Assurance of Salvation (part 2)

[Guest]

How can we have a secure "assurance of salvation"? The apostle John likes to nail things down, to "know" this or that for sure. Some two dozen times in his First Letter he says we can "know" that we "know" the truth. Half of those times he uses the word ginosko, which means to be informed, to gain the knowledge of. The other half he uses the word eido which means to know by perception of truth, or shall we say, by common sense. He has "written unto you ... that ye may know (eido) that ye have eternal life" (5:13).

How can spiritual common sense give us this "assurance"? The answer is in verse 11: "God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in His Son." "God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son" (John 3:16), not merely offered to give Him. Some five or six times in Romans 5 Paul emphasizes that God has given us the "free gift" that has reversed the "condemnation" that came upon the human race "in Adam," and as John says, that gift is "in Christ." The Father gave Christ to the world, that He might already be "the Saviour of the world," "the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe" (John 4:42; 1 Tim. 4:10).

What it boils down to is this: salvation is due to God's initiative; damnation can be due only to our own initiative in choosing not to "believe" the truth. As surely as Esau had the birthright, so surely you have eternal life in Christ. He gave Himself for you and to you. He not only offered to give you the gift of eternal life so that your salvation would depend on your own initiative; He actually gave you the gift so that in eternity you would never have any reason to "boast" that you took the initiative. It's 100% "by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God [there's that word again!]: not of works, lest any man should boast" (Eph. 2:8, 9).

Although Esau had the birthright, he chose to "despise" it and "sold" it for a trifle of worldly pleasure (Gen. 25:34: Heb. 12:16). "He that believeth not" takes the initiative in his being lost at last (John 3:18, 19), "despises" what God has given him "in Christ." Cherish your assurance in Christ, but don't be cocksure in yourself. You can trust Him but you can't trust yourself. You can very easily do something stupid. Look both ways before you cross the street.

by Robert J. Wieland.

[Kevin H]

I may not have the assurance of salvation; but I have the assurance of a saveour, I don't need the one, I just need to enjoy and trust the other. As I understand what the Bible and Mrs. White actually teach about hell, I can trust that Jesus will lead me to what is best for me and my issue is what do I do with Jesus? You only need to have the assurance of salvation if you are trying to convince God to let you into heaven and fear that he will send you to hell. But heaven and hell is not God grudgingly let you in one or joyefully throwing you into the other (ok, whipping the sweat off his brow as he can get you into one and cry as he sends you to the other if you like that view better) but I have Jesus there to look at and heaven or hell will fit in their place.

While I have not read much of Robert Wieland nor can say that I'm a big fan of his, I respect him and his work he at leasts gives information to consider and I'm glad you shared this information Richard.

Getting off the track but wanting to share some Bible; Abraham was adventerous but also responsible leader. Issac, as many growing up under the shadow of a great father lived life more in his shadow. Jacob lived more of a prince's life, while Easu had Abraham's sense of adventure. Issac loved the one who reminded him of dear old Dad, and Rebecca loved the one who reminded her of her loving husband.

Although Esau had the sense of adventure as Abraham, he did not have the sense of responsibility. Esau would have hated the birthright. He would have much prefered to have been a prince in the family and going out hunting and camping and having someone else work with the administrative responsibilities of the trade and business. God recognized this. Yes Easu would love the title of being the one on top, but he would have hated the job. It would have been interesting to see how God could have worked out the situation in a way that would not have breveaved Rebecca from both her sons in a single day (as she died before Jacob returned and before Easu's anger calmed so he probably had little or nothing to do with her thereafter) and to have had better relations between the brothers and their decendents.

Easu also appears to have had some sort of spirituality; There is evidence that Job was a decendent of Easu with Ishmaiel's daughter, and an early King of Edom, and in the Bible the Edomites were pictured as those who had once followed the truth but got away from it, also hinting that Easu may have tried to teach his children right with some success but as the generations passed they got farther and farther from the truth and became more and more bitter towards their cousins.

[Robert]

by Robert J. Wieland.

Jack's friend....

I like,

Rob

[BobRyan]

Why are these points on two different threads?

[pnattmbtc]

Here's something else from Wieland which discusses hell:

Quote:

(The Popular View)7. God will torture and destroy the lost in hell-fire. Emphasis is on His vindictive initiative in punishment.

(The 1888 View)7. Sin pays its wages—death. The second death mercifully ends the misery of the lost. God’s love is manifested in their fate.

http://www.gospel-herald.com/wieland/1888re_ex/rx_appendix_b.htm

[Robert]

Here's something else from Wieland which discusses hell:

Quote:

(The Popular View)7. God will torture and destroy the lost in hell-fire. Emphasis is on His vindictive initiative in punishment.

(The 1888 View)7. Sin pays its wages—death. The second death mercifully ends the misery of the lost. God’s love is manifested in their fate.

http://www.gospel-herald.com/wieland/1888re_ex/rx_appendix_b.htm

okay