Assurance of Salvation

Dear brother Wilkin:

Greetings! My apologies for the long lapse of time in getting a response off to you. So, without further delay (and without taking up more space than I already have!)…

The following is a ―Revised and Expanded Edition‖ of my earlier compilation of some passages of Scripture bearing on particular aspects of the nature, reign, inheritance, heavenly glory, and infinite blessings of Christ's beloved Body & Bride (comprised exclusively of all believers saved from Pentecost to Pre-Trib Rapture) in and with her Head, Life & Bridegroom – all by the infinite riches of His grace, unleashed by His infinitely precious, once-for-all shed blood.

This reworked compilation now has the added benefit [?] of being accompanied by some observations, remarks and questions, as well as liberally-interspersed commentary by a few ―guest speakers‖ (who are not cited as sources of authority, but simply as more eloquent expounders of the truth they conveyed in that which is quoted).

I have necessarily confined myself to the NT books of John-Revelation, as there alone (particularly in the Epistles of Paul) will the nature, purpose, and destiny of the Church be found – not in the earthly, law, kingdom-centered Synoptic Gospels (precious and indispensable though they be).

Let me say that when it comes to my view of the (Pre-Tribulational) Rapture, it is governed and determined by my understanding of the Soteriology and Ecclesiology of the present intercalary age; which thus allows all (through normal, plain, literal interpretation) to be kept in its proper, perfect, scriptural perspective and harmony – without contradicting or slighting any of its constituent parts.

Likewise, it will become quite evident as we proceed that my view of such things as the Bema-Seat of Christ, and other related matters, is also governed and determined by my understanding of the Soteriology and Ecclesiology of the present intercalary age; which thus, again, allows all (through normal, plain, literal interpretation) to be kept in its proper, perfect, scriptural perspective and harmony – without contradicting or slighting any of its constituent parts.

In contrast, it seems to me, your views on the Soteriology and Ecclesiology of the present age are rather governed and determined by your (mis)understanding of such things as the Bema-Seat of Christ, and other related matters; which thus does not allow all to be kept in its proper, perfect, scriptural perspective and harmony – resulting in many of its constituent parts being contradicted, slighted, and misunderstood. The content and format of my response is thus, at least in part, intended (if not completely well designed) to make that apparent.

Let it be observed, too, in passing, that absolutely none of the passages in the Synoptic Gospels which speak, e.g., of ―outer darkness‖ and ―weeping and gnashing teeth‖ (Matt. 8:12; 13:42, 50; 22:13; 24:51; 25:30; Lk. 13:28) are believed to be capable of application to any believers in general, let alone to any members of Christ‘s Body & Bride in particular.

Please note that the subdivisions below are not absolute; there is a good deal of overlapping, and necessarily so, as the truths taken up under each section are inextricably interrelated, due to the very nature and destiny of the Church. This too will become quite evident as we proceed.

There is much here [understatement!] to digest, dear brother; so please do take your time as you chew it over and weigh its substance.

If there are any areas that you feel have not been addressed, either adequately or at all (including points from your previous correspondence), please let me know.

May the Lord use that which is true herein to His glory and for your blessing.

Yours in Him Who is our Acceptance, Life & Hope,
James M Ventilato

Richard Sibbes (1577-1635) said, “A little fire is fire... a little thing in the hand of giant will do great things. A little faith strengthened by Christ will work wonders.”  Sibbes penned these words to bring comfort to his readers; a cure to a perplexed faith. In a word, faith is faith. This statement encapsulates the whole idea of the Holy Spirit’s work in the assurance of faith. The purpose of this article—main thesis—seeks to enlighten Sibbes’ teaching on the work of the Spirit in the assurance of faith—the ‘second sealing’.

Contemporary conversations over the relationship between divine election and whether a person can lose his or her salvation often consider the unconditional or conditional nature of God’s predestination of individuals. A neglected element of this conversation, with strong historical precedence in scholastic approaches to the doctrine and which is only recently being recovered, concerns the relationship between God’s knowledge and will. This study examines the question of the irrevocable nature of salvation, arguing that greater clarity concerning what divides various positions is to be found in consideration of the divine knowledge and will dialectic. How one understands the way in which what God knows is determined by what God wills dictates the contours of how one approaches election, its conditionality, and whether it can be lost. This study therefore considers the relationship of God’s knowledge to his will in historical Calvinist, Arminian, and Molinist conceptions to conclude that in its approach to this dialectic Arminianism possesses problematic features towards the development of a consistent basis for assurance of salvation that the other two views do not possess.

To properly understand the apostle John's Epistles (in keeping, indeed, with many expressions of our Lord Jesus Himself as recorded in John's Gospel), it is essential that we grasp their particularly "abstract" nature. The First Epistle of John, especially, "is mainly abstract (i.e., deals with truth in its principles) and [as such] draws a sharp distinction between light and darkness and between the old nature and the new" (RAH), with no shades of gray in such expressions, and generally not stopping to address the mixed condition that believers often find in themselves, who possess both the divine life/new nature and the old lawless nature-with such abstract statements further serving to both encourage and admonish us, stirring us to enter into by faith and realize in daily practice the profound blessings of the new nature and position we have in Christ and to walk accordingly. "It is of great value to view things in this abstract way [that is, according their fundamental nature by which they are characterized before God, without introducing any qualifying clauses related to varying experiential condition], for thereby we are instructed in the true nature of things, and see things as God sees them. Moreover [in the case of the children of God] we are seeing things as they will be displayed in the day to come when God has finished His work with us [in our glorified state]." (FBH) "Needless to say, that when we look into daily conversation [daily walk], there is failure too often. But John is not occupied with the shortcoming as a general rule, but with the principle, and therefore he puts it in all its simplicity as he was entitled to do. .. 'In this are manifest the children of God and the children of the devil.' The apostle regarded the difference as plain enough. He looks as usual at broad, clear, and practical proofs." "John as a rule [with few exceptions] does not occupy himself with the details of fact [as to modifications in the believer's spiritual condition or lapses of unfaithfulness]. He looks at truth in its own proper abstract character apart from passing circumstances; and if you do not read John's writings thus, especially the epistle before us, I am afraid that there is little prospect that you will ever understand them." (WK) "The ascribing to a person what is true only of a nature [the nature by which he is viewed before God], runs through all John's epistle." (JND) Thus, with respect to the believer, while he still has the old nature, the flesh, in him (Rom. 7:18), he is no longer "in the flesh" as to his standing or what characterizes him before God (Rom. 7:5; 8:8-9; Eph. 2:11; Col. 2:11). He is viewed as such all through this First Epistle-according to the new nature which alone characterizes him before God (in contrast with the falsely professing unbeliever whose sole nature, the flesh, characterizes him before God).

For a sampling of such “abstract” expressions of our Lord in John’s Gospel as well, see: 5:28-29; 8:12, 31-32, 34, 36, 42, 47, 51; 10:4-5, 27; 12:25-26; 14:21, 23-24; 15:14; 17:6, 8; etc. Likewise with respect to His characterization of “him that overcomes” in Revelation 2-3 (the real believer, 1 John 5:4-5), also recorded by John. Such may be found, to a lesser extent, in our Lord’s words in each of the other Gospels too, e.g.: Matt. 5:3-11; 7:17-19; 10:32-33, 37-39; 16:24-25; Mark 8:34-38; Luke 6:43-45; 8:21; 9:23-26; 14:26-27. Nor is this type of expression absent elsewhere in the NT, key examples of which may be noted in this striking set of related passages: 1 Cor. 6:9-11; Gal. 5:19-21; Eph. 5:5-8; Col. 3:5-6; Rev. 21:8.

Appendix 1: Know” in First John:  The Occurrences of and Shade of Difference between Ginosko and Oida

Appendix 2: Personal Assurance

Appendix 3: Divine Preservation of Faith in His Own Contrasted with Apostasy of False Professors

Muslim scholars known as the Mu’tazilites, dissented from this orthodoxy, and engaged in theological discussions as, “Predestination and Free Will,” “The Attributes of God” and the “Nature of the Qur’anic Revelation,” relying on Greek philosophical thought.
In their attempt to safeguard monotheism, they taught the Createdness of the Qur’an, distinguishing Allah from His Word, the Qur’an. They were active in Baghdad during the ninth and tenth centuries. Their views were adopted by the Abbasid Caliph, Al-Maamoun. Eventually, the uncreatedness of the Qur’an prevailed and became a standard Islamic orthodoxy.