Zobel said:

---

So it's an unknowable condition until judgment. Seems useful.

---

It's not; we can have true assurance. We can also have false assurance.

We talked about this a ways back somewhere else but what is the catholic stance on righteousness?

You would not agree with the view I hold around double imputation - where Christ takes on my sin and I am imputed his righteousness. Once and for all. Tied to our justification.

What is the catholic counter to this process? I brought it up once and was told I was not correct in my understanding of the catholic process. My understanding was that you essentially need to go back to the well regularly, for lack of a better way to explain it.

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

Zobel said:

---

So it's an unknowable condition until judgment. Seems useful.

---

It's not; we can have true assurance. We can also have false assurance.

---

Which is only as good as your last work, right?

AGC said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

Zobel said:

---

So it's an unknowable condition until judgment. Seems useful.

---

It's not; we can have true assurance. We can also have false assurance.

---

Which is only as good as your last work, right?

---

No because our works do not save us.

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

The Banned said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

The Banned said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

The Banned said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

Can he override? Sure. Why doesn't he? I don't know. His greater purpose will be accomplished no matter what you or I choose to do.

---

So I want to commit a sin. God can make me stop. God doesn't want to make me stop…

How is this not God wanting us to sin? Am I missing something?

---

I am not sure. God simply wants his children to trust and obey. Our sinful actions are not going to thwart his plans. We have the freedom to obey or rebel. We are not going to be perfect, but over the course of our regenerated lives, we should have a trajectory towards obedience. God will use our brokenness to bring about our good as it promises in Romans 8.

---

This is where we get nice and circular:

We can't have chosen God because that is a work. So God must have chosen us. Now that we are chosen, we must choose to obey Him in return. If we don't choose to obey Him, we would lose our salvation. But we can't lose salvation under once saved always saved, so God must only pick people that he knows will obey Him. So you are chosen because of your willingness to do good works. But that's "works based salvation". He's choosing you for your goodness.

The only other option is the limited free will of Calvinism. He is making us do the good. If we fail to do the good, it's because He didn't stop us from doing the bad. So in some form or fashion, God wants that sin to happen.

---

I think this is where either you misunderstand or the word "choose" does us a disservice (much like offspring/children).

It's all about desire. We make choices everyday continually, over and over, and we always choose what we desire the most. We never lose our responsibility to choose the Lord but He must first change our hearts so that we desire to do so. Now that we have the desire to please Christ, will that desire win out 100% of the time? Unfortunately, no it will not. Sometimes we desire to sin more and thus will choose sin. That is why we will never be through grieving our sins and repenting. This is where sanctification comes in, which is a journey. As we work through our salvation hand-in-hand with the Holy Spirt, we will become more like Him, winning less and grieving ever more deeply when we do.

Now, do you want to call this choice to believe in, love, honor, and obey God a work and then claim that is works-based salvation? Obviously there again we have the issue of different definitions. When I hear the term "works-based salvation" I'm thinking of someone racking up enough points in the good deeds column to earn their salvation, which I do not believe to be biblical nor do I believe that choosing to follow God falls into this category.

When I think of "works" I'm thinking of the fruit we bear after we have come to salvation; our works are an outpouring of our faith. We don't do good works to BE saved, we do them BECAUSE we are saved.

---

Similar to what I said to 10, your second paragraph describes the Catholic faith. That very same belief gets Catholics labeled works based.

This is because we believe we can lose our salvation, and most Protestants believe in once saved, always saved. So I would ask you: if we're supposed to be doing those good things and some people don't/stop, why? Because people deluded themselves? Because God didn't actually pick them? Ok, then God causes you to do the good things, and not them. Your compliance is caused by Him, so we're back to all of that good fruit being caused by God, and all of your sin being intentionally allowed by God, meaning God wants people to sin.

Or, in my opinion, you can abandon once saved, always saved, embrace that God allows people to choose Him and choose to fall away again in the future should they so choose, and that our salvation requires our efforts in some capacity. Reformed doctrine has it wrong. Do that and the equation is solved. It doesn't mean we "earn" it. But we definitely can lose it.

---

There is too much compelling scripture for me to believe we can lose our salvation. If God gave me a new heart of flesh, it's not going to turn back to a heart of stone.

You have to step away from the notion that people are robots in Calvinistic doctrine. It's all about desire. We choose what we desire. Before regeneration we desire sin, we are slaves to it, and therefore freely choose sin. When we are given new hearts, we desire the Lord, and freely choose to please Him. We aren't being unwilling forced to make these decisions. If we were, we'd never sin again. It doesn't please God when we sin but He allows it and will use it according to His purpose.

I'm sure you already know this but the answer to the questions about those who have "fallen away" was they were never truly regenerate to begin with.

---

This still leaves two issues:

1. God changed your heart. You couldn't do good without that. But He left your bad desires on purpose. How does that not mean that he WANTS you to sin. The alternative is He wants you to actively choose Him, which requires true free will and a possibility of falling away? I think you have to pick one here.

2. As you noted in your response to Zobel, you believe you can have real assurance and false assurance. What makes you convinced you aren't one of the ones with false assurance? And do you think the ones that were falsely assured and ended up falling away weren't truly convinced they were saved at the time? If they were deluded, how can you be sure you aren't. Saying they weren't truly saved seems to solve the falling away problem but opens the door wide to the issue of false assurance. I don't think that's better. In fact, I think it's worse because you can be warned not to lose your faith (as the Bible does many times) but there is nothing you can do to guard against false assurance. God may have already decided you're going to hell and you may not find out for another 30 years, wasting a lot of time along the way.

10andBOUNCE said:

---

We talked about this a ways back somewhere else but what is the catholic stance on righteousness?

You would not agree with the view I hold around double imputation - where Christ takes on my sin and I am imputed his righteousness. Once and for all. Tied to our justification.

What is the catholic counter to this process? I brought it up once and was told I was not correct in my understanding of the catholic process. My understanding was that you essentially need to go back to the well regularly, for lack of a better way to explain it.

---

Christ died, once and for all. But since we are created with free will, we choose whether or not to accept His sacrifice throughout the course of our life. Just because I pick Jesus today, doesn't mean I can't reject Him tomorrow. That, in my opinion, is a truly synergistic journey because I must continue to submit to Him. And that journey requires a truly free person to chose both bad and good.

Hence the reason all the warnings in the Bible to stay close to Him, to avoid sin and watch out for false teachers. What good are any of those warnings if me accepting His sacrifice one time sealed the deal?

ETA: the idea that we are a new creation with new desire is still true. But the devil works hard to take back what he had. Hence the whole spiritual warfare thing. What's the point of the devil even fighting for the ones that are locked in? He's wasting a bunch of time too

AGC said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

AGC said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

Zobel said:

---

So it's an unknowable condition until judgment. Seems useful.

---

It's not; we can have true assurance. We can also have false assurance.

---

Which is only as good as your last work, right?

---

No because our works do not save us.

---

But faith without works is dead, so how do you have true assurance of your faith without them? Or would any fruit you produce also be false assurance? Or is it both?

So we're back to Zobel's point.

---

How do I know I'm in a state of grace?

The Banned said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

The Banned said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

The Banned said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

The Banned said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

Can he override? Sure. Why doesn't he? I don't know. His greater purpose will be accomplished no matter what you or I choose to do.

---

So I want to commit a sin. God can make me stop. God doesn't want to make me stop…

How is this not God wanting us to sin? Am I missing something?

---

I am not sure. God simply wants his children to trust and obey. Our sinful actions are not going to thwart his plans. We have the freedom to obey or rebel. We are not going to be perfect, but over the course of our regenerated lives, we should have a trajectory towards obedience. God will use our brokenness to bring about our good as it promises in Romans 8.

---

This is where we get nice and circular:

We can't have chosen God because that is a work. So God must have chosen us. Now that we are chosen, we must choose to obey Him in return. If we don't choose to obey Him, we would lose our salvation. But we can't lose salvation under once saved always saved, so God must only pick people that he knows will obey Him. So you are chosen because of your willingness to do good works. But that's "works based salvation". He's choosing you for your goodness.

The only other option is the limited free will of Calvinism. He is making us do the good. If we fail to do the good, it's because He didn't stop us from doing the bad. So in some form or fashion, God wants that sin to happen.

---

I think this is where either you misunderstand or the word "choose" does us a disservice (much like offspring/children).

It's all about desire. We make choices everyday continually, over and over, and we always choose what we desire the most. We never lose our responsibility to choose the Lord but He must first change our hearts so that we desire to do so. Now that we have the desire to please Christ, will that desire win out 100% of the time? Unfortunately, no it will not. Sometimes we desire to sin more and thus will choose sin. That is why we will never be through grieving our sins and repenting. This is where sanctification comes in, which is a journey. As we work through our salvation hand-in-hand with the Holy Spirt, we will become more like Him, winning less and grieving ever more deeply when we do.

Now, do you want to call this choice to believe in, love, honor, and obey God a work and then claim that is works-based salvation? Obviously there again we have the issue of different definitions. When I hear the term "works-based salvation" I'm thinking of someone racking up enough points in the good deeds column to earn their salvation, which I do not believe to be biblical nor do I believe that choosing to follow God falls into this category.

When I think of "works" I'm thinking of the fruit we bear after we have come to salvation; our works are an outpouring of our faith. We don't do good works to BE saved, we do them BECAUSE we are saved.

---

Similar to what I said to 10, your second paragraph describes the Catholic faith. That very same belief gets Catholics labeled works based.

This is because we believe we can lose our salvation, and most Protestants believe in once saved, always saved. So I would ask you: if we're supposed to be doing those good things and some people don't/stop, why? Because people deluded themselves? Because God didn't actually pick them? Ok, then God causes you to do the good things, and not them. Your compliance is caused by Him, so we're back to all of that good fruit being caused by God, and all of your sin being intentionally allowed by God, meaning God wants people to sin.

Or, in my opinion, you can abandon once saved, always saved, embrace that God allows people to choose Him and choose to fall away again in the future should they so choose, and that our salvation requires our efforts in some capacity. Reformed doctrine has it wrong. Do that and the equation is solved. It doesn't mean we "earn" it. But we definitely can lose it.

---

There is too much compelling scripture for me to believe we can lose our salvation. If God gave me a new heart of flesh, it's not going to turn back to a heart of stone.

You have to step away from the notion that people are robots in Calvinistic doctrine. It's all about desire. We choose what we desire. Before regeneration we desire sin, we are slaves to it, and therefore freely choose sin. When we are given new hearts, we desire the Lord, and freely choose to please Him. We aren't being unwilling forced to make these decisions. If we were, we'd never sin again. It doesn't please God when we sin but He allows it and will use it according to His purpose.

I'm sure you already know this but the answer to the questions about those who have "fallen away" was they were never truly regenerate to begin with.

---

This still leaves two issues:

1. God changed your heart. You couldn't do good without that. But He left your bad desires on purpose. How does that not mean that he WANTS you to sin. The alternative is He wants you to actively choose Him, which requires true free will and a possibility of falling away? I think you have to pick one here.

2. As you noted in your response to Zobel, you believe you can have real assurance and false assurance. What makes you convinced you aren't one of the ones with false assurance? And do you think the ones that were falsely assured and ended up falling away weren't truly convinced they were saved at the time? If they were deluded, how can you be sure you aren't. Saying they weren't truly saved seems to solve the falling away problem but opens the door wide to the issue of false assurance. I don't think that's better. In fact, I think it's worse because you can be warned not to lose your faith (as the Bible does many times) but there is nothing you can do to guard against false assurance. God may have already decided you're going to hell and you may not find out for another 30 years, wasting a lot of time along the way.

---

1. If the Lord made me incapable of sinning, THAT would be robotic. This ties into the question of why does God allow evil.

2. How far does someone have to fall for them to lose their salvation? The most minor of sins should do the trick, which would we could never have more than momentary assurance, if even that. Not only that, but we'd have to continually be saved over and over and pray that every single thing was in Godly order the moment we die. I'd rather feel assured and proven wrong later than never being able to have assurance; which would be the case if falling away were a possibility.

The Banned said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

We talked about this a ways back somewhere else but what is the catholic stance on righteousness?

You would not agree with the view I hold around double imputation - where Christ takes on my sin and I am imputed his righteousness. Once and for all. Tied to our justification.

What is the catholic counter to this process? I brought it up once and was told I was not correct in my understanding of the catholic process. My understanding was that you essentially need to go back to the well regularly, for lack of a better way to explain it.

---

Christ died, once and for all. But since we are created with free will, we choose whether or not to accept His sacrifice throughout the course of our life. Just because I pick Jesus today, doesn't mean I can't reject Him tomorrow. That, in my opinion, is a truly synergistic journey because I must continue to submit to Him. And that journey requires a truly free person to chose both bad and good.

Hence the reason all the warnings in the Bible to stay close to Him, to avoid sin and watch out for false teachers. What good are any of those warnings if me accepting His sacrifice one time sealed the deal?

ETA: the idea that we are a new creation with new desire is still true. But the devil works hard to take back what he had. Hence the whole spiritual warfare thing. What's the point of the devil even fighting for the ones that are locked in? He's wasting a bunch of time too

---

So what about scripture such as John 6:37-40 and John 10:27-30?

Create Account said:

---

AGC said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

AGC said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

Zobel said:

---

So it's an unknowable condition until judgment. Seems useful.

---

It's not; we can have true assurance. We can also have false assurance.

---

Which is only as good as your last work, right?

---

No because our works do not save us.

---

But faith without works is dead, so how do you have true assurance of your faith without them? Or would any fruit you produce also be false assurance? Or is it both?

So we're back to Zobel's point.

---

How do I know I'm in a state of grace?

---

That's not generally a phrase we use in my traditional. Can you reword the question?

"It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the Word of God and the power of the coming age -- and then have fallen away -- to restore them against to repentance."

Here we have people who have been regenerated by every possible marker falling away. do the unregenerate become enlightened? do they partake of the Holy Spirit?

AGC said:

---

Create Account said:

---

AGC said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

AGC said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

Zobel said:

---

So it's an unknowable condition until judgment. Seems useful.

---

It's not; we can have true assurance. We can also have false assurance.

---

Which is only as good as your last work, right?

---

No because our works do not save us.

---

But faith without works is dead, so how do you have true assurance of your faith without them? Or would any fruit you produce also be false assurance? Or is it both?

So we're back to Zobel's point.

---

How do I know I'm in a state of grace?

---

That's not generally a phrase we use in my traditional. Can you reword the question?

---

What is your tradition and I'll just find the term.

Create Account said:

---

AGC said:

---

Create Account said:

---

AGC said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

AGC said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

Zobel said:

---

So it's an unknowable condition until judgment. Seems useful.

---

It's not; we can have true assurance. We can also have false assurance.

---

Which is only as good as your last work, right?

---

No because our works do not save us.

---

But faith without works is dead, so how do you have true assurance of your faith without them? Or would any fruit you produce also be false assurance? Or is it both?

So we're back to Zobel's point.

---

How do I know I'm in a state of grace?

---

That's not generally a phrase we use in my traditional. Can you reword the question?

---

What is your tradition and I'll just find the term.

---

Anglican.

AGC said:

---

Create Account said:

---

AGC said:

---

Create Account said:

---

AGC said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

AGC said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

Zobel said:

---

So it's an unknowable condition until judgment. Seems useful.

---

It's not; we can have true assurance. We can also have false assurance.

---

Which is only as good as your last work, right?

---

No because our works do not save us.

---

But faith without works is dead, so how do you have true assurance of your faith without them? Or would any fruit you produce also be false assurance? Or is it both?

So we're back to Zobel's point.

---

How do I know I'm in a state of grace?

---

That's not generally a phrase we use in my traditional. Can you reword the question?

---

What is your tradition and I'll just find the term.

---

Anglican.

---

This is from the 39 Articles. I guess the bold is what I'm referring to.

XVII. Of Predestination and Election.

Predestination to Life is the everlasting purpose of God, whereby (before the foundations of the world were laid) he hath constantly decreed by his counsel secret to us, to deliver from curse and damnation those whom he hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, and to bring them by Christ to everlasting salvation, as vessels made to honour. Wherefore, they which be endued with so excellent a benefit of God, be called according to God's purpose by his Spirit working in due season: they through Grace obey the calling: they be justified freely: they be made sons of God by adoption: they be made like the image of his only-begotten Son Jesus Christ: they walk religiously in good works, and at length, by God's mercy, they attain to everlasting felicity.

As the godly consideration of Predestination, and our Election in Christ, is full of sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable comfort to godly persons, and such as feel in themselves the working of the Spirit of Christ, mortifying the works of the flesh, and their earthly members, and drawing up their mind to high and heavenly things, as well because it doth greatly establish and confirm their faith of eternal Salvation to be enjoyed through Christ as because it doth fervently kindle their love towards God: So, for curious and carnal persons, lacking the Spirit of Christ, to have continually before their eyes the sentence of God's Predestination, is a most dangerous downfall, whereby the Devil doth thrust them either into desperation, or into wretchlessness of most unclean living, no less perilous than desperation.

Furthermore, we must receive God's promises in such wise, as they be generally set forth to us in Holy Scripture: and, in our doings, that Will of God is to be followed, which we have expressly declared unto us in the Word of God.

Create Account said:

---

AGC said:

---

Create Account said:

---

AGC said:

---

Create Account said:

---

AGC said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

AGC said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

Zobel said:

---

So it's an unknowable condition until judgment. Seems useful.

---

It's not; we can have true assurance. We can also have false assurance.

---

Which is only as good as your last work, right?

---

No because our works do not save us.

---

But faith without works is dead, so how do you have true assurance of your faith without them? Or would any fruit you produce also be false assurance? Or is it both?

So we're back to Zobel's point.

---

How do I know I'm in a state of grace?

---

That's not generally a phrase we use in my traditional. Can you reword the question?

---

What is your tradition and I'll just find the term.

---

Anglican.

---

This is from the 39 Articles. I guess the bold is what I'm referring to.

XVII. Of Predestination and Election.

Predestination to Life is the everlasting purpose of God, whereby (before the foundations of the world were laid) he hath constantly decreed by his counsel secret to us, to deliver from curse and damnation those whom he hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, and to bring them by Christ to everlasting salvation, as vessels made to honour. Wherefore, they which be endued with so excellent a benefit of God, be called according to God's purpose by his Spirit working in due season: they through Grace obey the calling: they be justified freely: they be made sons of God by adoption: they be made like the image of his only-begotten Son Jesus Christ: they walk religiously in good works, and at length, by God's mercy, they attain to everlasting felicity.

As the godly consideration of Predestination, and our Election in Christ, is full of sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable comfort to godly persons, and such as feel in themselves the working of the Spirit of Christ, mortifying the works of the flesh, and their earthly members, and drawing up their mind to high and heavenly things, as well because it doth greatly establish and confirm their faith of eternal Salvation to be enjoyed through Christ as because it doth fervently kindle their love towards God: So, for curious and carnal persons, lacking the Spirit of Christ, to have continually before their eyes the sentence of God's Predestination, is a most dangerous downfall, whereby the Devil doth thrust them either into desperation, or into wretchlessness of most unclean living, no less perilous than desperation.

Furthermore, we must receive God's promises in such wise, as they be generally set forth to us in Holy Scripture: and, in our doings, that Will of God is to be followed, which we have expressly declared unto us in the Word of God.

---

My response would be, you don't know until you've finished the race. We work out our faith with fear and trembling. If you read the prayers in the BCP you'll note that we constantly ask for God's mercy and for assistance to do the works put before us. Wheat and chaff, sheep and goats, the parable of the sower apply to us inside the church. It grows together to be harvested at the end.

We don't treat it as a one step process.

Ok, maybe I misread your posts. I thought you maintained that a person could be assured of their salvation and they could know they were in a state of grace.

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

The Banned said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

The Banned said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

The Banned said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

The Banned said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

Can he override? Sure. Why doesn't he? I don't know. His greater purpose will be accomplished no matter what you or I choose to do.

---

So I want to commit a sin. God can make me stop. God doesn't want to make me stop…

How is this not God wanting us to sin? Am I missing something?

---

I am not sure. God simply wants his children to trust and obey. Our sinful actions are not going to thwart his plans. We have the freedom to obey or rebel. We are not going to be perfect, but over the course of our regenerated lives, we should have a trajectory towards obedience. God will use our brokenness to bring about our good as it promises in Romans 8.

---

This is where we get nice and circular:

We can't have chosen God because that is a work. So God must have chosen us. Now that we are chosen, we must choose to obey Him in return. If we don't choose to obey Him, we would lose our salvation. But we can't lose salvation under once saved always saved, so God must only pick people that he knows will obey Him. So you are chosen because of your willingness to do good works. But that's "works based salvation". He's choosing you for your goodness.

The only other option is the limited free will of Calvinism. He is making us do the good. If we fail to do the good, it's because He didn't stop us from doing the bad. So in some form or fashion, God wants that sin to happen.

---

I think this is where either you misunderstand or the word "choose" does us a disservice (much like offspring/children).

It's all about desire. We make choices everyday continually, over and over, and we always choose what we desire the most. We never lose our responsibility to choose the Lord but He must first change our hearts so that we desire to do so. Now that we have the desire to please Christ, will that desire win out 100% of the time? Unfortunately, no it will not. Sometimes we desire to sin more and thus will choose sin. That is why we will never be through grieving our sins and repenting. This is where sanctification comes in, which is a journey. As we work through our salvation hand-in-hand with the Holy Spirt, we will become more like Him, winning less and grieving ever more deeply when we do.

Now, do you want to call this choice to believe in, love, honor, and obey God a work and then claim that is works-based salvation? Obviously there again we have the issue of different definitions. When I hear the term "works-based salvation" I'm thinking of someone racking up enough points in the good deeds column to earn their salvation, which I do not believe to be biblical nor do I believe that choosing to follow God falls into this category.

When I think of "works" I'm thinking of the fruit we bear after we have come to salvation; our works are an outpouring of our faith. We don't do good works to BE saved, we do them BECAUSE we are saved.

---

Similar to what I said to 10, your second paragraph describes the Catholic faith. That very same belief gets Catholics labeled works based.

This is because we believe we can lose our salvation, and most Protestants believe in once saved, always saved. So I would ask you: if we're supposed to be doing those good things and some people don't/stop, why? Because people deluded themselves? Because God didn't actually pick them? Ok, then God causes you to do the good things, and not them. Your compliance is caused by Him, so we're back to all of that good fruit being caused by God, and all of your sin being intentionally allowed by God, meaning God wants people to sin.

Or, in my opinion, you can abandon once saved, always saved, embrace that God allows people to choose Him and choose to fall away again in the future should they so choose, and that our salvation requires our efforts in some capacity. Reformed doctrine has it wrong. Do that and the equation is solved. It doesn't mean we "earn" it. But we definitely can lose it.

---

There is too much compelling scripture for me to believe we can lose our salvation. If God gave me a new heart of flesh, it's not going to turn back to a heart of stone.

You have to step away from the notion that people are robots in Calvinistic doctrine. It's all about desire. We choose what we desire. Before regeneration we desire sin, we are slaves to it, and therefore freely choose sin. When we are given new hearts, we desire the Lord, and freely choose to please Him. We aren't being unwilling forced to make these decisions. If we were, we'd never sin again. It doesn't please God when we sin but He allows it and will use it according to His purpose.

I'm sure you already know this but the answer to the questions about those who have "fallen away" was they were never truly regenerate to begin with.

---

This still leaves two issues:

1. God changed your heart. You couldn't do good without that. But He left your bad desires on purpose. How does that not mean that he WANTS you to sin. The alternative is He wants you to actively choose Him, which requires true free will and a possibility of falling away? I think you have to pick one here.

2. As you noted in your response to Zobel, you believe you can have real assurance and false assurance. What makes you convinced you aren't one of the ones with false assurance? And do you think the ones that were falsely assured and ended up falling away weren't truly convinced they were saved at the time? If they were deluded, how can you be sure you aren't. Saying they weren't truly saved seems to solve the falling away problem but opens the door wide to the issue of false assurance. I don't think that's better. In fact, I think it's worse because you can be warned not to lose your faith (as the Bible does many times) but there is nothing you can do to guard against false assurance. God may have already decided you're going to hell and you may not find out for another 30 years, wasting a lot of time along the way.

---

1. If the Lord made me incapable of sinning, THAT would be robotic. This ties into the question of why does God allow evil.

2. How far does someone have to fall for them to lose their salvation? The most minor of sins should do the trick, which would we could never have more than momentary assurance, if even that. Not only that, but we'd have to continually be saved over and over and pray that every single thing was in Godly order the moment we die. I'd rather feel assured and proven wrong later than never being able to have assurance; which would be the case if falling away were a possibility.

---

1. You say He is allowing evil. That's fine, as we say that too. But in your framework, everything is inside of God's active will. I don't see any room for God's permissive will , as we would call it. If God is fully sovereign, it is his active will that people sin. This is why I find Calvinism so detestable. Link for clarity from a Calvinist site. https://philgons.com/2010/06/calvin-on-gods-permissive-will/

2. The break with God happens when we actively choose to intentionally break communion with him with grave sin. Cussing when you step on a Lego, or feeling anger when your kids act up isn't you rejecting God. But having sec with another woman and not being remorseful? Never working prayer into your daily routine? Not giving of your abundance to those in need? In other words, intentionally doing what you shouldn't be doing and not stopping when corrected.

Hence the need to confess your sins and try to do better. That's all it takes. Repenting to the best of your ability through the grace God has given you. It's interesting that you'd rather be potentially blindsided after years of wasting your time rather than be given the formula to stay in God's flock.

AGC said:

---

Create Account said:

---

AGC said:

---

Create Account said:

---

AGC said:

---

Create Account said:

---

AGC said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

AGC said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

Zobel said:

---

So it's an unknowable condition until judgment. Seems useful.

---

It's not; we can have true assurance. We can also have false assurance.

---

Which is only as good as your last work, right?

---

No because our works do not save us.

---

But faith without works is dead, so how do you have true assurance of your faith without them? Or would any fruit you produce also be false assurance? Or is it both?

So we're back to Zobel's point.

---

How do I know I'm in a state of grace?

---

That's not generally a phrase we use in my traditional. Can you reword the question?

---

What is your tradition and I'll just find the term.

---

Anglican.

---

This is from the 39 Articles. I guess the bold is what I'm referring to.

XVII. Of Predestination and Election.

Predestination to Life is the everlasting purpose of God, whereby (before the foundations of the world were laid) he hath constantly decreed by his counsel secret to us, to deliver from curse and damnation those whom he hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, and to bring them by Christ to everlasting salvation, as vessels made to honour. Wherefore, they which be endued with so excellent a benefit of God, be called according to God's purpose by his Spirit working in due season: they through Grace obey the calling: they be justified freely: they be made sons of God by adoption: they be made like the image of his only-begotten Son Jesus Christ: they walk religiously in good works, and at length, by God's mercy, they attain to everlasting felicity.

As the godly consideration of Predestination, and our Election in Christ, is full of sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable comfort to godly persons, and such as feel in themselves the working of the Spirit of Christ, mortifying the works of the flesh, and their earthly members, and drawing up their mind to high and heavenly things, as well because it doth greatly establish and confirm their faith of eternal Salvation to be enjoyed through Christ as because it doth fervently kindle their love towards God: So, for curious and carnal persons, lacking the Spirit of Christ, to have continually before their eyes the sentence of God's Predestination, is a most dangerous downfall, whereby the Devil doth thrust them either into desperation, or into wretchlessness of most unclean living, no less perilous than desperation.

Furthermore, we must receive God's promises in such wise, as they be generally set forth to us in Holy Scripture: and, in our doings, that Will of God is to be followed, which we have expressly declared unto us in the Word of God.

---

My response would be, you don't know until you've finished the race. We work out our faith with fear and trembling. If you read the prayers in the BCP you'll note that we constantly ask for God's mercy and for assistance to do the works put before us. Wheat and chaff, sheep and goats, the parable of the sower apply to us inside the church. It grows together to be harvested at the end.

We don't treat it as a one step process.

---

Rereading the thread, I realized I was reading zobel's posts in conjunction with yours. So this article XVII is, as zobel puts it, an "unknowable condition until judgment. Seems useful."

Create Account said:

---

AGC said:

---

Create Account said:

---

AGC said:

---

Create Account said:

---

AGC said:

---

Create Account said:

---

AGC said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

AGC said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

Zobel said:

---

So it's an unknowable condition until judgment. Seems useful.

---

It's not; we can have true assurance. We can also have false assurance.

---

Which is only as good as your last work, right?

---

No because our works do not save us.

---

But faith without works is dead, so how do you have true assurance of your faith without them? Or would any fruit you produce also be false assurance? Or is it both?

So we're back to Zobel's point.

---

How do I know I'm in a state of grace?

---

That's not generally a phrase we use in my traditional. Can you reword the question?

---

What is your tradition and I'll just find the term.

---

Anglican.

---

This is from the 39 Articles. I guess the bold is what I'm referring to.

XVII. Of Predestination and Election.

Predestination to Life is the everlasting purpose of God, whereby (before the foundations of the world were laid) he hath constantly decreed by his counsel secret to us, to deliver from curse and damnation those whom he hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, and to bring them by Christ to everlasting salvation, as vessels made to honour. Wherefore, they which be endued with so excellent a benefit of God, be called according to God's purpose by his Spirit working in due season: they through Grace obey the calling: they be justified freely: they be made sons of God by adoption: they be made like the image of his only-begotten Son Jesus Christ: they walk religiously in good works, and at length, by God's mercy, they attain to everlasting felicity.

As the godly consideration of Predestination, and our Election in Christ, is full of sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable comfort to godly persons, and such as feel in themselves the working of the Spirit of Christ, mortifying the works of the flesh, and their earthly members, and drawing up their mind to high and heavenly things, as well because it doth greatly establish and confirm their faith of eternal Salvation to be enjoyed through Christ as because it doth fervently kindle their love towards God: So, for curious and carnal persons, lacking the Spirit of Christ, to have continually before their eyes the sentence of God's Predestination, is a most dangerous downfall, whereby the Devil doth thrust them either into desperation, or into wretchlessness of most unclean living, no less perilous than desperation.

Furthermore, we must receive God's promises in such wise, as they be generally set forth to us in Holy Scripture: and, in our doings, that Will of God is to be followed, which we have expressly declared unto us in the Word of God.

---

My response would be, you don't know until you've finished the race. We work out our faith with fear and trembling. If you read the prayers in the BCP you'll note that we constantly ask for God's mercy and for assistance to do the works put before us. Wheat and chaff, sheep and goats, the parable of the sower apply to us inside the church. It grows together to be harvested at the end.

We don't treat it as a one step process.

---

Rereading the thread, I realized I was reading zobel's posts in conjunction with yours. So this article XVII is, as zobel puts it, an "unknowable condition until judgment. Seems useful."

---

Can you point me to the specific time for this state of grace that any Anglican can claim based on that article? It does say, "walk religiously in good works…and at length, obtain God's mercy". And how would you reconcile it with the last paragraph of the article? We, as a practice, don't put scripture against itself. We're mystical in practice rather than material, we read the church fathers and generally don't confine ourselves (in my parish) to singular exclusive doctrines (more often both and, such as Christus victor and penal atonement, and…).

The Banned said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

The Banned said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

We talked about this a ways back somewhere else but what is the catholic stance on righteousness?

You would not agree with the view I hold around double imputation - where Christ takes on my sin and I am imputed his righteousness. Once and for all. Tied to our justification.

What is the catholic counter to this process? I brought it up once and was told I was not correct in my understanding of the catholic process. My understanding was that you essentially need to go back to the well regularly, for lack of a better way to explain it.

---

Christ died, once and for all. But since we are created with free will, we choose whether or not to accept His sacrifice throughout the course of our life. Just because I pick Jesus today, doesn't mean I can't reject Him tomorrow. That, in my opinion, is a truly synergistic journey because I must continue to submit to Him. And that journey requires a truly free person to chose both bad and good.

Hence the reason all the warnings in the Bible to stay close to Him, to avoid sin and watch out for false teachers. What good are any of those warnings if me accepting His sacrifice one time sealed the deal?

ETA: the idea that we are a new creation with new desire is still true. But the devil works hard to take back what he had. Hence the whole spiritual warfare thing. What's the point of the devil even fighting for the ones that are locked in? He's wasting a bunch of time too

---

So what about scripture such as John 6:37-40 and John 10:27-30?

---

Proof texting doesn't work. We have to take the scripture as a whole. There is a reason atheists always claim that the Bible contradicts itself, and that is because anyone can make the Bible say whatever they want with this formula. You send me some that you think prove unconditional election, I show you some that warn of falling away from the faith and we get nowhere

---

I don't know if I'm just being sensitive but I'm beginning to read your messages as condescending so I'm going to bow out now. Always appreciate a good discussion though, thanks.

The Banned said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

The Banned said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

The Banned said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

We talked about this a ways back somewhere else but what is the catholic stance on righteousness?

You would not agree with the view I hold around double imputation - where Christ takes on my sin and I am imputed his righteousness. Once and for all. Tied to our justification.

What is the catholic counter to this process? I brought it up once and was told I was not correct in my understanding of the catholic process. My understanding was that you essentially need to go back to the well regularly, for lack of a better way to explain it.

---

Christ died, once and for all. But since we are created with free will, we choose whether or not to accept His sacrifice throughout the course of our life. Just because I pick Jesus today, doesn't mean I can't reject Him tomorrow. That, in my opinion, is a truly synergistic journey because I must continue to submit to Him. And that journey requires a truly free person to chose both bad and good.

Hence the reason all the warnings in the Bible to stay close to Him, to avoid sin and watch out for false teachers. What good are any of those warnings if me accepting His sacrifice one time sealed the deal?

ETA: the idea that we are a new creation with new desire is still true. But the devil works hard to take back what he had. Hence the whole spiritual warfare thing. What's the point of the devil even fighting for the ones that are locked in? He's wasting a bunch of time too

---

So what about scripture such as John 6:37-40 and John 10:27-30?

---

Proof texting doesn't work. We have to take the scripture as a whole. There is a reason atheists always claim that the Bible contradicts itself, and that is because anyone can make the Bible say whatever they want with this formula. You send me some that you think prove unconditional election, I show you some that warn of falling away from the faith and we get nowhere

---

I don't know if I'm just being sensitive but I'm beginning to read your messages as condescending so I'm going to bow out now. Always appreciate a good discussion though, thanks.

---

I do apologize if it came across that way. Definitely been a day on my end, so I was being brief. Rest assured if we were doing this in person, it would be friendly the entire time. I've enjoyed your back and forth and thought you were very charitable throughout the entire thing.

So again, apologies if it came across as condescending.

---

I appreciate that, thank you. It's always warming to encounter a brother or sister who is not prideful and can share humble and kind words.

It's been a thought provoking discussion. I too think it would have been friendly and most edifying in person.

The Banned said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

The Banned said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

We talked about this a ways back somewhere else but what is the catholic stance on righteousness?

You would not agree with the view I hold around double imputation - where Christ takes on my sin and I am imputed his righteousness. Once and for all. Tied to our justification.

What is the catholic counter to this process? I brought it up once and was told I was not correct in my understanding of the catholic process. My understanding was that you essentially need to go back to the well regularly, for lack of a better way to explain it.

---

Christ died, once and for all. But since we are created with free will, we choose whether or not to accept His sacrifice throughout the course of our life. Just because I pick Jesus today, doesn't mean I can't reject Him tomorrow. That, in my opinion, is a truly synergistic journey because I must continue to submit to Him. And that journey requires a truly free person to chose both bad and good.

Hence the reason all the warnings in the Bible to stay close to Him, to avoid sin and watch out for false teachers. What good are any of those warnings if me accepting His sacrifice one time sealed the deal?

ETA: the idea that we are a new creation with new desire is still true. But the devil works hard to take back what he had. Hence the whole spiritual warfare thing. What's the point of the devil even fighting for the ones that are locked in? He's wasting a bunch of time too

---

So what about scripture such as John 6:37-40 and John 10:27-30?

---

Proof texting doesn't work. We have to take the scripture as a whole. There is a reason atheists always claim that the Bible contradicts itself, and that is because anyone can make the Bible say whatever they want with this formula. You send me some that you think prove unconditional election, I show you some that warn of falling away from the faith and we get nowhere

---

Taking scripture as a whole, the entire Bible is about God choosing people that belong to him. I said it before in another post...Abraham and Moses didn't come seeking God on their own accord. The twelve didn't respond to a flier that Jesus posted in the Capernaum town square asking for followers. Paul has been discussed. All of these are examples of God's sovereign election.

If anything the anti-election crowd has been sending over random verses to support their personal autonomy.

Agreed. And to go further, in my opinion, the Calvinist interpretation of "faith alone" is the most logical one. I don't know how each denomination faces the the challenge of an individual choosing to respond affirmatively to God as a work. As far as I can tell, having any choice in the matter undercuts the idea of faith alone. Our very choice to say yes is an action step in our salvation, which is why Calvin rejected it. I don't think it's illogical. I just don't agree with the premise.

And to other Protestants who think that's a slight, I don't mean it that way. I'd like to hear how choosing to say yes to God would still qualify as faith alone

Zobel said:

---

Kinda argument from silence. The evidence looks exactly the same as if He calls everyone, but only some respond.

---

But do the accounts in scripture say that God casted out a wide net and only those heroes of the faith stepped up to the call?

AGC said:

---

Create Account said:

---

AGC said:

---

Create Account said:

---

AGC said:

---

Create Account said:

---

AGC said:

---

Create Account said:

---

AGC said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

AGC said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

Zobel said:

---

So it's an unknowable condition until judgment. Seems useful.

---

It's not; we can have true assurance. We can also have false assurance.

---

Which is only as good as your last work, right?

---

No because our works do not save us.

---

But faith without works is dead, so how do you have true assurance of your faith without them? Or would any fruit you produce also be false assurance? Or is it both?

So we're back to Zobel's point.

---

How do I know I'm in a state of grace?

---

That's not generally a phrase we use in my traditional. Can you reword the question?

---

What is your tradition and I'll just find the term.

---

Anglican.

---

This is from the 39 Articles. I guess the bold is what I'm referring to.

XVII. Of Predestination and Election.

Predestination to Life is the everlasting purpose of God, whereby (before the foundations of the world were laid) he hath constantly decreed by his counsel secret to us, to deliver from curse and damnation those whom he hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, and to bring them by Christ to everlasting salvation, as vessels made to honour. Wherefore, they which be endued with so excellent a benefit of God, be called according to God's purpose by his Spirit working in due season: they through Grace obey the calling: they be justified freely: they be made sons of God by adoption: they be made like the image of his only-begotten Son Jesus Christ: they walk religiously in good works, and at length, by God's mercy, they attain to everlasting felicity.

As the godly consideration of Predestination, and our Election in Christ, is full of sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable comfort to godly persons, and such as feel in themselves the working of the Spirit of Christ, mortifying the works of the flesh, and their earthly members, and drawing up their mind to high and heavenly things, as well because it doth greatly establish and confirm their faith of eternal Salvation to be enjoyed through Christ as because it doth fervently kindle their love towards God: So, for curious and carnal persons, lacking the Spirit of Christ, to have continually before their eyes the sentence of God's Predestination, is a most dangerous downfall, whereby the Devil doth thrust them either into desperation, or into wretchlessness of most unclean living, no less perilous than desperation.

Furthermore, we must receive God's promises in such wise, as they be generally set forth to us in Holy Scripture: and, in our doings, that Will of God is to be followed, which we have expressly declared unto us in the Word of God.

---

My response would be, you don't know until you've finished the race. We work out our faith with fear and trembling. If you read the prayers in the BCP you'll note that we constantly ask for God's mercy and for assistance to do the works put before us. Wheat and chaff, sheep and goats, the parable of the sower apply to us inside the church. It grows together to be harvested at the end.

We don't treat it as a one step process.

---

Rereading the thread, I realized I was reading zobel's posts in conjunction with yours. So this article XVII is, as zobel puts it, an "unknowable condition until judgment. Seems useful."

---

Can you point me to the specific time for this state of grace that any Anglican can claim based on that article? It does say, "walk religiously in good works…and at length, obtain God's mercy". And how would you reconcile it with the last paragraph of the article? We, as a practice, don't put scripture against itself. We're mystical in practice rather than material, we read the church fathers and generally don't confine ourselves (in my parish) to singular exclusive doctrines (more often both and, such as Christus victor and penal atonement, and…).

---

I'm not sure I understand your question.

Not everyone is an apostle, or a prophet. That doesn't mean only few are called. Thats the climax of the parable of the wedding feast.

10andBOUNCE said:

---

The Banned said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

The Banned said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

We talked about this a ways back somewhere else but what is the catholic stance on righteousness?

You would not agree with the view I hold around double imputation - where Christ takes on my sin and I am imputed his righteousness. Once and for all. Tied to our justification.

What is the catholic counter to this process? I brought it up once and was told I was not correct in my understanding of the catholic process. My understanding was that you essentially need to go back to the well regularly, for lack of a better way to explain it.

---

Christ died, once and for all. But since we are created with free will, we choose whether or not to accept His sacrifice throughout the course of our life. Just because I pick Jesus today, doesn't mean I can't reject Him tomorrow. That, in my opinion, is a truly synergistic journey because I must continue to submit to Him. And that journey requires a truly free person to chose both bad and good.

Hence the reason all the warnings in the Bible to stay close to Him, to avoid sin and watch out for false teachers. What good are any of those warnings if me accepting His sacrifice one time sealed the deal?

ETA: the idea that we are a new creation with new desire is still true. But the devil works hard to take back what he had. Hence the whole spiritual warfare thing. What's the point of the devil even fighting for the ones that are locked in? He's wasting a bunch of time too

---

So what about scripture such as John 6:37-40 and John 10:27-30?

---

Proof texting doesn't work. We have to take the scripture as a whole. There is a reason atheists always claim that the Bible contradicts itself, and that is because anyone can make the Bible say whatever they want with this formula. You send me some that you think prove unconditional election, I show you some that warn of falling away from the faith and we get nowhere

---

Taking scripture as a whole, the entire Bible is about God choosing people that belong to him. I said it before in another post...Abraham and Moses didn't come seeking God on their own accord. The twelve didn't respond to a flier that Jesus posted in the Capernaum town square asking for followers. Paul has been discussed. All of these are examples of God's sovereign election.

If anything the anti-election crowd has been sending over random verses to support their personal autonomy.

---

Sorry but I have to respond. I am not anti election as that is clearly Biblical. I do think God elects some to be special messengers or whatever, in fact we are all elected to do what God planned for us to do.

I do not tie election into salvation and that is where I differ with my Reformed brothers. And that is okay. We have different views. So be it.

I kind of bristle at the suggestion that I throw out random verses. How else can I make my case? And you never respond to them but laugh them off.

I am not the one having to add words or brush off Scripture to make my theology make sense.

As I stated earlier, it is like one gets a Reformed/Calvinist lens, then every Scripture is interpreted through that lens.

That being said, I love any brother in Christ and am firmly convinced Christ will be Lord of all.

And I do not know what lit me up. Whether it is being called anti election or being accused of sending over random verses. Seems arrogant to me.

Shalom.

The Banned said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

The Banned said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

The Banned said:

---

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

The Banned said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

The Banned said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

Can he override? Sure. Why doesn't he? I don't know. His greater purpose will be accomplished no matter what you or I choose to do.

---

So I want to commit a sin. God can make me stop. God doesn't want to make me stop…

How is this not God wanting us to sin? Am I missing something?

---

I am not sure. God simply wants his children to trust and obey. Our sinful actions are not going to thwart his plans. We have the freedom to obey or rebel. We are not going to be perfect, but over the course of our regenerated lives, we should have a trajectory towards obedience. God will use our brokenness to bring about our good as it promises in Romans 8.

---

This is where we get nice and circular:

We can't have chosen God because that is a work. So God must have chosen us. Now that we are chosen, we must choose to obey Him in return. If we don't choose to obey Him, we would lose our salvation. But we can't lose salvation under once saved always saved, so God must only pick people that he knows will obey Him. So you are chosen because of your willingness to do good works. But that's "works based salvation". He's choosing you for your goodness.

The only other option is the limited free will of Calvinism. He is making us do the good. If we fail to do the good, it's because He didn't stop us from doing the bad. So in some form or fashion, God wants that sin to happen.

---

I think this is where either you misunderstand or the word "choose" does us a disservice (much like offspring/children).

It's all about desire. We make choices everyday continually, over and over, and we always choose what we desire the most. We never lose our responsibility to choose the Lord but He must first change our hearts so that we desire to do so. Now that we have the desire to please Christ, will that desire win out 100% of the time? Unfortunately, no it will not. Sometimes we desire to sin more and thus will choose sin. That is why we will never be through grieving our sins and repenting. This is where sanctification comes in, which is a journey. As we work through our salvation hand-in-hand with the Holy Spirt, we will become more like Him, winning less and grieving ever more deeply when we do.

Now, do you want to call this choice to believe in, love, honor, and obey God a work and then claim that is works-based salvation? Obviously there again we have the issue of different definitions. When I hear the term "works-based salvation" I'm thinking of someone racking up enough points in the good deeds column to earn their salvation, which I do not believe to be biblical nor do I believe that choosing to follow God falls into this category.

When I think of "works" I'm thinking of the fruit we bear after we have come to salvation; our works are an outpouring of our faith. We don't do good works to BE saved, we do them BECAUSE we are saved.

---

Similar to what I said to 10, your second paragraph describes the Catholic faith. That very same belief gets Catholics labeled works based.

This is because we believe we can lose our salvation, and most Protestants believe in once saved, always saved. So I would ask you: if we're supposed to be doing those good things and some people don't/stop, why? Because people deluded themselves? Because God didn't actually pick them? Ok, then God causes you to do the good things, and not them. Your compliance is caused by Him, so we're back to all of that good fruit being caused by God, and all of your sin being intentionally allowed by God, meaning God wants people to sin.

Or, in my opinion, you can abandon once saved, always saved, embrace that God allows people to choose Him and choose to fall away again in the future should they so choose, and that our salvation requires our efforts in some capacity. Reformed doctrine has it wrong. Do that and the equation is solved. It doesn't mean we "earn" it. But we definitely can lose it.

---

There is too much compelling scripture for me to believe we can lose our salvation. If God gave me a new heart of flesh, it's not going to turn back to a heart of stone.

You have to step away from the notion that people are robots in Calvinistic doctrine. It's all about desire. We choose what we desire. Before regeneration we desire sin, we are slaves to it, and therefore freely choose sin. When we are given new hearts, we desire the Lord, and freely choose to please Him. We aren't being unwilling forced to make these decisions. If we were, we'd never sin again. It doesn't please God when we sin but He allows it and will use it according to His purpose.

I'm sure you already know this but the answer to the questions about those who have "fallen away" was they were never truly regenerate to begin with.

---

This still leaves two issues:

1. God changed your heart. You couldn't do good without that. But He left your bad desires on purpose. How does that not mean that he WANTS you to sin. The alternative is He wants you to actively choose Him, which requires true free will and a possibility of falling away? I think you have to pick one here.

2. As you noted in your response to Zobel, you believe you can have real assurance and false assurance. What makes you convinced you aren't one of the ones with false assurance? And do you think the ones that were falsely assured and ended up falling away weren't truly convinced they were saved at the time? If they were deluded, how can you be sure you aren't. Saying they weren't truly saved seems to solve the falling away problem but opens the door wide to the issue of false assurance. I don't think that's better. In fact, I think it's worse because you can be warned not to lose your faith (as the Bible does many times) but there is nothing you can do to guard against false assurance. God may have already decided you're going to hell and you may not find out for another 30 years, wasting a lot of time along the way.

---

1. If the Lord made me incapable of sinning, THAT would be robotic. This ties into the question of why does God allow evil.

2. How far does someone have to fall for them to lose their salvation? The most minor of sins should do the trick, which would we could never have more than momentary assurance, if even that. Not only that, but we'd have to continually be saved over and over and pray that every single thing was in Godly order the moment we die. I'd rather feel assured and proven wrong later than never being able to have assurance; which would be the case if falling away were a possibility.

---

1. You say He is allowing evil. That's fine, as we say that too. But in your framework, everything is inside of God's active will. I don't see any room for God's permissive will , as we would call it. If God is fully sovereign, it is his active will that people sin. This is why I find Calvinism so detestable. Link for clarity from a Calvinist site. https://philgons.com/2010/06/calvin-on-gods-permissive-will/

2. The break with God happens when we actively choose to intentionally break communion with him with grave sin. Cussing when you step on a Lego, or feeling anger when your kids act up isn't you rejecting God. But having sec with another woman and not being remorseful? Never working prayer into your daily routine? Not giving of your abundance to those in need? In other words, intentionally doing what you shouldn't be doing and not stopping when corrected.

Hence the need to confess your sins and try to do better. That's all it takes. Repenting to the best of your ability through the grace God has given you. It's interesting that you'd rather be potentially blindsided after years of wasting your time rather than be given the formula to stay in God's flock.

---

And as a doctor, your link drives me crazy. I believe God allows diseases and cancer for His own purposes which are always good. But to say God actively gives a person cancer makes God into a monster. Sorry but He is love.
And John Piper drives me nuts. If he came into my patient's room and started saying God gave my patient cancer to make him repent, I would kick him out of the room.
And I get how this life is temporal and short. And that we focus on eternal life which gives us hope. The question is always about the character of God.

Jesus is the revelation of God. He always healed. And accepted everyone. The only people He chastised were the religious leaders who ironically thought they were the "elect" because of their being devout Jews. Seems eerily similar.

Rant over.