October 30, 2006
-
Sick of Doubting?
Did Paul say in Colossions 1:23 that believers are
(a) sometimes moved from the hope
or does it say
(b) that believers are grounded and settled and not being moved away from the hope ( i.e. never doubting their salvation)
“he reconciled [you] … if indeed you continue in the faith GROUNDED and SETTLED and NOT BEING MOVED AWAY from the HOPE of the gospel” (Col 1:21-23)
What did the Apostle say about those who struggled with assurance of salvation? Were they….
(a) weaker brethren
or
(b) unbelievers
“Examine yourselves, whether you are in the faith, prove your own selves. Do you not know your own selves, that Jesus Christ is in you, UNLESS YOU ARE REPROBATES?” (2 Cor 13:5, MKJV)
“Test yourselves to see if you are in the faith; examine yourselves! Or do you not recognize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you–unless indeed you FAIL THE TEST? (NASB)
Does 2 Corinthians 5:6 say that believers are
(a) sometimes confident Christ has saved them
(b) most of the time confident He has saved them
(c) always confident Christ has saved them
Answer: “So we are ALWAYS CONFIDENT, knowing that while we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord.”
So WE ARE ALWAYS CONFIDENT, knowing that while we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord.” (2 Cor 5:6) … Now, my question is — If believers are always confident, doesn’t that mean they never have doubts about their salvation? The righteousness of Christ is enough to comfort them at all times, right? ”
“And the work of righteousness shall be peace; and the service of righteousness shall be ASSURANCE AND HOPE FOREVER.” (Isaiah 32:17)
The righteousness of Christ gives a man ASSURANCE AND HOPE FOREVER.
Recently I had lunch with a Reformed family I know and we had some interesting discussions.
me: If a believer doubted they were saved…would they be thirsty for everlasting life?
peter: yes
me: ok, what does John 4:14 say?
peter: umm that “believers never thirst … for everlasting life”?
me: ok! thus, believers always know they have everlasting life
peter: oh …
me: so believers must never doubt their salvation, right?
peter: that seems to be the logical conclusion. Otherwise, we would have to say that Christ was wrong, and believers do thirst for everlasting life
me: so jane what would you say the gospel is?
jane: the message that God saves His people by Christ’s work
me: and that is the gospel that all true Christians believe?
jane: yes!
me: ok! Now, do Arminians believe God saves His people by Christ’s work?
jane: umm
me: they say that Christ shed his blood for those in hell
jane: no i guess Arminians don’t believe Christ’s blood saves
me: right! so do they believe the gospel?
jane: it doesn’t seem like it. I mean, if Arminians did believe the gospel, they would believe that Christ’s blood saves all for whom it was shed.
me: Can a man be standing in broad daylight and doubt he is in the sun?
martin: ahh … no way … unless he’s blind !!
me: ok! so can a believer be in the gospel light…and doubt he is the light?
martin: no i suppose not
me: right! So since believers are always in the light of the gospel, they will never doubt they are in the light.
martin: i see what you mean. If a man came to me and said “I’m not sure if I’m in the light.” Then this man must be in the darkness and not saved.
me: Arminians say that God gives all men free will right?
martin: oh yes that’s right
me: ok … so Arminians believe that man must save himself
martin: ohh yes…
me: so the Arminian god can’t save anyone .. man must save himself
martin: i guess you could say that … if you were really dogmatic …
me: so Arminians pray to a god that cannot save, since man must save himself?
martin: right… and now let me guess .. you’re going to read Isaiah 45:20, “the one praying to a god that cannot save, knows nothing”?
me: Yes!
martin: So Arminians are not better than idolaters. They pray to a god that cannot save since he gave everyone free will. Their god is not sovereign, but he must wait for man to make the choice. Clearly, Arminians do not believe in the God of the Bible who “works all things according to the counsel of His will” and has “done whatsoever pleased Him”.
me: Romans 1 says that “in the gospel, the righteousness of God is revealed”
martin: correct
me: now, before meeting me, did you know that Christ’s obedience to the Law is part OF THE GOSPEL?
martin: no, I didn’t preach that
me: so you were ignorant of part of the Gospel?
martin: yes
me: But now you know that “By the obedience of One shall many be constituted righteous” and that “Christ is the fulfilment of the Law for righteousness” and was “made under the Law”. Now that you know THIS IS PART OF THE GOSPEL, can you see that you were not saved in the past? Remember, God is “well pleased for HIS RIGHTEOUSNESS SAKE” (Isa 42:21). God is only pleased with a man because Christ obeyed in that man’s place. “Their righteousness is OF ME” (Isa 54:17) says the Lord. In other words, what constitutes a man righteous IS OUTSIDE the man. It’s actually the OBEDIENCE OF CHRIST in a man’s place, that constitutes him righteous. Thus, the believer cries out “IN THE LORD I have righteousness” (Isa 45:24). Now, I know you have been a Calvinist for many years. But if you have been IGNORANT of PART OF THE GOSPEL then you have been a unsaved person. If you did NOT KNOW that CHRIST’S OBEDIENCE to the Law is part of the Gospel, then you were “IGNORANT OF THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD” (Rom 10:3) and you did not understand the work of Christ.
However, if you NOW REALISE that “in the Gospel the righteousness of God is revealed” then you have been converted. You now believe the SAME GOSPEL as the Apostles ! You have “EQUALLY PRECIOUS FAITH IN THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD” (2 Pet 1:1). And because you know that you WERE LOST in your ignorance, you ALSO KNOW that ANYONE ignorant of the righteousness of God is lost too. So all the Arminians and any Calvinist who does not believe THIS GOSPEL — the facts that Christ obeyed the Law and propitiated for His people — they are not saved.
“For we have become partakers of Christ, if truly we hold the BEGINNING OF THE ASSURANCE FIRM TO THE END” (Heb 3:14) So only those who have the assurance of faith from the beginning til the end, are believers? “but Christ as Son over His house, whose house we are, IF TRULY WE HOLD FAST THE BOLDNESS and rejoicing of the hope firm to the end.” (Heb 3:6) If someone has doubted their salvation, have they had BOLDNESS and FIRM HOPE at all times? Heb 3:6 says that only those who have this hope to the end are saved.
Paul says,
== But now a righteousness of God has been revealed … even the righteousness of God through faith of Jesus Christ toward all and UPON ALL THOSE BELIEVING … Then where is the boasting? It was excluded. == Romans 3
Believers do NOT boast in their own works because they KNOW that the righteousness is UPON ALL those THAT BELIEVE. Boasting is EXCLUDED, right? That means that if someone boasts, they are NOT saved. For example, if you ask someone, “Why are you saved?”. And they say, “Because I made a commitment.”, then this person is boasting in their own works, and is NOT a believer.
In the True Gospel boasting is EXCLUDED. So anyone who believes the true gospel will NOT boast in their works, right? They will NOT say that they are saved because of their decision, commitment or prayer, will they? That would be boasting! (Something a believer never does). A believer boasts ONLY in the cross of Christ, and that means, that all believers understand that NOTHING is required EXCEPT the imputed righteousness and sacrifice of Christ.
So someone who says, “I am saved because I made a decision” or “I am saved because I repented”, then they are NOT believers. In the True Gospel boasting is EXCLUDED. So anyone who believes the true gospel will NOT boast in their works, right?
== Now to one working, the reward is not counted according to grace, but according to debt. But to the one not working, but believing on Him justifying the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. == Romans 4
The man that is working for his salvation is not saved, is he? Because if a man thinks that God favors him, because of something he has done, then he is not believing in the “gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24), that the Apostles preached.
Now, supposing you ask someone, “Right now, why are you righteous and perfect in God’s sight?”. To which they responded, “Because I trust in Christ.” Then this person does NOT have THE RIGHTEOUSNESS as the OBJECT of his faith. He has made an IDOL of His faith, making it the GROUNDS OF HIS JUSTIFICATION. He DOES NOT UNDERSTAND the ONE REQUIREMENT OF SALVATION — the work of Christ. Instead, he has substituted his trust for Christ’s work! He doesn’t think Christ’s work is sufficient for salvation.
On the other hand, the man who believes and knows that nothing is required except the righteousness and sacrifice of Christ, his faith — that is, Christ’s righteousness, the object of his faith — is counted for righteousness.
== I also count all things to be loss because of the excellency of the knowledge of Christ … not having my own righteousness of Law, but through the faith of Christ, having the righteousness of God on faith, to know Him and the power of His resurrection” Philippians 3 ==
Paul says that TO “KNOW CHRIST” is to KNOW THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD. And he states that the “KNOWLEDGE OF CHRIST” is to know the righteousness of God. So, Christ’s person and work are inseparable!
After all, can a man know that Christ is a Savior, and not know who he saves (by obeying the Law for His people)?
Can the True God be revealed in a man’s mind, without the man realising what THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD is?
Don’t all believers know the power of His resurrection? If yes, then all believers must know that Christ ACCOMPLISHED AND ACHIEVED salvation for His people. Peter says that that is the reason Christ was risen from the dead — because he FINISHED the work perfectly!
On the other hand, if somebody thinks Christ died for everyone, they do NOT believe in the power of the Resurrection. Their “christ” did NOT accomplish salvation.
Their christ failed, and would NOT have been risen from the dead. He is an IDOL, an ANTICHRIST and NOT GOD.
Arminians deny the deity of Christ because they make him a complete failure, and God is not a complete failure, so they do not believe Christ is God.
Extra….Can believers today doubt like the disciples did? http://Godnoliar.com/john_the_baptist.htm
Comments (14)
Hey,
I read most of your post. It’s very sad that you accuse that armianians are going to Hell. I’m a 5 point calvinist, but I would never say that Armianians are going to hell. They do not believe they save themselves…they believe in the same God as Calvinist do, the only true God. It’s very wrong to say they believe in a different God.
Also, the verses you used don’t make any sense to accuse anyone to have doubt their salvation, is actually a lost sheep. Does that make sense?
“Examine yourselves, whether you are in the faith, prove your own selves. Do you not know your own selves, that Jesus Christ is in you, UNLESS YOU ARE REPROBATES?” (2 Cor 13:5, MKJV)
“Test yourselves to see if you are in the faith; examine yourselves! Or do you not recognize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you–unless indeed you FAIL THE TEST? (NASB)
It never states that it’s wrong to doubt. NEVER! If we don’t bear fruit, that is when we should be concerned if we are truly saved, not if we are just going through a tough time, and doubt our salvation.
Have you ever NOT sinned? NO! You are constantly sinning, same with me. Have you ever loved the Lord with all your heart, soul, mind , and strength perfectly??? What about people. NEvER!
Does that make you a non-christian. Not according to God, but from the sounds of your theology, it sure does…Please hit me back.
I don’t mean to come off as mean, or disrespectful, so if I am. I am terribly sorry. Please let me know…
In Prayers,
-Justin
(www.agapejustin.blogspot.com)
Yeah, I would be concerned about the aspect of “doubting your salvation” as a reason for you not being a Christian, too. Is doubt the only sin you cannot commmit as a Christian? If you make a logical leap to say that doubting means you’re not saved then you have to say that others sins condemn you, too.
However, Jesus died for sinners! Even the man who went to Christ to have his son saved by demons said, “Lord, I believe. Help thou mine unbelief.” So, we see clearly in that passage that there is an aspect of perfect faith and at the same time a very weak faith. So, there’s a doubting confidence. God even accepts us when our faith and assurance are weak.
I wouldn’t say that faith equals assurance. However, faith includes some level of assurance. But it varies in each individual.
The Bible even speaks in terms of our faith growing. So, that means there are weaknesses in our faith. If we had perfect dependence AND confidence then we’d be entirely sanctified.
However, even our best works are tainted by sin.
In response to your verses, I believe you’re taking them out of the context Paul writes.
“Test yourselves to see if you are in the faith; examine yourselves! Or do you not recognize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you–unless indeed you FAIL THE TEST?” (NASB)
This passage is clear. “Test yourselves to see if you’re in the faith (in Christ). If you fail the test of examining your life and you truly haven’t gone to Christ for salvation and turned from your sins, you have failed the test.” It’s not saying, “If you have a perfect faith, you’ve failed because you’re sinning. Paul is calling them to have their faith strengthened by focusing more on Christ. He’s not trying to weaken their faith by telling them that their faith and confidence isn’t good enough.
“So WE ARE ALWAYS CONFIDENT, knowing that while we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord.” (2 Cor 5:6)
This passage is clear, too. Paul is ALWAYS confident. Paul’s faith is growing to a point to which he’s ALWAYS confident. But, that doesn’t mean there aren’t aspects of doubt. Again, I revert to “Lord, I believe. Help thou mine unbelief.”
I know you’re going to think I’m contradicting myself, but I recall J.I. Packer stating something to the affect that Christians, while under severe assaults and attacks spiritually can doubt whether they have inheritance in Christ and yet at the same time know that they are children of God. He then goes on to say that if you haven’t experienced this then you may not understand these sayings.
I’m guessing you haven’t experienced these things.
Look to the life of David. Look to the life of Paul (despairing of life – doubting Christ’s sufficiency which stems from a lack of faith). Look to Peter (denying Christ). Look to these men and see a weak faith but a STRONG Savior who saves and has saved in spite of their weakness.
If you truly believe the doctrines of grace then you will agree, Christ saves in spite of our sinfulness and lack of faith. And you also know that all you need is mustard seed faith (even though that faith is a gift). But, our faith is to grow and with our faith is an assurance (and that must grow, too).
Jesus died for Christians, too.
BTW – if faith equals assurance then that means whatever we pray for (praying in faith), we KNOW that God will give it to us. To me, faith is not equal to absolute assurance. Faith is depending on God for something. AND, if God promises in His Word that He will give it to us, then assurance flows from that dependence.
Thanks for your time.
Two more things to ask. If faith is just assenting to the facts, then why does James speak in chapter 2 of a difference between truth faith and false belief?
You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder! (v. 19)
James says that there are many people who believe the facts of the Bible (assent); however, that’s not true faith. He says “Even the demons believe the facts!” And he goes even further to say that the demons even shudder at those facts.
Also, why would Paul say to examine yourselves if faith is mere assent? There’s no need to examine myself if I just believe – no need. Because to examine would stem from a wondering as to whether or not you are in the faith.
Dang, I forgot how entertaining this blog was. Lolz!!
Romans 10:9 – because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
This is the heart of the gospel. This is what makes someone a child of God. While the other theology affects how you view the Bible as a whole and how you live you life, THAT THEOLOGY DOES NOT SAVED (OR KEEP YOU SAVED). Salvation is believing in Christ and His work and perfect life, His death on the cross for sin, and His resurrection and power over death. The rest is important, but doesn’t save you.
Christ is key for salvation.
xanga’s fun eh? haha we havent talked on here for a while.. and you havent posted since..hmmm weird.. anyway..thought this would be funny. *3-2-1* ok…not funny anymore.. talk to you very soon im sure…
suzy…suzi?..suzanne..w/e
I agree with laurenatmasters; true your faith in Christ and ideals can be mislead, but no matter what our sins or lack of good judgments God always calls His own back to himself and through grace sets us on the right path. in may take a day or it may take years… But those for whom Christ died he always sets them right. And through grace all things are possible!
Hows life down under?
Andrew,
We would like your responses…
-Justin
You said: Now, I know you have been a Calvinist for many years. But if you have been IGNORANT of PART OF THE GOSPEL then you have been a unsaved person. If you did NOT KNOW that CHRIST’S OBEDIENCE to the Law is part of the Gospel, then you were “IGNORANT OF THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD” (Rom 10:3) and you did not understand the work of Christ.
However, if you NOW REALISE that “in the Gospel the righteousness of God is revealed” then you have been converted. You now believe the SAME GOSPEL as the Apostles ! You have “EQUALLY PRECIOUS FAITH IN THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD” (2 Pet 1:1). And because you know that you WERE LOST in your ignorance, you ALSO KNOW that ANYONE ignorant of the righteousness of God is lost too. So all the Arminians and any Calvinist who does not believe THIS GOSPEL — the facts that Christ obeyed the Law and propitiated for His people — they are not saved.
I am always wary of arguments that say that if you did not have the exact right understanding of the Gospel, then you can’t be saved. Doesn’t that make your salvation dependent upon YOUR understanding rather than Christ? Hmmm…
so…a few logic tricks and you get to decide salvation? isn’t who belongs to the Kingdom of God sort of up to God? your whole attitude makes it seem as though you think you know who is a part of the Kingdom and who isn’t. that seems a touch arrogant. and if I am wrong, how would a humble approach to salvation look?
Theology Matters
I have had quite a few interactions with Andrew (andrew_c_bain) on Xanga, who added me to his AIM buddy. He also got my email address and send a few letters he wrote to his pastor (at that time, I think) and have left the church. As of now, I do not think he is attending a Christian church.
The issue for his leaving of the church was due to his disagreement about “personal assurance of salvation.” I was hoping to talk with him so that he would join a Christian church where there would be people who cares for his soul. Christians need to attend church, that is why Jesus created the Church.
This may seems to be a small issue at the surface, but it is much more deeper than one would think. Add on top of the erred teaching with personal allegiance to it, will result in the imprisonment of the heart to the ideology. I am guessing that there is a lot more personal side to the issue that is not being written. Be it arrogance, pride, immaturity, or misunderstanding, I will not venture to judge; it is Spirit that convicts the heart. IF he is born again by the Spirit, I know one day the Spirit will bring him to repentance. The view, I clearly reject, but the person, I pray one day the Holy Spirit will convict to repent and return to a Christian church.
I wrote this letter to him nearly a year ago, but he did not even interacted with the points. I have been asking him about it, and I hope that he could see the predicament of holding to a view refuted. I welcomed him to give response to the points on this blog.
Here is my letter to him [updated, as I told him I would before posting it here]:
Hi Andrew,
It is not often that a person just adds me to their list and then solicits my input into their blog conversation. I read the “articles” you asked me to read (which where really your letter written to your pastor and others) and you wanted my response. I will hope to give you a little more fuller thought than what I said on our IM chat.
It seems that this is one subject that you are committed to and you must have taken a lot of time into it. As I have said, it seems that if you likewise take such interest in other subjects, I’m sure you would be equally diligent in. But that is part of my concern for you as well. IF diligence were missed guided, as I believe it is on this subject, it would be a bad thing.
Here are some of my thoughts on doubt and assurance:
1. “Assurance” and “Personal Assurance”
“Assurance” in general is the teaching of the bible regarding the subject: touching on the nature of the gospel, the effectiveness of the saving work of God, applied to the individual. This is the abstract principle of what Bible teaches.
When we are talking about “Personal Assurance” of Salvation, we are talking about a “personal” assurance of the individual person.
Please note this distinction. You may identify with this analogy. The difference is like talking about the principles of structural engineering, how every mine SHOULD be structurally sound. But that is not the same as to say the structure you are standing in is structurally sound. The principles of how caves could and should be structurally designed strong, does not mean that the individual cave actually is strong. But the insecurity is entirely due to the individual and not the great Engineer. It may not be all that great of an analogy, but I think the points are clear. {Gordon Clark seems to have no issue with this distinction; see below}
2. Personal knowledge is not always certain
Whither the individual person has “personal knowledge” of his own personal assurance that he himself is saved: A person may have what he does not know that he has. A uneducated man may not know what is called the “law of non-contradiction.” But that same man would look twice before crossing the street, because it is either the car or him and could not be both. He lives out what he does not know by name.
On the other hand, a person may be mistaken in thinking that he personally has what he does not have. The Pharisees claimed to have person righteousness. They were more sure of their own salvation than anyone, that they where truly the people of God, but the truly righteous Jesus came around and they want to kill him. They where not the righteous people of God, Jesus said that they were children of Satan. (John 8:44; Matt. 23:13)
What a person may think he has is not always truth. Jesus said that there will be those people who claim to have a persona relationship with Him and doing things in Jesus’ name, yet Jesus says to them “I never knew you: depart from me, you workers of iniquity.” (Matt. 7:23)
3. Personal Assurance develops
The individual person may have been born-again by the spirit without knowing the full complexity of the gospel, systematic, historical research, apologetics, etc. With further growth and maturity in the faith (directly related to their learning these subjects), the person comes to a greater assurance. So Personal Assurance is not ONLY a matter of “have” or “not have” but also weaker, or stronger.
4. The Object of Doubt
I would agree that if the person doubts the effectiveness of God to save, then he really undermines his own salvation and is a lost person. Yet, not all doubt is directed at the effective saving work of God. Most, if not all, of your [Andrew] arguments address this aspect of doubting God, and confuse it with personal doubt.
When a person doubts that he personally is born again, the object of his doubt is whither the Holy Spirit personally changed his heart. That doubt is not directed at the effectiveness of the work of God but whether God did that for him personally. This doubt is directed at whither the saving work of God happened to him personally.
5. Personal Sin and Doubt
Justification does not mean perfected sanctification. It would be ideal if there was no personal doubt of salvation in this life. This will be the case when we are in Heaven. Yet, as people who struggle with personal sin, there are occasions when we doubt if we are saved.
Should a person continue to sin and not question whither he/she is saved or not? Personal sin is a symptom of a greater ailment. Sin is produced by a “sinner,” and sinners are subject to the judgment of God. Lost sinners sin, and saved sinners sin, but how would we know that we are a lost sinner or a saved sinner? The presence of personal sin will cause personal doubt.
While continuing to call ourselves a child of God, and turning to see our sins, we cry out with Paul, “What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death?” [Rom 7:24] There is a real present struggle with personal and habitual sins in this life (1 John 1:8-10), causing us to cry out to God and for forgiveness.
6. Personal Doubt could be a good thing.
This personal aspect of doubt, I would argue is a good thing. It moves us to repentance, growth and personal closeness to God. We could then say with Paul, “Thanks be to God-through Jesus Christ our Lord!” [Rom 7:25]
There are many people who claim to be “Christians” but live their life profanely. It would be a good thing that they doubt their so call salvation. It is not biblical or right to claim to be a Christian and yet not depending on Christ alone for salvation, or live gratifying the cravings of the sinful nature.
It is a good thing, and it maybe the work of the Spirit in the person, for the person to doubt his/her own claim of salvation. Doubt prompted by the Spirit will awaken the sinner to the truth that he personally is not saved and in need of the Holy Spirit to give him life. Yet, this is also good, for the beginning of life is to know that you are dead.
A person examines his personal conduct and see that it is not in submission to the Lordship of God, not following the guidelines of God’s word, SHOULD
a. ask himself if his claim to being born-again is true or not. Non-believers do not worry about their salvation. That real worry alone is a good sign that the person is a saved person.
b. The person should then confess his sins to God, repent of his actions, and tries further to live in the guidelines of God’s word. Yet, is comforted in knowing that his actions are not to be done in the hope of salvation, but because he already has salvation. He is not saved by is action but by Christ. His actions may detour him away from personal fellowship with God, and the Spirit’s convicting work, this may include doubt of personal salvation, would bring the person to repentance and closer to God.
c. A person can doubt/question his salvation to learn that he does have assurance. Much like a person who takes a self-exam to learned how well he knew the answers.
Could a Christian doubt his salvation and still be saved?
It seems silly to ask if people “could” doubt their salvation. They do. But the issue raised is if doubting one’s own salvation DISQUALIFIES himself as one of those who have salvation. Let me put it in a simple way, “If I doubt I have it, does that mean I don’t have it?”
That seems to be the view. I don’t think you [Andrew] are saying that “if you doubt it, then you LOST it.” Unless I am mistaken, I don’t think you hold to a lost of salvation, but rather that the person NEVER had it if he doubt.
So you are holding to the claim that if a person doubts that he has salvation, then he does not have salvation; thus a saved person could never doubt his salvation.
I did read what you wrote, and some of your blog’s also, but unless I totally missed it there was no good case made in support of such a conclusion. You had a lot to say, but nothing I noticed that actually touch directly on the real issue.
Please do this for me: on a hand written paper 1. State your claim clearly, 2. State the reasonable case for it, 3. Provide the biblical case for it, 4. Ask your self if the supports are directly related to the claim, and 5. Ask if the Bible verse use do directly address what you claim in its own context.
My thought overall regarding your claims:
If it is true and biblical to not doubt one’s salvation, then I think it should be taught from the pulpits and let everyone know about it. That is IF your claim is true, but it seems clear to me that there are a lot of problems to that claim, and is indefensible from evident reason and the bible.
1. simplistic and confused: “If we say that faith is simply ‘receiving the testimony of God’.. then assurance will be guaranteed. We can simply think, ‘I believe the true gospel, therefore I am regenerate.”
How is the individual “guaranteed assurance” just because he believes “the true gospel”? Note your use of the adjective “true”? Do you think that a Mormon, a Jehovah’s Witnesses, Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, etc. who claims to know the “true gospel” [good news], should doubt the gospel he claims to have? Should they have “guaranteed assurance”? What is the “true” gospel and how do you know that you believe the true one and not the false one?
That only brings the person back to doubt.
2. you claim that belief is only a matter of “assent” to a proposition, yet you are not able to state what that proposition is. You use blanket words without defining it-”the ‘true’ gospel.” What does that mean? Are you more able to define the proposition(s) than Gordon Clark was in his book “Faith and Saving Faith.” (Trinity, 1990; page 106-110)? He did not provide an answer to what the person is to “assent” to; just that the person needs to hear the “whole preaching” of the word of God.
What is/are the proposition(s) that one must believe to be saved? In making faith into a mere accent to a proposition, yet the proposition is not defined, you have less than doubt; you don’t even know what to doubt. How could one “accent” to what he does not know?
That results with less assurance, not more.
3. taking text out of context: force the Bible to teach what it does not. You often make quotation marks and follow that with a Bible reference, but when I look it up, it does not say what you have in quotation. We have looked at John 4:14 together and saw how it does not say that believers will “never” thirst for everlasting life. Rom. 14:23, “doubts” is regarding food sacrifice to idols, and not about personal assurance. Palms 14:1, does not says that the unbeliever does not have any knowledge about God, but that the fool says to himself, “There is no God.” Most, if not all your bible references do not teach what you claim.
It is the person who will distort the word of God; he is the one who makes God out to be a liar.
4. Confuse the real issues of doubt by not keeping the distinction of personal doubt verses doubting the ability of God to save; and over looking that there are degrees of doubt. Please note the distinction in the subject of doubt. Even Clark seemed to agree with this kind of distinction. Clark acknowledge that some theologians want to “make ‘faith’ something other than ‘mere belief.” Clark goes into providing verses that “has some bearing on this conviction.” (Trinity, 1990; page 96)
It seems from Clark’s book, “Faith and Saving Faith,” that he does not make belief and faith into mere accent. It seems from the book that he takes “believe in” and “believe that” to be accent to but he does not confuse the mere “head knowledge” with “personal knowledge.” I am far from an expert on Clark, but are you getting the teaching from another source who may have distorted Clark’s teaching? That confusion of the two is not found in this above book.
5. make absolute what is not: as in claiming that a true Christian can “never” doubt/question if he is a true Christian; a true individual Christian must “ALWAYS have full assurance of salvation..” and this all the time, I take it. If that is the case then, all those who claim to be a Christian but at one time doubted his salvation are all going to Hell and are not saved.
Are you infallible in this self-claim knowledge? The first doctrine in theology proper is the “Un-Knowableness of God.” The finite man is not able to contain the infinite God. This should humble us. What we know about God is because He had made himself known.
6. Your assumptions about assurance have caused you to chop off a lot of teachings that do not fit with your assumption:
a. you claim that the unregenerate person does NOT know anything about God-”have NO KNOWLEDGE of God.” That is plainly not true to personal experience and nowhere found in the Bible, but contrary.
No person who is not God has ALL knowledge of God; but the evidence that the unregenerate people have SOME knowledge of God is all over the bible. The Pharaoh’s sure knew something about the God of Israel: knew God’s judgment (Genesis 12:17-19); God spoke by Moses with signs of judgment (Ex. 7-9). Moses repeatedly says, “that you [Pharaoh] may KNOW that there is no one like the LORD our God.” (7:17; 8:10, 22; 9:14) After the 9th plague, Pharaoh did not answer, “Yahweh?.. What’s that?” God clearly state to Moses, “And the EGYPTIANS WILL KNOW that I am the LORD when I stretch out my hand against Egypt and bring the Israelites out of it.” (Ex. 7:5) Even the magicians said to Pharaoh, “This is the finger of God.” (8:19)
b. from there you move to reject general/natural revelation, that God makes himself known through what he has made. No Christian group I know about actually holds to what you claim; Gordon Clark would disagree with you. Evidential arguments for the existence of God are grounded in natural revelation. If natural revelation goes then, so do the arguments for the existence of God based on it.
How would you explain Rom. 1:20-23, particularly where it says that unbelieving pagans whom God gives over to their sins “though they knew God..” that is in opposition to your words “NO knowledge of God at all!”
c. also reject the possibility of apostasy. Reform theology reject the possibility of finally apostasy of the elect, but they do not reject the fact that some people may come to have some knowledge of God and participated in the church, but yet apostatize.
You would have not meaningful response to the fact that the Bible talks about apostasy (2 Thessalonians 2:10; John 17:12; John 6:66; 1 Timothy 1:19; 2 Timothy 1:15; 1John 2:19)
7. You are not following the teachings of the Reformation. The Reform and Calvinist churches teach that though a person is justified by Christ, the person may not yet fully sanctified. The person may fall and doubt even as a Christian.
8. It does not seem that you are able to present your bible verses in the context that it is in. What result is a distortion of what the words in fact communicates, producing any kind of conclusions that a false teacher would provide to you. A person in that state is the infant of Eph. 4:14, who is “blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of men..” That is because the infant is not taught by the word of God, and he is not able to test false teachings by the word of God, because he is unable to keep examine the false teaching according to the context of the word of God.
9. All the while in claim to give infallible absolute assurance, the teaching robs people of their assurance. They are told to shift the focus of assurance from Christ into the PERSON’S ABILITY to apprehend Christ.
If I must trust in my own trust, believe in my own ability to believe, have faith in my own ability to have faith, trust in my own ability to trust, that “I know God.” How ironic! The way to have self-infallible assurance is to focus on self and not the Savior, which would take all assurance always. Sure, I don’t think they would put it that way, but the reality is that the teaching results in the person’s focus is taken off of the Savior and redirected to self. This is evident by your very claim that you are regenerate because “I UNDERSTAND GOD.” Note the shift from Christ to “I”.
There is only one who saves, yet this teaching removed the focus off Christ the Savior and focus on their own ability to “understand” instead. Again, even what is to be believe is left undefined. All the while claiming to give absolute assurance, in fact takes true assurance away.
Please take this as from a person who cares and is sadden by how this subject had taken you out of the Christian church.
Original
new louis vuitton handbag
are too much costly and its way over your budget. The price tags of original
replica handbags louis vuitton
make you unhappy because it is too far than your reach. Then you might be considering for the replica of
louis vuitton handbags sale
. High quality
louis vuitton handbags Monogram Multicolore
come in every size, shape and styles imaginable and they look like the almost real
louis vuitton handbags cheap
. High quality Replica handbags are usually made in the same style, using the same kind of material and even stitched in the same way as original.
louis vuitton handbags Suhali Leather
are the rage among women, for number of reasons. The cost factor obviously comes first. Genuine
louis vuitton summer 2010 handbags
are costs anywhere between several hundreds to thousands. On the other hand high quality
Louis Vuitton Shoulder bags Totes Monogram Canvas
cost 200$ to 250$. So you can easily purchase several replica handbags in the cost of one original L
Totes Damier Canvas
Many popular
Louis Vuitton Shoulder bags Totes Monogram Vernis
sale like, Stephen Sprouse Collection, Cruise 2009, Mahina, Winter 2008 and all popular Louis Vuitton replica handbags exists in the market.