Not exact matches
We can hold to
eternal security while still affirming that most verses that talk about «salvation» affirm a conditional deliverance
from some sort of temporal and physical calamity.
For some people, when they hear the phrase, «
eternal security» their blood starts to boil and they have trouble keeping their tongue
from shouting, «Heresy!»
You claim that those who reject
eternal security believe that only sins committed prior to receiving Jesus are forgiven but you also go on to warn that we better be careful or else the next time we sin, Jesus will take
eternal life away
from us.
I think that much of the confusion about the
security of
eternal life comes
from this simple misunderstanding.
He saved me
from my sins... gave me peace, joy and
security of
Eternal life.
1) that
eternal life given on the basis of faith alone, in Christ alone, apart
from works; 2) that
eternal security is part of the gift of
eternal life; 3) that assurance of salvation is through faith in Christ's promise of
eternal life, and not by looking at one's own works 4) Christians can apostatize in this life, and are still eternally secure 5)
eternal rewards are earned by faithful works, and lost by unfaithfulness 6) unlimited atonement 7) free - will to respond to God's drawing or not
Pentecostals, being rooted or influenced
from a Wesleyan / Holiness background, also tend to reject the doctrine of
eternal security, a doctrine central to many Mainline and Evangelical denominations.
Our
eternal security comes
from Christ's finished work on the cross, not
from our own works.
This passage affirms our
eternal security because it is a passage about the discipline that God gives to his own children when they fall away
from him.
From this perspective, Jesus was little more than theological dues ex machina, a vehicle through which my
eternal security was attained.