Sudsy wrote:Wade wrote:I have heard this often that we have eternal security or obedience isn't important because God loves us. It makes no sense to me, is it not confusing predestination, love, free will and faith while throwing, obedience, righteousness, justice, responsibility, and consequences out. Love is all those things, it doesn't override and omit parts of itself.
I think perhaps our communications are not clear as this is not what I was trying to say. Believing in eternal security, in my experience (and I have been in two OSAS churches) has never suggested 'obedience isn't important because God loves is.' As Valerie also has experienced being in churches with this belief. I have never heard a sermon that threw 'obedience, righteousness, justice, responsibility, and consequences out' because God loves us. Some of the most godly living acquaintances I have are eternal security believers.
I think where some of this may come from is there are OSAS churches that do have members that, by their life style, have not either been born again or they 'accepted Christ' on their terms. Such as 'I will believe in you but not make you Lord of my life'. And some preaching from the pulpit has used the love of God to not offend some of these members, who may be the big financial contributors. I'm not saying this does not occur in some places.
What I don't agree with and have tried to get some clearer defining on is that it appears that some believe there is a level of obedience one must maintain to 'stay saved' (remain in the Kingdom). Some of us here that are not eternal security believers see God not 'disowning us' as His child based on some point of unrepented disobedience. Believing in free will we believe it possible to quit believing in Jesus and therefore not qualify then to be saved. We have abandoned our faith in Jesus as our Saviour. We also believe disobedience as a Christian has consequences not only here and now but in our future performance review before the King.
Does that explanation help whether you agree or not ?
I think where I am troubled is how these different views can have an extremely huge impact on our view of scripture. No matter how obedient or disobedient, or if one claims either is; often OSAS believing people seem quick to point out what isn't in scripture, rather than what is. Or how the law is done and we are free...
Why is that a born again person can take the scripture and explain why they don't have to do something?
For some of us even through many stumbles we rather want to know what scripture does say. We are so compeled by the love, mercy, and forgiveness of God that being in His will, communing with Him is a place we always
want to be. In Isaiah 53:10 we read about it being God's pleasure that he bruised Christ to take away our sin. To meditate on things like that in scripture are so incredibly humbling since we know that our obedience cannot achieve that. And since we can even see a glimpse of His love while not being able to search out all His understandings, we don't need to reason away literal obedience. We still want to get the point too and are not obedient because we are concerned about our salvation or a need to maintain it but rather are grateful and enjoy the privilege of living unto Him. If we get the point or principle taught, then won't someone after God's heart want to know how He defines it and how He may think application should be?! Often I see Christians defining a principle how the world defines it, rather than by looking to the scripture in how God defines it. When we try to define a principle by scripture we end up taking things more literally. We don't obey these things so we can be saved or have to but rather because we are saved and we are looking for things the scripture
does say and
want to obey them, even though we are a work in progress.