most definitely did demerit it—and lost grace not only for themselves but for us as well (cf. also Rom. 11:17-24). While the idea that what is received without merit cannot be lost by demerit may have a kind of poetic charm for some, it does not stand up when compared with the way things really work—either in the everyday world or in the Bible.
Regarding the issue of whether Christians have an "absolute" assurance of salvation, regardless of their actions, consider this warning Paul gave: "See then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God’s kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness; otherwise you too will be cut off" (Rom. 11:22; see also Heb. 10:26–29, 2 Pet. 2:20–21).
Can You Know?
Related to the issue of whether one can lose one’s salvation is the question of whether one can know with complete certainty that one is in a state of salvation. Even if one could not lose one’s salvation, one still might not be sure whether one ever had salvation. Similarly, even if one could be sure that one is now in a state of salvation, one might be able to fall from grace in the future. The "knowability" of salvation is a different question than the "loseability" of salvation.
From the Radio Bible Class listeners can obtain a booklet called Can Anyone Really Know for Sure? The anonymous author says the "Lord Jesus wanted his followers to be so sure of their salvation that they would rejoice more in the expectation of heaven than in victories on earth. ‘These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God (1 John 5:13).’"
Places where Scripture speaks of our ability to know that we are abiding in grace are important and must be taken seriously. But they do not promise that we will be protected from self-deception on this matter. Even the author of Can Anyone Really Know for Sure? admits that there is a false assurance: "The New Testament teaches us that genuine assurance is possible and desirable, but it also warns us that we can be deceived through a false assurance. Jesus declared: ‘Not everyone who says to me, "Lord, Lord" shall enter the kingdom of heaven’ (Matt. 7:21)."
Sometimes Fundamentalists portray Catholics as if they must every moment be in terror of losing their salvation since Catholics recognize that it is possible to lose salvation through mortal sin. Fundamentalists then hold out the idea that, rather than living every moment in terror, they can have a calm, assured knowledge that they will, in fact, be saved, and that nothing will ever be able to change this fact.
But this portrayal is in error. Catholics do not live lives of mortal terror concerning salvation. True, salvation can be lost through mortal sin, but such sins are by nature grave ones, and not the kind that a person living the Christian life is going to slip into committing on the spur of the moment, without deliberate thought and consent. Neither does the Catholic Church teach that one cannot have an assurance of salvation. This is true both of present and future salvation.
One can be confident of one’s present salvation. This is one of the chief reasons why God gave us the sacraments—to provide visible assurances that he is invisibly providing us with his grace. And one can be confident that one has not thrown away that grace by simply examining one’s life and seeing whether one has committed mortal sin. Indeed, the tests that John sets forth in his first epistle to help us know whether we are abiding in grace are, in essence, tests of whether we are dwelling in grave sin. For example, "By this it may be seen who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not do right is not of God, nor he who does not love his brother" (1 John 3:10), "If any one says, ‘I love God,’ and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen, cannot love God whom he has not seen" (1 John 4:20), "For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome" (1 John 5:3).
Likewise, by looking at the course of one’s life in grace and the resolution of one’s heart to keep following God, one can also have an assurance of future salvation. It is this Paul speaks of when he writes to the Philippians and says, "And I am sure that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ" (Phil. 1:6). This is not a promise for all Christians, or even necessarily all in the church at Philippi, but it is a confidence that the Philippian Christians in general would make it. The basis of this is their spiritual performance to date, and Paul feels a need to explain to them that there is a basis for his confidence in them. Thus he says, immediately, "It is right for me to feel thus about you all, because I hold you in my heart, for you are all partakers with me of grace, both in my imprisonment and in the defense and confirmation of the gospel" (1:7). The fact that the Philippians performed spiritually by assisting Paul in his imprisonment and ministry showed that their hearts were with God and that it could be expected that they, at least in general, would persevere and remain with God.
There are many saintly men and women who have long lived the Christian life and whose characters are marked with profound spiritual joy and peace. Such individuals can look forward with confidence to their reception in heaven.
Such an individual was Paul, writing at the end of his life, "I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith. Henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, will award to me on that Day" (2 Tim. 4:7-8). But earlier in life, even Paul did not claim an infallible assurance, either of his present justification or of his remaining in grace in the future. Concerning his present state, he wrote, "I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not thereby justified [Gk., dedikaiomai]. It is the Lord who judges me" (1 Cor. 4:4). Concerning his remaining life, Paul was frank in admitting that even he could fall away: "I pummel my body and subdue it, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified" (1 Cor. 9:27). Of course, for a spiritual giant such as Paul, it would be quite unexpected and out of character for him to fall from God’s grace. Nevertheless, he points out that, however much confidence in his own salvation he may be warranted in feeling, even he cannot be infallibly sure either of his own present state or of his future course.
The same is true of us. We can, if our lives display a pattern of perseverance and spiritual fruit, have not only a confidence in our present state of grace but also of our future perseverance with God. Yet we cannot have an infallible certitude of our own salvation, as many Protestants will admit. There is the possibility of self-deception (cf. Matt. 7:22-23). As Jeremiah expressed it, "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately corrupt; who can understand it?" (Jer. 17:9). There is also the possibility of falling from grace through mortal sin, and even of falling away from the faith entirely, for as Jesus told us, there are those who "believe for a while and in time of temptation fall away" (Luke 8:13). It is in the light of these warnings and admonitions that we must understand Scripture’s positive statements concerning our ability to know and have confidence in our salvation. Assurance we may have; infallible certitude we may not.
For example, Philippians 2:12 says, "Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling." This is not the language of self-confident assurance. Our salvation is something that remains to be worked out.
What To Say
"Are you saved?" asks the Fundamentalist. The Catholic should reply: "As the Bible says, I am already saved (Rom. 8:24, Eph. 2:5–8), but I’m also being saved (1 Cor. 1:18, 2 Cor. 2:15, Phil. 2:12), and I have the hope that I will be saved (Rom. 5:9–10, 1 Cor. 3:12–15). Like the apostle Paul I am working out my salvation in fear and trembling (Phil. 2:12), with hopeful confidence in the promises of Christ (Rom. 5:2, 2 Tim. 2:11–13)."
The Apostle Paul said it best when he declared that "all things are lawful but not all things are expedient" (I Corinthians 10:23) Those Christians who acknowledge assurance of their salvation do not look upon this assurance as a license to sin but rather that even though our salvation is assured our rewards in heaven nor our close relationship with the holy trinity is not. Miserable indeed is the true child of God who are in willful disobedience and is living with a loving relationship to his savior.
If I didn’t have assurance that I was saved I would be frozen in fear that any action or thought could condemn me to hell. The premise that I’m okay unless I commit a big sin is neither scriptural nor reassuring. Jesus makes it plain that to break the law in the least of things makes one guilty of violating the entire law. There is no distinction made anywhere in the scriptures between different types or sin nor does the scriptures talk about different degrees of sin. Sin is sin, plain and simple. The bible makes it clear that even the saved will commit sin but that sin is covered by the blood and we will not be charged with it.
There are however rewards to be given out in heaven and if we fail to run well or to finish our course, the it is the rewards we will lose, not our salvation. The Pharisees focused their lives on obedience to the laws do they could remain holy but Jesus said that they had their reward here on earth. It is our relationship to God that we must protect and nor adherence to procedures, rules, regulations, and laws. When Christ declared "It is finished" from the Cross he was referring to the plan of salvation. He did not come to do away with the law but to fulfill the law. That doesn’t mean we are still bound by the law for if we were then we are still condemned to die but if we give ourselves completed to Christ then He has paid the penalty for our sin.
A person cannot be born but twice: once physically and the other spiritually. I know some have made a logical argument against this point of view but the bible is not a book of logic and I do believe Christ rather than the logic of man. There are so many scriptures, both old and new testament, that give of assurance of our salvation that one just cannot deny that truth. The argument against assurance uses the logic of man that it just doesn’t seem right that a person can claim to accept Christ, go back out into the world and live as any sinner, and still go to heaven. But I’m not willing to put my faith and trust in the logic of man but in the Lord Jesus Christ who declared through Paul in Romans 34-39 that he is able to keep us secure.
e are too many interpretations, or translations as they like to refer to themselves, for me to know which bible to use as a basis of my study. So how do I proceed?
First we have to set some study guidelines. Without rules and boundaries then we have no assurance that our study methods are sound and that we are still on the correct course to arrive at the truth. First we have to settle on a definition of truth. John 1:17 states "For the law was given by Moses but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ." John 8:32 says "And ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free", and John 14; 6 says " Jesus saith unto him "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father but by me".
John 1:1 maintains that Jesus is the word and the word is God. ‘In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." I believe it should be apparent that Jesus and God are the same being and that if God says that Jesus is truth then we must judge all statements using Jesus as the standard of measurement.
As to which translation of the Bible to use I do believe the one that served many mighty men of God for hundreds of years will suffice. I am aware that many claim not to be able to understand the King James version but I do believe the Bible is foolishness ( I Corinthians 1:18) to those that don’t believe as the book is spiritually discerned. God sent the Holy Ghost to be our teacher so with reliance on God and much prayer and study( 2 Timothy 2:15) the truth will be revealed. We will use Christ as our standard to determine the correct interpretation of scripture and not rely on the logic of men. In I Corinthians chapter 3 and verse 19 the bible says "For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness."
God’s plan of salvation was established from the beginning although it was hidden for many years. Jesus was introduced in Genesis 3:15 "And I will but enmity between thee and the woman and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head and thou shalt bruise his head."
Some will argue that the sin of Eve and Adam is proof that we cannot have assurance of our salvation. Their logic is that the couple sinned and therefor lost their salvation and needed to be saved again. That logic assumes some facts not in evidence, and fact one is that Adam and Eve had salvation to lose. But before the first sin they had no need of salvation as death only came into being because of their sin and a plan of salvation was only introduced because the two were condemned to die. In other words, Adam and Eve did not have salvation to lose. They had a physical life to lose and they had to die because their nature was now corrupt. Their sin nature was passed down because God makes it clear in the account of creation that "like begats like, each after its own kind". One has to be careful not to read things into scripture that isn’t there and to guard against faulty logic. While there is no scripture to declare the eternal state Adam and Eve there is evidence that they obeyed God’s commands. Genesis Chapter 4 verse one and verse four.
God destroyed the world by water because the inhabitants of earth had become wicked. Even though God judged them wicked and the concept of sin had been introduced into the world, there was no measuring stick by which to determine what was or was not a sin. What we had was a world system that operated by the logic of men. A person had to determine what was important to himself and how to best survive and still satisfy his own needs and wants. Noah delivered a message to the people from God urging them to follow God and not their own desires and Noah was faithful to preach that message for 120 years.
The story of the Ark is a perfect illustration of the plan of salvation. The plans for the Ark was God’s plans. Noah didn’t have to do anything in order to get the plans but he did have to work because he had the plans.
Philippians 2:12 states"Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling." Some would have you believe this scripture means in order to be saved one much work but when we use lessons already taught us in the bible and view this scripture from the life and teachings of Christ, then that view doesn’t seem as logical. Noah lived before the age of grace yet because of his faith, he found grace with God. (Genesis 6:8). It was because of his faith that he built the ark. And his salvation was established by the grace of God. His faith is evidenced by the fruit it produced. In Noah’s case the fruit of his physical labor produced a ship. But we must remember it was God who furnished the plans and material for that ship. Even if Noah had become so discouraged that he gave up working on the Ark and drowned as everyone else did, that is only proof that he lost his physical life. We can make no judgements about his soul, and after all, salvation is all about the soul, not our physical bodies.
After the Ark was finished and everyone was aboard, the door to the Ark was shut. Genesis 7:16 states that the Lord shut him in. In other words, the door was closed from the outside. Noah could not get out and if he had, he could not close the door again because the door would have to be shut from the outside and would have to be sealed from the outside to make the Ark waterproof.
The plan of salvation cannot be made any clearer than in this illustration. God provided the means (Jesus Christ) through whom we can be saved and we are sealed unto the day of redemption by God. According to Ephesians 4:30 "And grieve not the holy Spirit of God whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption."
To those that believe that we don’t have assurance we will be saved, is that belief based on a thorough and unbiased study of the word of God or on what you have been taught? We have a tendency to accept as truth the things we first learned from others. It may not have been their fault but we must find the truth for ourselves. Do not ever allow others to determine your eternity for you. Paul is recorded in I Corinthians 9:27 as stating "But I keep under my body and bring it unto subjection; lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway." There are those who would have you believe that Paul here is stating that he is fearful of losing his salvation if he doesn’t do well enough in his ministry to please God. Really? Could it not be true that Paul was not fearful of losing his salvation but his testimony? Paul doubting his salvation and yet he says (Ephesians 2:8) By grace are ye saved through faith and that not of yourselves; for it is the gift of God (9) and not of works lest any man should boast.
I do believe that based on the story of the Ark and this verse along with what Jesus says in John 10 28-29. "And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me is greater than all and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand." Are we greater than God? Is Jesus a liar? Jesus says he gave us eternal life. What part of eternal is based on our ability to keep God’s law. Didn’t the scriptures tell us that salvation is a gift of grace through faith and that not of ourselves? It isn’t our faith that saves us but the faith that Christ has in God’s ability to keep us for him.
There is a difference between confession and repentance. Some people realize they need a savior and do accept Christ as their savior, confess their sins, and vow to do better. They may even serve at church for awhile but sooner or later they get discouraged and quit. I realize it is hard for some to grasp the concept of once saved, always saved believing that if that is true then a person can claim Christ as his savior and then live their lives without any devotion to Christ and die and go to heaven. Well, it doesn’t work that way either. Christianity is not a set of rules, regulations, laws, or edicts that if we obey we’ll go to heaven and if we disobey we will go to hell. If that were true then the law would have been sufficient and there would have been no need of Christ to be born and even less need of him to die upon the cross.
God promised Adam and Eve if they sinned they would surely die and they did. We all will. God says we will and that makes it so whether I believe it or not. Romans 3:23 says "For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God’ There are some that would have you believe that it is only the big sins that condemn a person. But where is the scripture that backs up that view? Exactly when does a lie get big enough for one to lose their salvation over? The law was necessary to show that we are all sinners. It was given not as a means for salvation but as the vehicle for condemnation.
Christianity is not obedience to a set of rules. The Pharisees were strict adherents to the law and yet Christ referred to them as a generation of vipers. Jesus says that the greatest commandment is to love God with all the heart and with all thy soul and to love thy neighbor as thyself. This statement is the entire ten commandments boiled down to one short statement. It isn’t about the law. It is about our relationship to God.
Some people do confess and then fall by the wayside. The problem is they only confessed and never repented. Repentance is a turning away from where one is going and turning towards the cross. If we are truly born again, we are born into the family of God and we becomes sons. Whom God loves he also chastises. If we are not chastised then we are not children. No, if a person claims they are saved and yet live their lives without evidence of Christ then they are not children. Fathers love their children and expect them to obey and will punish and correct them if they get out of his will. But the father loves his children not because they obey but because they are his blood. His children obey because they love the father. Sure, they will make mistakes but will not stray for long. Even the Christian who goes back out into the world and appears to live his life without the thought of Christ will return if he is truly God’s child.
The Catholic Position
There are few more confusing topics than salvation. It goes beyond the standard question posed by Fundamentalists: "Have you been saved?" What the question also means is: "Don’t you wish you had the assurance of salvation?" Evangelicals and Fundamentalists think they do have such an absolute assurance.
All they have to do is "accept Christ as their personal Savior," and it’s done. They might well live exemplary lives thereafter, but living well is not crucial and definitely does not affect their salvation.
Kenneth E. Hagin, a well-known Pentecostal televangelist from the "Word Faith" wing of Protestantism, asserts that this assurance of salvation comes through being "born again": "Unless one is born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God" (John 3:3). Though much of Hagin’s theology is considered bizarre in Protestant circles, his explanation of being born again could be endorsed by millions of Evangelical Protestants. In his booklet, The New Birth, Hagin writes, "The new birth is a necessity to being saved. Through the new birth you come into the right relationship with God."
According to Hagin, there are many things that this new birth is not. "The new birth is not: confirmation, church membership, water baptism, the taking of sacraments, observing religious duties, an intellectual reception of Christianity, orthodoxy of faith, going to church, saying prayers, reading the Bible, being moral, being cultured or refined, doing good deeds, doing your best, nor any of the many other things some men are trusting in to save them." Those who have obtained the new birth "did the one thing necessary: they accepted Jesus Christ as personal Savior by repenting and turning to God with the whole heart as a little child." That one act of the will, he explains, is all they needed to do. But is this true? Does the Bible support this concept?
Scripture teaches that one’s final salvation depends on the state of the soul at death. As Jesus himself tells us, "He who endures to the end will be saved" (Matt. 24:13; cf. 25:31–46). One who dies in the state of friendship with God (the state of grace) will go to heaven. The one who dies in a state of enmity and rebellion against God (the state of mortal sin) will go to hell.
For many Fundamentalists and Evangelicals it makes no difference—as far as salvation is concerned—how you live or end your life. You can heed the altar call at church, announce that you’ve accepted Jesus as your personal Savior, and, so long as you really believe it, you’re set. From that point on there is nothing you can do, no sin you can commit, no matter how heinous, that will forfeit your salvation. You can’t undo your salvation, even if you wanted to.
Does this sound too good to be true? Yes, but nevertheless, it is something many Protestants claim. Take a look at what Wilson Ewin, the author of a booklet called There is Therefore Now No Condemnation, says. He writes that "the person who places his faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and his blood shed at Calvary is eternally secure. He can never lose his salvation. No personal breaking of God’s or man’s laws or commandments can nullify that status."
"To deny the assurance of salvation would be to deny Christ’s perfect redemption," argues Ewin, and this is something he can say only because he confuses the redemption that Christ accomplished for us objectively with our individual appropriation of that redemption. The truth is that in one sense we are all redeemed by Christ’s death on the cross—Christians, Jews, Muslims, even animists in the darkest forests (1 Tim. 2:6, 4:10, 1 John 2:2)—but our individual appropriation of what Christ provided is contingent on our response.
Certainly, Christ did die on the cross once for all and has entered into the holy place in heaven to appear before God on our behalf. Christ has abundantly provided for our salvation, but that does not mean that there is no process by which this is applied to us as individuals. Obviously, there is, or we would have been saved and justified from all eternity, with no need to repent or have faith or anything else. We would have been born "saved," with no need to be born again. Since we were not, since it is necessary for those who hear the gospel to repent and embrace it, there is a time at which we come to be reconciled to God. And if so, then we, like Adam and Eve, can become unreconciled with God and, like the prodigal son, need to come back and be reconciled again with God, after having left his family.
You Can’t Lose Heaven?
Ewin says that "no wrong act or sinful deed can ever affect the believer’s salvation. The sinner did nothing to merit God’s grace and likewise he can do nothing to demerit grace. True, sinful conduct always lessens one’s fellowship with Christ, limits his contribution to God’s work and can result in serious disciplinary action by the Holy Spirit."
One problem with this argument is that this is not even how things work in everyday life. If another person gives us something as a grace—as a gift—and even if we did nothing to deserve it (though frequently gifts are given based on our having pleased the one bestowing the gift), it in no way follows that our actions are irrelevant to whether or not we keep the gift. We can lose it in all kinds of ways. We can misplace it, destroy it, give it to someone else, take it back to the store. We may even forfeit something we were given by later displeasing the one who gave it—as when a person has been appointed to a special position but is later stripped of that position on account of mismanagement.
The argument fares no better when one turns to Scripture, for one finds that Adam and Eve, who received God’s grace in a manner just as unmerited as anyone today, most definitely did demerit it—and lost grace not only for themselves but for us as well (cf. also Rom. 11:17-24). While the idea that what is received without merit cannot be lost by demerit may have a kind of poetic charm for some, it does not stand up when compared with the way things really work—either in the everyday world or in the Bible.
Regarding the issue of whether Christians have an "absolute" assurance of salvation, regardless of their actions, consider this warning Paul gave: "See then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God’s kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness; otherwise you too will be cut off" (Rom. 11:22; see also Heb. 10:26–29, 2 Pet. 2:20–21).
Can You Know?
Related to the issue of whether one can lose one’s salvation is the question of whether one can know with complete certainty that one is in a state of salvation. Even if one could not lose one’s salvation, one still might not be sure whether one ever had salvation. Similarly, even if one could be sure that one is now in a state of salvation, one might be able to fall from grace in the future. The "knowability" of salvation is a different question than the "loseability" of salvation.
From the Radio Bible Class listeners can obtain a booklet called Can Anyone Really Know for Sure? The anonymous author says the "Lord Jesus wanted his followers to be so sure of their salvation that they would rejoice more in the expectation of heaven than in victories on earth. ‘These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God (1 John 5:13).’"
Places where Scripture speaks of our ability to know that we are abiding in grace are important and must be taken seriously. But they do not promise that we will be protected from self-deception on this matter. Even the author of Can Anyone Really Know for Sure? admits that there is a false assurance: "The New Testament teaches us that genuine assurance is possible and desirable, but it also warns us that we can be deceived through a false assurance. Jesus declared: ‘Not everyone who says to me, "Lord, Lord" shall enter the kingdom of heaven’ (Matt. 7:21)."
Sometimes Fundamentalists portray Catholics as if they must every moment be in terror of losing their salvation since Catholics recognize that it is possible to lose salvation through mortal sin. Fundamentalists then hold out the idea that, rather than living every moment in terror, they can have a calm, assured knowledge that they will, in fact, be saved, and that nothing will ever be able to change this fact.
But this portrayal is in error. Catholics do not live lives of mortal terror concerning salvation. True, salvation can be lost through mortal sin, but such sins are by nature grave ones, and not the kind that a person living the Christian life is going to slip into committing on the spur of the moment, without deliberate thought and consent. Neither does the Catholic Church teach that one cannot have an assurance of salvation. This is true both of present and future salvation.
One can be confident of one’s present salvation. This is one of the chief reasons why God gave us the sacraments—to provide visible assurances that he is invisibly providing us with his grace. And one can be confident that one has not thrown away that grace by simply examining one’s life and seeing whether one has committed mortal sin. Indeed, the tests that John sets forth in his first epistle to help us know whether we are abiding in grace are, in essence, tests of whether we are dwelling in grave sin. For example, "By this it may be seen who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not do right is not of God, nor he who does not love his brother" (1 John 3:10), "If any one says, ‘I love God,’ and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen, cannot love God whom he has not seen" (1 John 4:20), "For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome" (1 John 5:3).
Likewise, by looking at the course of one’s life in grace and the resolution of one’s heart to keep following God, one can also have an assurance of future salvation. It is this Paul speaks of when he writes to the Philippians and says, "And I am sure that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ" (Phil. 1:6). This is not a promise for all Christians, or even necessarily all in the church at Philippi, but it is a confidence that the Philippian Christians in general would make it. The basis of this is their spiritual performance to date, and Paul feels a need to explain to them that there is a basis for his confidence in them. Thus he says, immediately, "It is right for me to feel thus about you all, because I hold you in my heart, for you are all partakers with me of grace, both in my imprisonment and in the defense and confirmation of the gospel" (1:7). The fact that the Philippians performed spiritually by assisting Paul in his imprisonment and ministry showed that their hearts were with God and that it could be expected that they, at least in general, would persevere and remain with God.
There are many saintly men and women who have long lived the Christian life and whose characters are marked with profound spiritual joy and peace. Such individuals can look forward with confidence to their reception in heaven.
Such an individual was Paul, writing at the end of his life, "I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith. Henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, will award to me on that Day" (2 Tim. 4:7-8). But earlier in life, even Paul did not claim an infallible assurance, either of his present justification or of his remaining in grace in the future. Concerning his present state, he wrote, "I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not thereby justified [Gk., dedikaiomai]. It is the Lord who judges me" (1 Cor. 4:4). Concerning his remaining life, Paul was frank in admitting that even he could fall away: "I pummel my body and subdue it, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified" (1 Cor. 9:27). Of course, for a spiritual giant such as Paul, it would be quite unexpected and out of character for him to fall from God’s grace. Nevertheless, he points out that, however much confidence in his own salvation he may be warranted in feeling, even he cannot be infallibly sure either of his own present state or of his future course.
The same is true of us. We can, if our lives display a pattern of perseverance and spiritual fruit, have not only a confidence in our present state of grace but also of our future perseverance with God. Yet we cannot have an infallible certitude of our own salvation, as many Protestants will admit. There is the possibility of self-deception (cf. Matt. 7:22-23). As Jeremiah expressed it, "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately corrupt; who can understand it?" (Jer. 17:9). There is also the possibility of falling from grace through mortal sin, and even of falling away from the faith entirely, for as Jesus told us, there are those who "believe for a while and in time of temptation fall away" (Luke 8:13). It is in the light of these warnings and admonitions that we must understand Scripture’s positive statements concerning our ability to know and have confidence in our salvation. Assurance we may have; infallible certitude we may not.
For example, Philippians 2:12 says, "Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling." This is not the language of self-confident assurance. Our salvation is something that remains to be worked out.
What To Say
"Are you saved?" asks the Fundamentalist. The Catholic should reply: "As the Bible says, I am already saved (Rom. 8:24, Eph. 2:5–8), but I’m also being saved (1 Cor. 1:18, 2 Cor. 2:15, Phil. 2:12), and I have the hope that I will be saved (Rom. 5:9–10, 1 Cor. 3:12–15). Like the apostle Paul I am working out my salvation in fear and trembling (Phil. 2:12), with hopeful confidence in the promises of Christ (Rom. 5:2, 2 Tim. 2:11–13)."
The Apostle Paul said it best when he declared that "all things are lawful but not all things are expedient" (I Corinthians 10:23) Those Christians who acknowledge assurance of their salvation do not look upon this assurance as a license to sin but rather that even though our salvation is assured our rewards in heaven nor our close relationship with the holy trinity is not. Miserable indeed is the true child of God who are in willful disobedience and is living with a loving relationship to his savior.
If I didn’t have assurance that I was saved I would be frozen in fear that any action or thought could condemn me to hell. The premise that I’m okay unless I commit a big sin is neither scriptural nor reassuring. Jesus makes it plain that to break the law in the least of things makes one guilty of violating the entire law. There is no distinction made anywhere in the scriptures between different types or sin nor does the scriptures talk about different degrees of sin. Sin is sin, plain and simple. The bible makes it clear that even the saved will commit sin but that sin is covered by the blood and we will not be charged with it.
There are however rewards to be given out in heaven and if we fail to run well or to finish our course, the it is the rewards we will lose, not our salvation. The Pharisees focused their lives on obedience to the laws do they could remain holy but Jesus said that they had their reward here on earth. It is our relationship to God that we must protect and nor adherence to procedures, rules, regulations, and laws. When Christ declared "It is finished" from the Cross he was referring to the plan of salvation. He did not come to do away with the law but to fulfill the law. That doesn’t mean we are still bound by the law for if we were then we are still condemned to die but if we give ourselves completed to Christ then He has paid the penalty for our sin.
A person cannot be born but twice: once physically and the other spiritually. I know some have made a logical argument against this point of view but the bible is not a book of logic and I do believe Christ rather than the logic of man. There are so many scriptures, both old and new testament, that give of assurance of our salvation that one just cannot deny that truth. The argument against assurance uses the logic of man that it just doesn’t seem right that a person can claim to accept Christ, go back out into the world and live as any sinner, and still go to heaven. But I’m not willing to put my faith and trust in the logic of man but in the Lord Jesus Christ who declared through Paul in Romans 34-39 that he is able to keep us secure.
All they have to do is "accept Christ as their personal Savior," and it’s done. They might well live exemplary lives thereafter, but living well is not crucial and definitely does not affect their salvation.
Kenneth E. Hagin, a well-known Pentecostal televangelist from the "Word Faith" wing of Protestantism, asserts that this assurance of salvation comes through being "born again": "Unless one is born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God" (John 3:3). Though much of Hagin’s theology is considered bizarre in Protestant circles, his explanation of being born again could be endorsed by millions of Evangelical Protestants. In his booklet, The New Birth, Hagin writes, "The new birth is a necessity to being saved. Through the new birth you come into the right relationship with God."
According to Hagin, there are many things that this new birth is not. "The new birth is not: confirmation, church membership, water baptism, the taking of sacraments, observing religious duties, an intellectual reception of Christianity, orthodoxy of faith, going to church, saying prayers, reading the Bible, being moral, being cultured or refined, doing good deeds, doing your best, nor any of the many other things some men are trusting in to save them." Those who have obtained the new birth "did the one thing necessary: they accepted Jesus Christ as personal Savior by repenting and turning to God with the whole heart as a little child." That one act of the will, he explains, is all they needed to do. But is this true? Does the Bible support this concept?
Scripture teaches that one’s final salvation depends on the state of the soul at death. As Jesus himself tells us, "He who endures to the end will be saved" (Matt. 24:13; cf. 25:31–46). One who dies in the state of friendship with God (the state of grace) will go to heaven. The one who dies in a state of enmity and rebellion against God (the state of mortal sin) will go to hell.
For many Fundamentalists and Evangelicals it makes no difference—as far as salvation is concerned—how you live or end your life. You can heed the altar call at church, announce that you’ve accepted Jesus as your personal Savior, and, so long as you really believe it, you’re set. From that point on there is nothing you can do, no sin you can commit, no matter how heinous, that will forfeit your salvation. You can’t undo your salvation, even if you wanted to.
Does this sound too good to be true? Yes, but nevertheless, it is something many Protestants claim. Take a look at what Wilson Ewin, the author of a booklet called There is Therefore Now No Condemnation, says. He writes that "the person who places his faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and his blood shed at Calvary is eternally secure. He can never lose his salvation. No personal breaking of God’s or man’s laws or commandments can nullify that status."
"To deny the assurance of salvation would be to deny Christ’s perfect redemption," argues Ewin, and this is something he can say only because he confuses the redemption that Christ accomplished for us objectively with our individual appropriation of that redemption. The truth is that in one sense we are all redeemed by Christ’s death on the cross—Christians, Jews, Muslims, even animists in the darkest forests (1 Tim. 2:6, 4:10, 1 John 2:2)—but our individual appropriation of what Christ provided is contingent on our response.
Certainly, Christ did die on the cross once for all and has entered into the holy place in heaven to appear before God on our behalf. Christ has abundantly provided for our salvation, but that does not mean that there is no process by which this is applied to us as individuals. Obviously, there is, or we would have been saved and justified from all eternity, with no need to repent or have faith or anything else. We would have been born "saved," with no need to be born again. Since we were not, since it is necessary for those who hear the gospel to repent and embrace it, there is a time at which we come to be reconciled to God. And if so, then we, like Adam and Eve, can become unreconciled with God and, like the prodigal son, need to come back and be reconciled again with God, after having left his family.
You Can’t Lose Heaven?
Ewin says that "no wrong act or sinful deed can ever affect the believer’s salvation. The sinner did nothing to merit God’s grace and likewise he can do nothing to demerit grace. True, sinful conduct always lessens one’s fellowship with Christ, limits his contribution to God’s work and can result in serious disciplinary action by the Holy Spirit."
One problem with this argument is that this is not even how things work in everyday life. If another person gives us something as a grace—as a gift—and even if we did nothing to deserve it (though frequently gifts are given based on our having pleased the one bestowing the gift), it in no way follows that our actions are irrelevant to whether or not we keep the gift. We can lose it in all kinds of ways. We can misplace it, destroy it, give it to someone else, take it back to the store. We may even forfeit something we were given by later displeasing the one who gave it—as when a person has been appointed to a special position but is later stripped of that position on account of mismanagement.
The argument fares no better when one turns to Scripture, for one finds that Adam and Eve, who received God’s grace in a manner just as unmerited as anyone today, most definitely did demerit it—and lost grace not only for themselves but for us as well (cf. also Rom. 11:17-24). While the idea that what is received without merit cannot be lost by demerit may have a kind of poetic charm for some, it does not stand up when compared with the way things really work—either in the everyday world or in the Bible.
Regarding the issue of whether Christians have an "absolute" assurance of salvation, regardless of their actions, consider this warning Paul gave: "See then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God’s kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness; otherwise you too will be cut off" (Rom. 11:22; see also Heb. 10:26–29, 2 Pet. 2:20–21).
Can You Know?
Related to the issue of whether one can lose one’s salvation is the question of whether one can know with complete certainty that one is in a state of salvation. Even if one could not lose one’s salvation, one still might not be sure whether one ever had salvation. Similarly, even if one could be sure that one is now in a state of salvation, one might be able to fall from grace in the future. The "knowability" of salvation is a different question than the "loseability" of salvation.
From the Radio Bible Class listeners can obtain a booklet called Can Anyone Really Know for Sure? The anonymous author says the "Lord Jesus wanted his followers to be so sure of their salvation that they would rejoice more in the expectation of heaven than in victories on earth. ‘These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God (1 John 5:13).’"
Places where Scripture speaks of our ability to know that we are abiding in grace are important and must be taken seriously. But they do not promise that we will be protected from self-deception on this matter. Even the author of Can Anyone Really Know for Sure? admits that there is a false assurance: "The New Testament teaches us that genuine assurance is possible and desirable, but it also warns us that we can be deceived through a false assurance. Jesus declared: ‘Not everyone who says to me, "Lord, Lord" shall enter the kingdom of heaven’ (Matt. 7:21)."
Sometimes Fundamentalists portray Catholics as if they must every moment be in terror of losing their salvation since Catholics recognize that it is possible to lose salvation through mortal sin. Fundamentalists then hold out the idea that, rather than living every moment in terror, they can have a calm, assured knowledge that they will, in fact, be saved, and that nothing will ever be able to change this fact.
But this portrayal is in error. Catholics do not live lives of mortal terror concerning salvation. True, salvation can be lost through mortal sin, but such sins are by nature grave ones, and not the kind that a person living the Christian life is going to slip into committing on the spur of the moment, without deliberate thought and consent. Neither does the Catholic Church teach that one cannot have an assurance of salvation. This is true both of present and future salvation.
One can be confident of one’s present salvation. This is one of the chief reasons why God gave us the sacraments—to provide visible assurances that he is invisibly providing us with his grace. And one can be confident that one has not thrown away that grace by simply examining one’s life and seeing whether one has committed mortal sin. Indeed, the tests that John sets forth in his first epistle to help us know whether we are abiding in grace are, in essence, tests of whether we are dwelling in grave sin. For example, "By this it may be seen who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not do right is not of God, nor he who does not love his brother" (1 John 3:10), "If any one says, ‘I love God,’ and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen, cannot love God whom he has not seen" (1 John 4:20), "For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome" (1 John 5:3).
Likewise, by looking at the course of one’s life in grace and the resolution of one’s heart to keep following God, one can also have an assurance of future salvation. It is this Paul speaks of when he writes to the Philippians and says, "And I am sure that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ" (Phil. 1:6). This is not a promise for all Christians, or even necessarily all in the church at Philippi, but it is a confidence that the Philippian Christians in general would make it. The basis of this is their spiritual performance to date, and Paul feels a need to explain to them that there is a basis for his confidence in them. Thus he says, immediately, "It is right for me to feel thus about you all, because I hold you in my heart, for you are all partakers with me of grace, both in my imprisonment and in the defense and confirmation of the gospel" (1:7). The fact that the Philippians performed spiritually by assisting Paul in his imprisonment and ministry showed that their hearts were with God and that it could be expected that they, at least in general, would persevere and remain with God.
There are many saintly men and women who have long lived the Christian life and whose characters are marked with profound spiritual joy and peace. Such individuals can look forward with confidence to their reception in heaven.
Such an individual was Paul, writing at the end of his life, "I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith. Henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, will award to me on that Day" (2 Tim. 4:7-8). But earlier in life, even Paul did not claim an infallible assurance, either of his present justification or of his remaining in grace in the future. Concerning his present state, he wrote, "I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not thereby justified [Gk., dedikaiomai]. It is the Lord who judges me" (1 Cor. 4:4). Concerning his remaining life, Paul was frank in admitting that even he could fall away: "I pummel my body and subdue it, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified" (1 Cor. 9:27). Of course, for a spiritual giant such as Paul, it would be quite unexpected and out of character for him to fall from God’s grace. Nevertheless, he points out that, however much confidence in his own salvation he may be warranted in feeling, even he cannot be infallibly sure either of his own present state or of his future course.
The same is true of us. We can, if our lives display a pattern of perseverance and spiritual fruit, have not only a confidence in our present state of grace but also of our future perseverance with God. Yet we cannot have an infallible certitude of our own salvation, as many Protestants will admit. There is the possibility of self-deception (cf. Matt. 7:22-23). As Jeremiah expressed it, "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately corrupt; who can understand it?" (Jer. 17:9). There is also the possibility of falling from grace through mortal sin, and even of falling away from the faith entirely, for as Jesus told us, there are those who "believe for a while and in time of temptation fall away" (Luke 8:13). It is in the light of these warnings and admonitions that we must understand Scripture’s positive statements concerning our ability to know and have confidence in our salvation. Assurance we may have; infallible certitude we may not.
For example, Philippians 2:12 says, "Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling." This is not the language of self-confident assurance. Our salvation is something that remains to be worked out.
What To Say
"Are you saved?" asks the Fundamentalist. The Catholic should reply: "As the Bible says, I am already saved (Rom. 8:24, Eph. 2:5–8), but I’m also being saved (1 Cor. 1:18, 2 Cor. 2:15, Phil. 2:12), and I have the hope that I will be saved (Rom. 5:9–10, 1 Cor. 3:12–15). Like the apostle Paul I am working out my salvation in fear and trembling (Phil. 2:12), with hopeful confidence in the promises of Christ (Rom. 5:2, 2 Tim. 2:11–13)."
The Apostle Paul said it best when he declared that "all things are lawful but not all things are expedient" (I Corinthians 10:23) Those Christians who acknowledge assurance of their salvation do not look upon this assurance as a license to sin but rather that even though our salvation is assured our rewards in heaven nor our close relationship with the holy trinity is not. Miserable indeed is the true child of God who are in willful disobedience and is living with a loving relationship to his savior.
If I didn’t have assurance that I was saved I would be frozen in fear that any action or thought could condemn me to hell. The premise that I’m okay unless I commit a big sin is neither scriptural nor reassuring. Jesus makes it plain that to break the law in the least of things makes one guilty of violating the entire law. There is no distinction made anywhere in the scriptures between different types or sin nor does the scriptures talk about different degrees of sin. Sin is sin, plain and simple. The bible makes it clear that even the saved will commit sin but that sin is covered by the blood and we will not be charged with it.
There are however rewards to be given out in heaven and if we fail to run well or to finish our course, the it is the rewards we will lose, not our salvation. The Pharisees focused their lives on obedience to the laws do they could remain holy but Jesus said that they had their reward here on earth. It is our relationship to God that we must protect and nor adherence to procedures, rules, regulations, and laws. When Christ declared "It is finished" from the Cross he was referring to the plan of salvation. He did not come to do away with the law but to fulfill the law. That doesn’t mean we are still bound by the law for if we were then we are still condemned to die but if we give ourselves completed to Christ then He has paid the penalty for our sin.
A person cannot be born but twice: once physically and the other spiritually. I know some have made a logical argument against this point of view but the bible is not a book of logic and I do believe Christ rather than the logic of man. There are so many scriptures, both old and new testament, that give of assurance of our salvation that one just cannot deny that truth. The argument against assurance uses the logic of man that it just doesn’t seem right that a person can claim to accept Christ, go back out into the world and live as any sinner, and still go to heaven. But I’m not willing to put my faith and trust in the logic of man but in the Lord Jesus Christ who declared through Paul in Romans 34-39 that he is able to keep us secure.
Monday, December 09, 2013
To Give to the Poor 0r Not Give to the Poor, that is the question.
It is more blessed to give than to receive so it is said and the Christmas season (or holiday season if you are offended by Christmas) is the season for giving. There are collection centers that take new toys and distribute them to poor children and the needs of the poor and elderly. All these are worthy projects and I wouldn't change any of them. What bothers me is that some people are poor because they are too lazy to help themselves except when it comes time to take advantage of other people.
A good example of this is the actions of the family of a crippled widow woman who attends our church. The woman has a son but he won't bring her to church so she has to beg other church members to give her a ride yet she never offers to pay for gas or buy them lunch. She never contributes a dime to the church yet she helps herself to three or four bottles of water every Sunday morning and Sunday night. None of her family ever darken the doors of the church unless the words free or food are involved. Saturday was the church's Christmas dinner so her son, two daughters, and all the kids showed up, ate at least three plates full of food and then took home 13 heaping full plates full of food. They didn't ask nor say thank you.
Of course her family didn't make it to church Sunday but they do plan on coming for the evening service on the 15th. That is the night of our Christmas play and when we traditionally give out our treat bags full of fruit, nuts, and candy. The last time these people came to church was at homecoming when we had dinner on the ground. On three occasions we have collected food to give to them and they want to avail themselves of everything free the church offers.
We had a chicken dinner a couple of months ago ($8.00 a plate for 1/2 BBQ chicken and fixins, including desert) and the mother asked to be given three plates for free and then asked to have the plates delivered to her 18 miles away from the church.
I gave one man 7 shirts and six pairs of pants and then he had the nerve to complain that he didn't have a good pair of shoes to wear the clothes with and asked me to buy him a pair. Another pay who doesn't work asked the preacher to tell me to DVD his brothers funeral, then go mow his grass (he lives 30 miles from me). I reluctantly agreed to do the funeral except I refused to get any shots of the body. he gripped about the fact that I only made the one DVD and didn't make copies for his family.
he took one of the bibles the church keeps to give to new members to put in his brothers caskets. He didn't offer to compensate me or the church. The pastor not only conducted the funeral but also mowed his grass and the preacher had to bring his mower over 60 miles.
I don't dislike poor people. There was a time in my life when the best I could do was sleep in the guard shack at the city lot on Green Street in High Point. I worked a full time job and a part time job that provided me with 30 hours a week. I won't go into details but I worked hard and had a good income but through no fault of my own I was deeply in debt and homeless. I had intentions of remaining that way. I worked my way out of debt and now I'm married, retired and own my own home. I never asked nor did anyone ever give me anything.
Some people are poor and their attitude is one of "I'm poor so I'm going to take as much from you as I can get." You feel about this people however you want to feel. We will always have the poor among us. Some are poor in spite of how hard they try while others are poor because they try hard not to try.'
A good example of this is the actions of the family of a crippled widow woman who attends our church. The woman has a son but he won't bring her to church so she has to beg other church members to give her a ride yet she never offers to pay for gas or buy them lunch. She never contributes a dime to the church yet she helps herself to three or four bottles of water every Sunday morning and Sunday night. None of her family ever darken the doors of the church unless the words free or food are involved. Saturday was the church's Christmas dinner so her son, two daughters, and all the kids showed up, ate at least three plates full of food and then took home 13 heaping full plates full of food. They didn't ask nor say thank you.
Of course her family didn't make it to church Sunday but they do plan on coming for the evening service on the 15th. That is the night of our Christmas play and when we traditionally give out our treat bags full of fruit, nuts, and candy. The last time these people came to church was at homecoming when we had dinner on the ground. On three occasions we have collected food to give to them and they want to avail themselves of everything free the church offers.
We had a chicken dinner a couple of months ago ($8.00 a plate for 1/2 BBQ chicken and fixins, including desert) and the mother asked to be given three plates for free and then asked to have the plates delivered to her 18 miles away from the church.
I gave one man 7 shirts and six pairs of pants and then he had the nerve to complain that he didn't have a good pair of shoes to wear the clothes with and asked me to buy him a pair. Another pay who doesn't work asked the preacher to tell me to DVD his brothers funeral, then go mow his grass (he lives 30 miles from me). I reluctantly agreed to do the funeral except I refused to get any shots of the body. he gripped about the fact that I only made the one DVD and didn't make copies for his family.
he took one of the bibles the church keeps to give to new members to put in his brothers caskets. He didn't offer to compensate me or the church. The pastor not only conducted the funeral but also mowed his grass and the preacher had to bring his mower over 60 miles.
I don't dislike poor people. There was a time in my life when the best I could do was sleep in the guard shack at the city lot on Green Street in High Point. I worked a full time job and a part time job that provided me with 30 hours a week. I won't go into details but I worked hard and had a good income but through no fault of my own I was deeply in debt and homeless. I had intentions of remaining that way. I worked my way out of debt and now I'm married, retired and own my own home. I never asked nor did anyone ever give me anything.
Some people are poor and their attitude is one of "I'm poor so I'm going to take as much from you as I can get." You feel about this people however you want to feel. We will always have the poor among us. Some are poor in spite of how hard they try while others are poor because they try hard not to try.'
Saturday, December 07, 2013
One cannot outgive God
If there is one thing I've learned in the past few years is that God honors His promises, even the ones involving money. When my wife suffered her traumatic brain injury just a little over a year ago we not only were faced with medical bills but also the loss of her income. When we were just about out of money I was supplied with enough pay off our bills and enough to allow myself a monthly allowance. While it is true that the money was mine all along it is equally true that I did not know about it and the money could not have come at a more appropriate time.
My wife hasn't liked my pickup truck especially since I purchased the van. The reason I purchased it in the first place is so she would be more comfortable when she went with me when I go and visit my mom. I told her I would sell it and get a trailer and hitch for the van. That would be good for me since the mower was hard to load onto the back of my pickup and I am getting older and it was getting harder and more dangerous for me to continue transporting the mower in that manner.
Of course, never having had the need to transport stuff via trailer before I had no idea what was involved. I sold my truck for the amount of money I needed to purchased the trailer and hitch with just a little left over. What I didn't know is what little I would have left over the state would want.
I sold my truck for $1100.00. A place I talked to about fixing the hitch and trailer wanted $375.00 for the hitch installation and $799.00 for the trailer. With tax that comes to over $1250.00.
I figured $20.00 for a tag and I'd be done but no, there is a $40.00 fee and road use tax and an increase on my car insurance policy. "Whoa, that's a little more than I want to spend to mow grass that I'm not compensated for doing," I thought. And especially after I purchased the mower and weed eater out of my on pocket as well.
I started doing some research and found a place in Asheboro that did the job on the hitch for $245.00
and I bought the trailer at Lows on sale for $599.00 plus they gave me a 10% discount for being a veteran. Even with the $127.00 I had to pay the state my total outlay was just a little over $900.00. My research saved me almost $500.00. Still, with the cost of the mower and weed eater and the trailer and hitch I am in the hole over $2000.00 to mow the grass for no compensation.
Well, the day after I spent all the money there was a deposit in my checking account to more than enough to cover my recent outlay with a couple hundred left over.
Isn't God good?
My wife hasn't liked my pickup truck especially since I purchased the van. The reason I purchased it in the first place is so she would be more comfortable when she went with me when I go and visit my mom. I told her I would sell it and get a trailer and hitch for the van. That would be good for me since the mower was hard to load onto the back of my pickup and I am getting older and it was getting harder and more dangerous for me to continue transporting the mower in that manner.
Of course, never having had the need to transport stuff via trailer before I had no idea what was involved. I sold my truck for the amount of money I needed to purchased the trailer and hitch with just a little left over. What I didn't know is what little I would have left over the state would want.
I sold my truck for $1100.00. A place I talked to about fixing the hitch and trailer wanted $375.00 for the hitch installation and $799.00 for the trailer. With tax that comes to over $1250.00.
I figured $20.00 for a tag and I'd be done but no, there is a $40.00 fee and road use tax and an increase on my car insurance policy. "Whoa, that's a little more than I want to spend to mow grass that I'm not compensated for doing," I thought. And especially after I purchased the mower and weed eater out of my on pocket as well.
I started doing some research and found a place in Asheboro that did the job on the hitch for $245.00
and I bought the trailer at Lows on sale for $599.00 plus they gave me a 10% discount for being a veteran. Even with the $127.00 I had to pay the state my total outlay was just a little over $900.00. My research saved me almost $500.00. Still, with the cost of the mower and weed eater and the trailer and hitch I am in the hole over $2000.00 to mow the grass for no compensation.
Well, the day after I spent all the money there was a deposit in my checking account to more than enough to cover my recent outlay with a couple hundred left over.
Isn't God good?
Wednesday, December 04, 2013
2,000 mice dropped by parachute on Guam to kill snakes
It seems there is a snake that has been causing million of dollars in damage in Guam and apparently mice can kill these snakes. I hope there are plenty of natural enemies of the mice roaming the island as I would think a mouse infestation could be as bad or worse than the snakes. I do believe there is a serious problem with rodents in Australian after the animals were introduced into that country. I can't remember if it was an intentional act or if the mice and rats got to Australia via the stowaway route aboard ships. In either case the rodents have been responsible for almost devastating large parts of the Island continent.
There are many examples of animal and plant life being introduced, again either intentional or not, to an area with great detrimental effects. Kudzu is an example of plant life in this area that has caused serious problems.
There are many examples of animal and plant life being introduced, again either intentional or not, to an area with great detrimental effects. Kudzu is an example of plant life in this area that has caused serious problems.
Should chimps become 'legal persons'?
In a recent survey 87% of respondents replied "No", 3 percent wasn't sure and the other ten percent are certifiable lunatics. I realize that chimps DNA is close to that of humans but that makes them non human. Laws can't make animals human. Just take this survey as a reminder that as we go about our day that at least one out of every ten people you encounter is crazy. Be careful out there.
Tuesday, December 03, 2013
Kittens like weird stuff
My wife and I purchased fuzzy covered kitty beds for our two cats but Ryder still prefers her shopping bag while Smokie would rather sleep in a cardboard box. Go figure.
Sunday, December 01, 2013
Duke beats UNC
For years I listened to the Duke Blue Devils play football. I worked on weekends so I had to catch the games on radio while at meal break or on my way home from work. Duke was my favorite team to listen too. Even though they lost more often than won--a lot more often, Duke seemed to make the games interesting.
Now I'm not one of those people who pull for one team and every other team can rot. It seems a given that if you love Duke you will hate UNC and if you love UNC you will hate Duke. I'll pull for Duke first, the any other NC team, then an ACC team then a southern team. I'm just not quite sure what to do with Florida. Are they really Southern?
Anyway, I'm sorry UNC lost since they had a good winning streak going and their seniors deserved a win as much as anyone. But I'm still glad Duke won. I remember a few years ago when they were ranked something like 296th out of 298 teams or something sucky like that and now they are ranked in the top 25. Awesome.
The sad part of the story is since I'm retired I never listen to them play on the radio anymore. I don't think I own one except in my vehicles and I'm not sitting outside by myself running a vehicle engine just to listen to a football game. Anyway, congrats to Duke and my heart bleeds Carolina blue for UNC.
Now I'm not one of those people who pull for one team and every other team can rot. It seems a given that if you love Duke you will hate UNC and if you love UNC you will hate Duke. I'll pull for Duke first, the any other NC team, then an ACC team then a southern team. I'm just not quite sure what to do with Florida. Are they really Southern?
Anyway, I'm sorry UNC lost since they had a good winning streak going and their seniors deserved a win as much as anyone. But I'm still glad Duke won. I remember a few years ago when they were ranked something like 296th out of 298 teams or something sucky like that and now they are ranked in the top 25. Awesome.
The sad part of the story is since I'm retired I never listen to them play on the radio anymore. I don't think I own one except in my vehicles and I'm not sitting outside by myself running a vehicle engine just to listen to a football game. Anyway, congrats to Duke and my heart bleeds Carolina blue for UNC.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)