Can We Really Exercise Free Will?

[Journey_man]

Current murderers and adulterers can become God’s people if they repent. David admitted his sin before Nathan. God forgave David because he trusted in the grace of God. (2 Samuel 12:13, Ephesians 2:8-9).

(KJV 1 John 1:9) “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”

Wicked murderers and adulterers are not God’s people and they will perish. (1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Revelation 21:8)

The Bible teaches conditional security. Many of the promises of God are conditional. It is possible for a Christian to fall away, as the scriptures demonstrate. Eternal security is a false doctrine.

Hebrews 10:10 describes these believers as being sanctified through the Lord Jesus Christ.

(KJV Hebrews 10:10) “By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.”

The sanctified believers are described as being “perfected forever.” (Hebrews 10:14) They could have “full assurance of faith” through Jesus their High Priest according to Hebrews 10:22.

(KJV Hebrews 10:23) “Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised)” We are instructed to “hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering.” This implies it was possible for them to let go of their profession of faith.

(KJV Hebrews 10:26-27) “For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.” This implies that it was possible for these believers to return to willful sin and be subject to damnation.

Hebrews 3:12 warns of the peril of unbelief. (KJV Hebrews 3:12) “Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God.”

(KJV Hebrews 3:14) “For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end;” We are made partakers of Christ if we hold our original confidence firm to the end. This is a condition Christians must meet.

Saul (1 Samuel 10:10-12, 1 Samuel 28:16, 1 Samuel 31:4) Solomon, (1 Kings 11:4-10) Demas (2 Timothy 4:10) and Judas (Acts 1:25) are examples of believers who fell away from the faith.

The book of John speaks of disciples that fell away from the faith. (KJV John 6:66) "From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him."

Jesus speaks about the conditional security of the believer in the book of Matthew. (KJV Matthew 6:14-15) "For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses." God will forgive the believer who has forgiven others. However, God will not forgive those who refuse to forgive others.

Other scriptures that show conditional security include Luke 12:45-46, John 15:2-6, 2 John 1:9, Romans 11:21-22, 1 Corinthians 3:16-17, 1 Corinthians 9:27, 1 Corinthians 10:12, 1Corinthians 15:2, Colossians 1:23, 2 Thessalonians 2:3, 1 Timothy 3:6-7, 1 Timothy 4:1, 1 Timothy 5:12,, 1 Timothy 5:15, Hebrews 3:12-14, Hebrews 6:4-6, Hebrews 12:15-17, James 5:19-20, 2 Peter 2:20-22, Revelation 2:5, Revelation 3:16, Revelation 22:19.

None of that is true, the Bible proves that your opinion is nonsense.

John 10:27–29
Jesus says His sheep will never perish and no one can snatch them out of His or the Father's hand. This shows Christ protects His own permanently.

John 6:39–40
Jesus states it is the Father's will that He loses none of those given to Him, but raises them up on the last day. Salvation rests on God's sovereign will.

Romans 8:38–39
Paul writes that nothing in all creation—including death, life, or powers—can separate believers from the love of God in Christ Jesus

Philippians 1:6
Paul is confident that God, who began a good work in the believers at Philippi, will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus

Ephesians 1:13–14
Believers are marked with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until we are redeemed

Romans 8:29–30
Paul outlines the "golden chain of redemption," showing that those God foreknew and predestined are also called, justified, and ultimately glorified without exception.

You reject Gods Word at your own peril.

 

[brightfame52]

Hebrews 10:14 says Jesus “has perfected forever” (τετελείωκεν) the people who “are being made holy” (ἁγιαζομένους, present‑tense), which means His work is totally finished, but the verse itself says the finished gift belongs to people who keep trusting Him, not people who walk away on purpose like Hebrews 10:26 warns (“if we sin willfully,” ἑκουσίως).

Them that are being sanctified in Heb 10:14 give evidence of their once and for all being made perfect. Their being sanctified is a present tense passive participle, meaning they are being acted upon, they are being made to persevere. The key is the ones being sanctified is passive voice. That's why the writer can confidently write in vs 39

But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.

 

[JimiSurvivor]

@JimiSurvivor , @OMC

JimiSurvivor and OMC, I see you two have decided to team up to try and escape the literal verses of Scripture.

a). First, we made no secret decision to collaborate in some plot to ESCAPE what you call the LITERAL meaning of scripture. If we happen to come to similar conclusions about some matters it is based on the similar way we read the text.
b). You cannot claim to have the corner market on literalism. This can be seen in instances where the author of Hebrews gives warnings. Rather than accept as a real POSSIBILITY for believers [as it appears to be] you find it necessary to posit the existence of an entirely different group of false believers who are the real targets of those warnings.
c). If the author had intended some of what he wrote to indicate FALSE believers then he would have explicitly said so.

d) It is EXTREMELY COMMON in the Bible, throughout the OT and in the NT to present to present A SINGLE AUDIENCE with two possible sets of consequences that COULD happen, depending on their choices. This is the essence of what a warning is.
e). For example, Isaiah 1 says:
18 “Come now, let us reason together,” says the LORD. “Though your sins are like scarlet, they will be as white as snow; though they are as red as crimson, they will become like wool.
19 If you are willing and obedient, you will eat the best of the land.
20 But if you resist and rebel, you will be devoured by the sword.” For the mouth of the LORD has spoken.…

e). This proposition is very clear and understandable even to us simple-minded humans. There is certainly no need to DIVIDE the audience into two groups - one of which CONSISTS of true believers in YHWH and OTHERS who are only pretending.

f). In reality We ALL understand moral/spiritual propositions couched in conditional language and use them all the time when disciplining our children:
IF you CLEAN your room thoroughly, I will let you go outside to PLAY. IF YOU DO NOT you will have to remain in your room.
This is straightforward because we ordinarily assume the child is able to understand and to respond to what we have said.
If one of our children is impaired in some way we will provide SOME way for them to respond.

You claim that using basic pronouns to identify different groups is just a "theological construct," but that is a flat-out denial of how language works. When an author

No, I am not DENYING the ordinary use of pronouns. I think you have an agenda which you are attempting to shoe-horn into the text without taking into account the nuanced way language is to be understood. How an author uses pronouns depends on the literary context - whether he is speaking as an individual, a traveler, or a teacher.

Here are some different ways pronouns can be understood.

1. The Editorial or Authorial "We"

• Meaning: The writer uses the first-person plural ("we," "us," "our") while actually referring only to himself.
• Context: This stylistic choice appears often in New Testament letters (such as those by Paul, Sosthenes, or Timothy). It acts as a rhetorical device to sound less authoritarian, blend the writer's personal voice with his co-senders, or gently invite the audience into shared agreement.

2. The Eyewitness or Traveling "We"

• Meaning: The writer includes himself alongside literal traveling companions or fellow eyewitnesses.
• Context: A clear example occurs in the "we" sections of Acts (e.g., Acts 16:10–17). The author (traditionally identified as Luke) switches from writing in the third person ("he" or "they") to the first-person plural ("we") precisely at the points where he physically joins the Apostle Paul on his missionary journeys, marking himself as a direct participant in the events. [1, 2, 3]

3. The Inclusive Corporate "We"

• Meaning: The writer includes himself and his readers/listeners together as a unified group of believers.
• Context: In letters like Romans or 1 John, "we" often encompasses both the apostles/authors and all Christians everywhere (e.g., "we have sinned," "we are children of God"). It emphasizes a shared human condition, collective faith, or common apostolic testimony.

inspired by God Himself uses distant third-person plural pronouns like "those" and "themselves" to describe individuals who fall away into total destruction, and then explicitly switches to first and second-person plural pronouns like "you" and "we" to state he is persuaded of "better things of you, and things that accompany salvation," he is explicitly and purposefully separating two different groups of people, otherwise, he would have explained it differently. To claim "those" and "we" are the exact same group completely violates universal grammar, human speech, and basic logic.

We must avoid being dogmatic. For instance, when the author of Hebrews wrote:
3 how shall we escape if we neglect such a great salvation? This salvation was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard Him, 4 and was affirmed by God through signs, wonders, various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to His will.…(Hebrews 2:3)
He was not necessarily saying he expected the consequences to fall on. Including himself in the warning was a way of acknowledging the universality of the warning,

 

[rogerg]

a). First, we made no secret decision to collaborate in some plot to ESCAPE what you call the LITERAL meaning of scripture. If we happen to come to similar conclusions about some matters it is based on the similar way we read the text.
b). You cannot claim to have the corner market on literalism. This can be seen in instances where the author of Hebrews gives warnings. Rather than accept as a real POSSIBILITY for believers [as it appears to be] you find it necessary to posit the existence of an entirely different group of false believers who are the real targets of those warnings.
c). If the author had intended some of what he wrote to indicate FALSE believers then he would have explicitly said so.

d) It is EXTREMELY COMMON in the Bible, throughout the OT and in the NT to present to present A SINGLE AUDIENCE with two possible sets of consequences that COULD happen, depending on their choices. This is the essence of what a warning is.
e). For example, Isaiah 1 says:
18 “Come now, let us reason together,” says the LORD. “Though your sins are like scarlet, they will be as white as snow; though they are as red as crimson, they will become like wool.
19 If you are willing and obedient, you will eat the best of the land.
20 But if you resist and rebel, you will be devoured by the sword.” For the mouth of the LORD has spoken.…

Jimi, to conform to posting size restrictions, I am did not quote your full post, but I will reply to it here.

Thank you for a detailed explanation of your perspective with pronoun definitions.
I understand your point about how "we" can function in a corporate or pastoral sense to include an entire audience, such as in Hebrews 2:3. However, your use of Hebrews 2:3 actually highlights the exact distinction I am pointing out. When the author wants a teaching to apply generally, he explicitly writes, "How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation." But when he describes individuals falling away into total perdition, he purposefully and explicitly switches to third-person groups like "those" and "them." While the author uses "we" to address the community hearing the gospel, he draws a clear distinction as in Hebrews 10:39 by explicitly declaring, "But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition." This consistent pronoun precedent is woven throughout the entire book. In Hebrews 6, after describing the destruction of "those" who fall away, the author immediately shifts back to his readers in verse 9 stating, "But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation." When an author inspired by God, assigns specific actions and eventual destruction strictly to third-person groups like "those" and "them," and then draws a clear line stating we are "not of them," he is using basic language and logic to show that those saved belong to a completely separate and distinct category from those who perish. Your grammar definitions cannot turn a declarative like "we are not of them" and yet places them into a group that falls into perdition.
Regarding your mention of Isaiah 1 and conditional warnings, it is true that God uses warnings for instruction. But from a New Covenant perspective, true believers do not maintain their saved state through their own human willpower or performance - that could only happen under the Old Covenant, not the New Covenant. With the New Covenant, God Himself assumed full responsibility to ensure and guarantee that those He places under it remain under it - nowhere in Scripture are we told of anyone being taken from under the New Covenant and being placed back under the Old Covenant - it functions only unidirectionally. This is made clear in 1 Peter 1:4-5, which states that our inheritance is incorruptible and reserved in heaven, and that true believers are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation. In Hebrews 10:14, the phrase "them that are sanctified" is structured as a passive participle, meaning the elect are being acted upon by God's grace, and so it is by/through God alone that they persevere. Edifications function as God's tools to teach His children; but it is by His grace alone through Jesus Christ, Savior, that their eternal security is guaranteed and not in any way by their actions.

---

 

[JimiSurvivor]

Jimi, to conform to posting size restrictions, I am did not quote your full post, but I will reply to it here.

Thank you for a detailed explanation of your perspective with pronoun definitions.
I understand your point about how "we" can function in a corporate or pastoral sense to include an entire audience, such as in Hebrews 2:3. However, your use of Hebrews 2:3 actually highlights the exact distinction I am pointing out. When the author wants a teaching to apply generally, he explicitly writes, "How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation." But when he describes individuals falling away into total perdition, he purposefully and explicitly switches to third-person groups like "those" and "them."

a). The author of Hebrews presents various possible outcomes for his audience which were contingent on whether they would heed or ignore his warnings.
However, he was quick to add that: 9 Even though WE speak like this, beloved, WE are CONVINCED of better things in your case— things that accompany salvation.
(Hebrews 6:9)
The Greek word translated CONVINCED is peíthō (which is the root of 4102 /pístis, "faith") –TO BE PERSUADED OR CONVINCED (by argument, true or false) His confidence in them was based on his observations of them over time.

While the author uses "we" to address the community hearing the gospel, he draws a clear distinction as in Hebrews 10:39 by explicitly declaring, "But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition." This consistent pronoun precedent is woven throughout the entire book. In Hebrews 6, after describing the destruction of "those" who fall away, the author immediately shifts back to his readers in verse 9 stating, "But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation."

Warnings are based on universal truths which are potentially applicable to anyone. When the Author of Hebrews gave warnings he intended them to be understood as potential realities. However, he assures them that "although he had been speaking to them in this manner he expected better things of them," that is, he expected them to persevere in the Faith and realize their inheritance.
What was the basis of his confidence in them. Given the context of the book and without importing any presuppositions his confidence in them seems to have been based on his long acquaintance with them observing them enduring suffering and deprivations and for the sake of Christ.

---

 

[JimiSurvivor]

Jimi, to conform to posting size restrictions, I am did not quote your full post, but I will reply to it here.
Thank you for a detailed explanation of your perspective with pronoun definitions.
I understand your point about how "we" can function in a corporate or pastoral sense to include an entire audience, such as in Hebrews 2:3. However, your use of Hebrews 2:3 actually highlights the exact distinction I am pointing out. When the author wants a teaching to apply generally, he explicitly writes, "How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation."

But when he describes individuals falling away into total perdition, he purposefully and explicitly switches to third-person groups like "those" and "them." While the author uses "we" to address the community hearing the gospel, he draws a clear distinction as in Hebrews 10:39 by explicitly declaring, "But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition."

The author DOES expect better things of this specific group of Hebrew Christians. You have gone far beyond this to to say that a positive outcome is INEVITABLE in the case of every (true) individual believer. In fact, the author does not address those who living among these Messianic Jews but are merely PRETENDING to be believers. It is highly unlikely that such people would have stuck around during the days when the Church was undergoing persecution and material deprivation The Book of Hebrews never speaks of directly about a special category of so-called FALSE BELIEVERS. Had this been a problem, no doubt it would have been addressed. Your attempt to smuggle FALSE BELIEVERS into the narrative reveals a primary commitment to a theological system which did not exist at the time when Hebrews was written.

 

[rogerg]

a). The author of Hebrews presents various possible outcomes for his audience which were contingent on whether they would heed or ignore his warnings.
However, he was quick to add that: 9 Even though WE speak like this, beloved, WE are CONVINCED of better things in your case— things that accompany salvation.
(Hebrews 6:9)
The Greek word translated CONVINCED is peíthō (which is the root of 4102 /pístis, "faith") –TO BE PERSUADED OR CONVINCED (by argument, true or false) His confidence in them was based on his observations of them over time.


Warnings are based on universal truths which are potentially applicable to anyone. When the Author of Hebrews gave warnings he intended them to be understood as potential realities. However, he assures them that "although he had been speaking to them in this manner he expected better things of them," that is, he expected them to persevere in the Faith and realize their inheritance.
What was the basis of his confidence in them. Given the context of the book and without importing any presuppositions his confidence in them seems to have been based on his long acquaintance with them observing them enduring suffering and deprivations and for the sake of Christ.

---

The author DOES expect better things of this specific group of Hebrew Christians. You have gone far beyond this to to say that a positive outcome is INEVITABLE in the case of every (true) individual believer. In fact, the author does not address those who living among these Messianic Jews but are merely PRETENDING to be believers. It is highly unlikely that such people would have stuck around during the days when the Church was undergoing persecution and material deprivation The Book of Hebrews never speaks of directly about a special category of so-called FALSE BELIEVERS. Had this been a problem, no doubt it would have been addressed. Your attempt to smuggle FALSE BELIEVERS into the narrative reveals a primary commitment to a theological system which did not exist at the time when Hebrews was written.

I understand your point regarding the Greek root peíthō in Hebrews 6:9, but in the New Testament epistles, when an inspired writer is "persuaded" of something regarding the elect, it denotes absolute, divine certainty, not changeable human opinion based on familiarity. Don't forget that it was God who moved the writer of Hebrews to write specifically what He wanted written - it did not originate from/by the writer himself so there can be absolutely no possibility of it actually meaning something else. It perfectly mirrors Romans 8:38 where Paul declares, "For I am persuaded (peíthō), that neither death, nor life... shall be able to separate us from the love of God." You subtly insert that the author intended these warnings as "potential realities" for true believers who must simply persevere to realize their inheritance, but that completely alters the text. The author does not state that a positive outcome is a conditional potentiality based on human performance; he explicitly states it as a declarative fact that he is persuaded of things that "accompany salvation" in their case. The text links and bases their security to the nature of what they possess, not their human ability to avoid a potential fall. Otherwise, 1 Pe 1:4- 5 would be wrong and would therefore make Christ not THE Savior but themselves savior. Notice that the word/title of Savior is singular, meaning there is only one possible Savior and that Jesus Christ. As such, He eliminates the possibility of believers of having to contribute to or maintain that spiritual state of themselves. I believe the fundamental flaw in your belief is that you eliminate Christ as Savior and instead place it upon man.
Your claim that the book of Hebrews never addresses a category of false believers, or that non-believers would not remain during trials, is flatly refuted by the text itself. In Matthew 13:21, Christ explicitly states that stony-ground hearers can endure "for a while," but wither when tribulation or persecution arises. They outwardly act like true believers for a season, but they actually are non-believers who have no root. Further, the entire warning of Hebrews is grounded in the historical example of earthly Israel in the wilderness. Hebrews 3:12 warns against "an evil heart of unbelief," and verses 17-19 explicitly state that those carcasses fell in the wilderness that could not enter in "because of unbelief." They were part of earthly Israel and all saw/experienced the miracles, yet they were still total non-believers who completely lacked true faith, despite making an outward claim of belonging to God's covenant as those of Heb 6:4 -6 also did. The author uses this exact historical blueprint to warn against profane individuals like Esau in Hebrews 12:16, and the distant third-person group in Hebrews 10:39 who "draw back unto perdition."
Highlighting a separate category of non-believers who make a false profession isn't a new theological system as you claim it is; it is the plain and sharp literal distinction the text itself draws by separating "those" who perish from whom the author clearly and explicitly states are "not of them." True believers do not maintain their saved state through human willpower; they are passive yet full recipients of God's New Covenant power, which ensures their final perseverance and makes Jesus Christ, Savior, and not man.

---

 

[brightfame52]

The author DOES expect better things of this specific group of Hebrew Christians. You have gone far beyond this to to say that a positive outcome is INEVITABLE in the case of every (true) individual believer. In fact, the author does not address those who living among these Messianic Jews but are merely PRETENDING to be believers. It is highly unlikely that such people would have stuck around during the days when the Church was undergoing persecution and material deprivation The Book of Hebrews never speaks of directly about a special category of so-called FALSE BELIEVERS. Had this been a problem, no doubt it would have been addressed. Your attempt to smuggle FALSE BELIEVERS into the narrative reveals a primary commitment to a theological system which did not exist at the time when Hebrews was written.

JimiSurvivor,

Your argument rests on a fundamental category mistake. By reducing the author’s confidence in Hebrews 6:9 to a fallible human opinion based on "observation over time," you treat the inspired writer like a human speculator guessing at a provisional outcome. Furthermore, by claiming that a positive outcome is not inevitable for every true believer, you turn salvation into an open-ended, conditional contract dependent on human performance.


To clear away this confusion, we must view the phrase "things that accompany salvation" through the strict, systematic timeline of Scripture. In biblical theology, salvation is a unified, unbreakable covenant chain. It does not exist in pieces; it unfolds in Five Distinct Phases:

I. The Eternal Phase (Decreed Past)

Salvation begins in the council of eternity past through God's sovereign foreknowledge, election, and predestination (Ephesians 1:4-5). God did not choose a nameless corporate slot; He chose specific individuals to be infallibly conformed to the image of His Son (Romans 8:29). A positive outcome is a covenant decree before history even begins.

II. The Legal Phase (Executed Past)

At Calvary in 33 AD, Christ acted as the legal Surety for those specific elect individuals. His physical death fully satisfied Divine Justice, wiped their legal ledgers clean, and objectively put away their sins (Hebrews 9:26). This phase establishes a finished forensic reality. If a single soul for whom Christ legally satisfied the law could ultimately perish, then Christ’s legal satisfaction was a failure.

III. The Vital Phase (Applied Present)
In time, the Holy Spirit sovereignly quickens and regenerates the dead sinner, giving them a new heart and life by His effectual call (Ephesians 2:1-5). This is a unilateral act of God. It transfers the legal reality of Phase II into an internal, vital possession.

IV. The Practical Phase (Manifested Present)

This brings us directly to the core of your error in Hebrews 6:9. You argue that perseverance is a conditional variable that true believers must maintain. But under this biblical blueprint, Phase IV (Practical Conversion and Sanctification) is the inevitable, mandatory consequence of Phases I, II, and III.

When the author speaks of "things that accompany salvation" (echomena sōtērias—literally, "things clinging to or holding fast to salvation"), he is referring to the fruits of Phase IV. These things—such as faith, love, obedience, and endurance—are not conditions to secure salvation; they are the infallible evidence that salvation is already vitally possessed. Because the Legal Phase (Phase II) was an objective success, and the Vital Phase (Phase III) is an unstoppable reality, the fruits of Phase IV must and shall inevitably manifest in every true child of God. They continue because the cross was a success, not to make the cross a success.

V. The Final Phase (Consummated Future)

The ultimate end of this unbreakable chain is the bodily resurrection and glorification of the Church at the final consummation of history (Romans 8:30).

The Structural Reality of Hebrews

When the author issues warnings in Hebrews, he is not telling true believers that they can slip out of God's ledger and fall into hell. The warnings are the historical means the Holy Spirit uses to cause the elect to persevere in Phase IV.
Your claim that Hebrews never addresses a category of "false believers" or "profane professors" is flatly contradicted by the text itself. In Hebrews 10:39, the author draws a razor-sharp literal line between two distinct categories: “But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.”

Those who "draw back unto perdition" are unregenerate professors who look like believers for a season but completely lack true root (Matthew 13:21), exactly like the wilderness generation who saw the miracles but possessed an "evil heart of unbelief" (Hebrews 3:12).

The author of Hebrews is not an agnostic counselor hoping the Colossians or Hebrews perform well enough to activate a pending contract. Because he is inspired by the Holy Spirit, he is persuaded (peíthō) with absolute, divine certainty that his true audience possesses an inheritance that cannot fail. True believers do not save themselves by their own willpower; they are the passive, full recipients of an unyielding New Covenant power that guarantees their final presentation as holy, unblameable, and unreprovable in His sight. The case remains closed.

 

[JimiSurvivor]

JimiSurvivor,

Your argument rests on a fundamental category mistake. By reducing the author’s confidence in Hebrews 6:9 to a fallible human opinion based on "observation over time," you treat the inspired writer like a human speculator guessing at a provisional outcome. Furthermore, by claiming that a positive outcome is not inevitable for every true believer, you turn salvation into an open-ended, conditional contract dependent on human performance.

A. For one thing I do not see salvation as a mere contract. It is something much deeper - a blood covenant,

B. Where does the Author WRITE that he had received a special divine revelation from God granting him perfect knowledge of the final destinies of every person under his care. Do you hold the bar that high for your pastor. Do you yourself have that kind of revelatory knowledge for everyone under your care? At the very least, show me where the author of Hebrews claims to have this kind of knowledge and I will examine your reference. So far, you have provided nothing but your own human opinion about these matters which we all know out of a particular deterministic theological system which no one in the Early Church believed until Augustine introduced such ideas INTO the body of Christian doctrine in the FIFTH Century. Think about that - the Fifth Century.

B. When I said there was no evidence that the Author was claiming to have personal REVELATORY knowledge about the future of every member of his community, you said this somehow REDUCED author's role to that of a mere human spectator who was merely speculating or guessing.
1) Of course, I acknowledge that he was human but this in no way disqualifies him from having spiritual wisdom, insight or or authority.
2) Every Pastor SHOULD pray for spiritual insight into the hearts of their flock whether his knowledge is obtained directly from God by prayer or by long term observations of their behavior.
3) Jesus said: …16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit.…
(Matthew 7:16-17)

To clear away this confusion, we must view the phrase "things that accompany salvation" through the strict, systematic timeline of Scripture. In biblical theology, salvation is a unified, unbreakable covenant chain. It does not exist in pieces; it unfolds in Five Distinct Phases:

When you describe salvation as an UNBREAKABLE chain seems rather like calling our covenant spouse our ball and chain. Seriously, though, what you seem to be saying is that coming to Christ is a sequential process and, on that, we agree. The foundational truths mentioned in Hebrews 6 suggest this.

I. The Eternal Phase (Decreed Past)

Salvation begins in the council of eternity past through God's sovereign foreknowledge, election, and predestination (Ephesians 1:4-5). God did not choose a nameless corporate slot; He chose specific individuals to be infallibly conformed to the image of His Son (Romans 8:29). A positive outcome is a covenant decree before history even begins.

C. The idea that God micromanages every event that occurs in the universe including every thought, desire and choice of every human in existence was not the view of the Early Church. In fact, they opposed such ideas which were very common in many ancient religions and philosophies. Aurelius Augustine spent years in the Persian cult of Manichaeism studying determinism from that angle.
Eventually, he came to embrace Christianity and rejected what he had been taught taking up the traditional view of human freewill coordinated by God according to his foreknowledge into a plan of Redemption

The Structural Reality of Hebrews

When the author issues warnings in Hebrews, he is not telling true believers that they can slip out of God's ledger and fall into hell. The warnings are the historical means the Holy Spirit uses to cause the elect to persevere in Phase IV.

D. By what authority have you attached the word TRUE to the noun believer? You have obviously done this to eliminate the possibility that a person who has been born again can ever depart from the faith - which the scriptures warns us about many times. Rather than heed that you have attempted to re-interpret the written text. However, warnings are, by definition, appeals to the will based on a legitimate fear of negative consequences. Denying that such consequences exist makes God's warnings hollow and is no different from calling God a liar and mocking Him
Galatians 6:7 says "Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap"

E. The idea that a warning is not (really) a warning but instead just a MEANS of scaring people in order to motivate them to AVOID committing certain sins strikes me as deception as if God were the type of father who makes up fantastic but idle threats to make His children mind. A warning that does not include some possible negative consequence is not really a warning but only an admonition or exhortation.

Your claim that Hebrews never addresses a category of "false believers" or "profane professors" is flatly contradicted by the text itself. In Hebrews 10:39, the author draws a razor-sharp literal line between two distinct categories: “But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.”

F. What I said was that the author of Hebrews did not himself use the TERM false or profane believers. YOU brought those terms into the discussion because you believe humans are pawns which cannot truly make choices. The fact that the author says WE are not OF THEM only draws a line between those who are actively walking by faith trusting God and those who are faltering, stumbling or have completely given up.

 

[brightfame52]

A. For one thing I do not see salvation as a mere contract. It is something much deeper - a blood covenant,

B. Where does the Author WRITE that he had received a special divine revelation from God granting him perfect knowledge of the final destinies of every person under his care. Do you hold the bar that high for your pastor. Do you yourself have that kind of revelatory knowledge for everyone under your care? At the very least, show me where the author of Hebrews claims to have this kind of knowledge and I will examine your reference. So far, you have provided nothing but your own human opinion about these matters which we all know out of a particular deterministic theological system which no one in the Early Church believed until Augustine introduced such ideas INTO the body of Christian doctrine in the FIFTH Century. Think about that - the Fifth Century.

B. When I said there was no evidence that the Author was claiming to have personal REVELATORY knowledge about the future of every member of his community, you said this somehow REDUCED author's role to that of a mere human spectator who was merely speculating or guessing.
1) Of course, I acknowledge that he was human but this in no way disqualifies him from having spiritual wisdom, insight or or authority.
2) Every Pastor SHOULD pray for spiritual insight into the hearts of their flock whether his knowledge is obtained directly from God by prayer or by long term observations of their behavior.
3) Jesus said: …16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit.…
(Matthew 7:16-17)
When you describe salvation as an UNBREAKABLE chain seems rather like calling our covenant spouse our ball and chain. Seriously, though, what you seem to be saying is that coming to Christ is a sequential process and, on that, we agree. The foundational truths mentioned in Hebrews 6 suggest this.
C. The idea that God micromanages every event that occurs in the universe including every thought, desire and choice of every human in existence was not the view of the Early Church. In fact, they opposed such ideas which were very common in many ancient religions and philosophies. Aurelius Augustine spent years in the Persian cult of Manichaeism studying determinism from that angle.
Eventually, he came to embrace Christianity and rejected what he had been taught taking up the traditional view of human freewill coordinated by God according to his foreknowledge into a plan of Redemption
D. By what authority have you attached the word TRUE to the noun believer? You have obviously done this to eliminate the possibility that a person who has been born again can ever depart from the faith - which the scriptures warns us about many times. Rather than heed that you have attempted to re-interpret the written text. However, warnings are, by definition, appeals to the will based on a legitimate fear of negative consequences. Denying that such consequences exist makes God's warnings hollow and is no different from calling God a liar and mocking Him
Galatians 6:7 says "Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap"

JimiSurvivor,

Your response mixes ad hominem historical claims with a total misunderstanding of the nature of biblical inspiration and covenantal mechanics. Let’s address your points directly and allow the unyielding parameters of Scripture to clear away your confusion:
A. The Nature of the Covenant

You object to salvation being described as an "unbreakable chain," mockingly comparing it to a "ball and chain" spouse. This reveals that your concept of a "blood covenant" is unstable.

A biblical blood covenant is not a modern, fragile marriage contract that can be dissolved by human unfaithfulness. It is an everlasting Covenant of Redemption made between God the Father and God the Son before the foundation of the world (Titus 1:2, Hebrews 13:20). In Phase II (The Legal Phase) at the cross, Christ—acting as the absolute Surety—fulfilled every single legal condition of that covenant for the elect (Hebrews 7:22). Because His blood-bought satisfaction was final, the covenant chain is forensically unbreakable. If a sheep could break the chain and slip into hell, Christ's blood would be a failure.

B. Inspiration vs. Human Speculation

You ask where the author claims to have "special divine revelation" about the final destinies of his flock, comparing his insight to that of a fallible modern pastor.

This is a massive category mistake. The author of Hebrews was not a modern pastor writing a fallible letter based on "long-term observation." He was an inspired penman of Holy Scripture. Peter tells us that “holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost” (2 Peter 1:21).

When the author writes in Hebrews 6:9, "But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation," he isn't guessing based on their behavior. The Holy Spirit is making a statement of divine certainty regarding the true possessors of grace. If it's just his human opinion, then Hebrews 6 is fallible human commentary, not the inerrant Word of God.

C. The Church History Boogeyman

Your claim that "no one in the Early Church believed in determinism until Augustine in the fifth century" is a recycled historical myth.
We do not base our doctrines on the uninspired writings of later church fathers; we base them on the absolute timeline of God's eternal decree. Long before Augustine, the Apostle Paul wrote that God “worketh all things after the counsel of his own will” (Ephesians 1:11) and that the elect were chosen in Christ “before the foundation of the world” (Ephesians 1:4). If you have a problem with absolute divine monergism, your issue is with Paul and Christ, not Augustine.

D & E. The Logic of Biblical Warnings

You claim that if warnings do not include the literal possibility of true believers falling into hell, then God's warnings are "hollow deception." You have the mechanics completely backward.

Warnings are the historical means the Holy Spirit uses to cause the quickened elect to persevere in Phase IV (The Practical Phase). God decrees the end (the final glorification of the elect), and He also decrees the means to that end (holy fear, warnings, and admonitions).

When a father tells his child, "Don't touch that hot stove or you will get burned," the warning is real, and the negative consequences are real. But if the father safely watches over the child to ensure they heed the warning and never touch it, the father hasn't "deceived" them. He has used the warning as an effectual means of preservation. God’s warnings are not hollow threats; they are the exact tool He uses to ensure His sheep never cross the line into perdition. Prov 6:23;10:17

F. Hebrews 10:39 Destroys Your System

You claim the author doesn't create a category of "false believers" but merely describes people who are "faltering or stumbling." Let the text expose that error:

“But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.” (Hebrews 10:39)
Paul does not describe a single group of true believers who sometimes stumble and sometimes don't. He draws a razor-sharp, literal line between two entirely distinct classes of people:

1. Those whose drawing back ends in perdition (eternal destruction).
2. Those whose faith ends in the saving of the soul.

Those who draw back to perdition do not lose a salvation they once possessed; they simply expose the fact that they never possessed the "better things" that accompany salvation. They are profane professors like Esau (Hebrews 12:16), who associated with the covenant blessings but never vitally had the heart of stone removed.


The case remains forensically closed: Christ's sheep hear His voice, He keeps them by His power, and they shall never perish (John 10:28).

 

[JimiSurvivor]

To clear away this confusion, we must view the phrase "things that accompany salvation" through the strict, systematic timeline of Scripture. In biblical theology, salvation is a unified, unbreakable covenant chain. It does not exist in pieces; it unfolds in Five Distinct Phases:

A. So in your opinion, which you refer to as "Biblical Theology" salvation is an unbreakable chain. Insofar as salvation occurs as a result of personally realizing a sequential set of truths, I agree. This seems to agree with what Hebrews 6 is saying.

Next I will list these essential truths upon which every son of God must build His life
1) REPENTANCE
Before God saves us He must first bring us to see our own sinfulness. Jesus said He came to save sinners - not those who hold the delusion that "we have no sin" The Holy Spirit facilitates this through a process called CONVICTION which comes from the Greek word ἐλέγχω which means:
1. to convict, refute, confute, generally with a suggestion of the shame of the person convicted.
Until we see our desperate need for Him we will not be willing to give up our lives to him
8And when He comes, He will convict the world in regard to sin and righteousness and judgment: 9 in regard to sin, because they do not believe in Me;…[ John 16:8-9]

2) FAITH
Once we realize we cannot meet God's standard of righteousness and have no hope of ever doing so, the Holy Spirit points us to the Savior, assuring us that we can trust in Him to do what we cannot do for ourselves. For most people this is a great struggle but as soon as we are willing to look upon that serpent hanging on the pole we will be saved.

When the author speaks of "things that accompany salvation" (echomena sōtērias—literally, "things clinging to or holding fast to salvation"), he is referring to the fruits of Phase IV. These things—such as faith, love, obedience, and endurance—are not conditions to secure salvation; they are the infallible evidence that salvation is already vitally possessed.

I see no scriptural evidence of faith, love, obedience and endurance CLINGING to or HOLDING FAST to salvation if, by that, you mean only that these things are only closely associated with salvation. Instead, the NT posits a more direct, causal relationship between faith and salvation. Faith which means to trust in, have confidence in, rely upon, to depend upon Jesus. Is what God responds to

Of course, the ultimate CAUSE of salvation lies within the heart of God Himself being rooted in, in the abundant love and goodwill he He has for mankind. Grace is what MOTIVATED the Father to give his Son to die for us. The Son, in turn, accepted the cup when it was offered to him at Gethsemene.

Faith and obedience are connected from the very first moment we hear the gospel which is why the Bible speaks about the obedience of faith. Paul also describes salvation as submission to God's will;

16 Do you not know that when you offer yourselves as obedient slaves, you are slaves to the one you obey, whether you are slaves to sin leading to death, or to obedience leading to righteousness? 17 But thanks be to God that, though you once were slaves to sin, you wholeheartedly obeyed the form of teaching to which you were committed.…(Romans 6:16)
What was the "teaching" they committed themselves to if not the gospel of salvation?

Making a covenant with Jesus is more than just adopting a set of truth propositions ABOUT CHRIST. If that had been enough then the forced conversions imposed on unbelievers by Augustine would have produced real Christians. A covenant is much deeper and more personal than merely converting to a religion.

Ephesians 2:8 For it is by GRACE you have been saved THROUGH FAITH, and this not from yourselves; it is the gift of God,
9 not by works, so that no one can boast.…Through FAITH [διὰ πίστεως] denotes BY MEANS OF FAITH God decreed that under the New Covenant faith would be the means by which we are able to enter the promise. This had to be the requirement because we could never be perfect enough to enter by our own efforts.

 

[brightfame52]

A. So in your opinion, which you refer to as "Biblical Theology" salvation is an unbreakable chain. Insofar as salvation occurs as a result of personally realizing a sequential set of truths, I agree. This seems to agree with what Hebrews 6 is saying.

Next I will list these essential truths upon which every son of God must build His life
1) REPENTANCE
Before God saves us He must first bring us to see our own sinfulness. Jesus said He came to save sinners - not those who hold the delusion that "we have no sin" The Holy Spirit facilitates this through a process called CONVICTION which comes from the Greek word ἐλέγχω which means:
1. to convict, refute, confute, generally with a suggestion of the shame of the person convicted.
Until we see our desperate need for Him we will not be willing to give up our lives to him
8And when He comes, He will convict the world in regard to sin and righteousness and judgment: 9 in regard to sin, because they do not believe in Me;…[ John 16:8-9]

2) FAITH
Once we realize we cannot meet God's standard of righteousness and have no hope of ever doing so, the Holy Spirit points us to the Savior, assuring us that we can trust in Him to do what we cannot do for ourselves. For most people this is a great struggle but as soon as we are willing to look upon that serpent hanging on the pole we will be saved.


I see no scriptural evidence of faith, love, obedience and endurance CLINGING to or HOLDING FAST to salvation if, by that, you mean only that these things are only closely associated with salvation. Instead, the NT posits a more direct, causal relationship between faith and salvation. Faith which means to trust in, have confidence in, rely upon, to depend upon Jesus. Is what God responds to

Of course, the ultimate CAUSE of salvation lies within the heart of God Himself being rooted in, in the abundant love and goodwill he He has for mankind. Grace is what MOTIVATED the Father to give his Son to die for us. The Son, in turn, accepted the cup when it was offered to him at Gethsemene.

Faith and obedience are connected from the very first moment we hear the gospel which is why the Bible speaks about the obedience of faith. Paul also describes salvation as submission to God's will;

JimiSurvivor,

I appreciate the structured breakdown, but your response demonstrates the exact conditional, synergistic framework that turns the Covenant of Grace into a bargain of works. You are confusing the evidence of life with the cause of life, making God’s eternal decrees wait upon the independent actions of a spiritually dead sinner.

Let the text of Scripture, the Greek grammar, and the unshakeable timeline of biblical soteriology shatter your conditional scheme:

1. Conviction is the Fruit of the Vital Phase, Not a Pre-Condition

You argue that before God saves us, the Holy Spirit must bring us to see our sinfulness via conviction (ἐλέγχω - elenchō).
Your order is completely backward. You are placing a spiritual action—godly sorrow and conviction of sin—inside a spiritually dead corpse. A man who is dead in trespasses and sins (Ephesians 2:1) has a mind that is at enmity against God (Romans 8:7). The natural mind cannot receive the things of the Spirit, for they are foolishness to him (1 Corinthians 2:14).

If a sinner experiences genuine, godly conviction that drives him to see his desperate need for Christ, that is absolute proof that he has already been sovereignly quickened in the Vital Phase (Phase III). Conviction is not a condition you perform to get life; it is the immediate breathing of the life God has already monergistically infused into you.

2. You have Completely Redefined "Through Faith" (διὰ πίστεως)

You claim that διά (dia) + genitive in Ephesians 2:8 (through faith) denotes a "means" that God responds to under the New Covenant. By saying "faith is what God responds to," you actively strip God of His sovereignty and hand the decisive power of salvation to the human will.

When Paul writes διὰ πίστεως (dia pisteōs), faith is the instrumental means, not the causal condition. As the High Calvinist framework and John Gill rightly maintain, faith is the eye that perceives salvation, not the hand that builds it. In the Greek of Ephesians 2:8, the neuter phrase καὶ τοῦτο (kai touto)—"and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God"—grammatically encompasses the entire preceding clause: salvation by grace through faith. Faith is not a humanly generated tool that triggers God's response; the faith itself is sovereignly given.

3. Romans 6 and the "Obedience of Faith"

You try to use Romans 6:16-17 to argue that salvation is conditional upon a person's decision to "wholeheartedly obey."
Look at the text you quoted. Paul says, "But thanks be to God that... ye have obeyed from the heart." Who gets the glory and the thanks for that obedience? God does.

Why do they obey? Because under the New Covenant, God does not stand on a mountain giving conditions; He sovereignly writes His laws upon their hearts (Hebrews 8:10). Philippians 2:13 locks this down: “For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.” The sinner genuinely obeys, but they obey by and through being vitally empowered by the Spirit of God as set forth in 1 Peter 1:2 and 1 Peter 1:22. The sanctifying work of the Spirit must precede the obedience and the sprinkling of the blood. The obedience of the Roman saints is the Practical fruit (Phase IV) of an inward, divine operation, not an independent human variable.

4. The Delusion of a Snake-Bitten Corpse

You use the analogy of looking at the serpent on the pole to imply a simple, conditional act of human free will. But you forget the state of the sinner: he is not merely sick; he is spiritually dead.
A corpse cannot look. A corpse cannot trust. A corpse cannot rely. Before a sinner can look to the Savior, he must pass from death unto life (John 5:24). Your system teaches that Christ’s death merely made salvation a "possibility" if man supplies the faith. But the Cross did not secure a possibility; it secured an actual, unalterable legal redemption (Phase II) for every single one of God's elect (Romans 5:10, Colossians 2:14).

The Bottom Line

Faith, love, obedience, and endurance do cling to salvation as its inseparable fruits. But they do not cause it.

• The sinner believes, but he believes through grace (Acts 18:27).
• The sinner obeys, but it is God working in him to will and to do (Philippians 2:13) through the vital empowerment of the Spirit (1 Peter 1:2, 22).
  
  
• The sinner repents, but God grants the repentance (2 Timothy 2:25).

Stop making the finished work of Christ wait on the moving of a dead man's finger. The legal precedes the vital, and the vital produces the practical. Salvation is 100% of the Lord, and His grace is causal, not conditional!

---

 

[JimiSurvivor]

JimiSurvivor,

Your response mixes ad hominem historical claims with a total misunderstanding of the nature of biblical inspiration and covenantal mechanics. Let’s address your points directly and allow the unyielding parameters of Scripture to clear away your confusion:

In what way have I used ad hominems? Do you think it is sufficient to simply make the claim?

A. The Nature of the Covenant


You object to salvation being described as an "unbreakable chain," mockingly comparing it to a "ball and chain" spouse. This reveals that your concept of a "blood covenant" is unstable.

Actually, I was speaking tongue in cheek.

A biblical blood covenant is not a modern, fragile marriage contract that can be dissolved by human unfaithfulness. It is an everlasting Covenant of Redemption made between God the Father and God the Son before the foundation of the world (Titus 1:2, Hebrews 13:20). In

A. That covenants between God and man CAN be broken is stated in many passages. For instance, Jeremiah, seeing the failure of the prior covenant and the need for a New One says
32 It will not be like the covenant I made with their fathers when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt—
a covenant they broke, though I was a husband to them,” declares the LORD.
(Jeremiah 31:32)
This shows that covenants with God CAN be broken. To demonstrate that this is true even in the case of the New Covenant we must look at other passages.

B. Before the author of Hebrews chapter 10 presents the terrible consequences that CAN befall NT believers who defect from the faith and thereby break their covenant with God, the author offers some counter-measures.
(1) The first thing he tells us to do is:
22....draw near [to God] with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and our bodies washed with pure water
(Hebrews 10:22)
(2) This shows us that forgiveness and cleansing are not a one-time event that takes place at salvation [though we do experience forgiveness and cleansing then] However this begins a process of ongoing forgiveness and cleansing that continues in a believers life (1 John 2:7-9)
Scripturally, there is no place for the idea of being forgiven ONCE for all future sins. CHRIST'S SACRIFICE was once for all time but our EXPERIENCE of what He did continues like an ongoing dialysis
(3) While God is absolutely faithful something is also required of us Hebrews gives us the following instructions:

23....hold resolutely to the hope we profess, for He who promised is faithful.
24 And let us consider how to spur one another on to love and good deeds.
25 Let us not neglect meeting together, as some have made a habit, but let us encourage one another, and all the more as you see the Day approaching.
(Hebrews 10:23-25)

B. No doubt you will argue that the New Covenant is UNBREAKABLE. However, let us test that proposition by consulting what the original ministers of the New Covenant understood the nature and design of the New Covenant to be. Let us begin right here in the book of Hebrews.
28 Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses.
(Hebrews 10:28)
You might think that from this point he would digress from his point and begin emphasizing the contrast with believers under the New Covenant saying that since we are under grace God will never under any circumstances condemn us. However, he goes the opposite direction saying: 29 How much MORE SEVERELY do you think one deserves to be PUNISHED who has TRAMPLED ON the Son of God,
PROFANED the blood of the covenant that sanctified him, and insulted the Spirit of grace?
(Hebrews 10:29)C.

The Church History Boogeyman.

Your claim that "no one in the Early Church believed in determinism until Augustine in the fifth century" is a recycled historical myth.
We do not base our doctrines on the uninspired writings of later church fathers; we base them on the absolute timeline of God's eternal decree.

This claim is historical fact. I know because I have actually read what they wrote while you clearly have not. The father of Calvinism and Lutheranism and all Reformed doctrine was ultimately Augustine. Until he appeared in the Fifth Century no one in the early Church taught either
(1) Total human INABILITY or
(2) DIVINE unilateral divine determinism

In fact, for 400 yrs the Early Church actively opposed this teaching as pagan and non-Christian. I can prove this to you if you wish but, apparently when the Bible speaks about the gospel being "once for all time delivered" to the saints you think that it means that the gospel came in two parts - the first of which came from Jesus and the Apostles. However, the latter portion was not "delivered" until 400 years later, long after they were dead by Aurelius Augustine the Bishop of Hippo.

 

[JimiSurvivor]

Tell me, is abiding in the Vine just another meritorious work?

 

[Cameron143]

Tell me, is abiding in the Vine just another meritorious work?

No. It has nothing to do with salvation. It is simply the highest estate of Christian living.

 

[JimiSurvivor]

No. It has nothing to do with salvation. It is simply the highest estate of Christian living.

What does this mean?

 

[Cameron143]

What does this mean?

You asked whether abiding in Christ was a meritorious work. I answered your question.

 

[brightfame52]

In what way have I used ad hominems? Do you think it is sufficient to simply make the claim?

Actually, I was speaking tongue in cheek.

A. That covenants between God and man CAN be broken is stated in many passages. For instance, Jeremiah, seeing the failure of the prior covenant and the need for a New One says
32 It will not be like the covenant I made with their fathers when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt—
a covenant they broke, though I was a husband to them,” declares the LORD.
(Jeremiah 31:32)
This shows that covenants with God CAN be broken. To demonstrate that this is true even in the case of the New Covenant we must look at other passages.

B. Before the author of Hebrews chapter 10 presents the terrible consequences that CAN befall NT believers who defect from the faith and thereby break their covenant with God, the author offers some counter-measures.
(1) The first thing he tells us to do is:
22....draw near [to God] with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and our bodies washed with pure water
(Hebrews 10:22)
(2) This shows us that forgiveness and cleansing are not a one-time event that takes place at salvation [though we do experience forgiveness and cleansing then] However this begins a process of ongoing forgiveness and cleansing that continues in a believers life (1 John 2:7-9)
Scripturally, there is no place for the idea of being forgiven ONCE for all future sins. CHRIST'S SACRIFICE was once for all time but our EXPERIENCE of what He did continues like an ongoing dialysis
(3) While God is absolutely faithful something is also required of us Hebrews gives us the following instructions:

23....hold resolutely to the hope we profess, for He who promised is faithful.
24 And let us consider how to spur one another on to love and good deeds.
25Let us not neglect meeting together, as some have made a habit, but let us encourage one another, and all the more as you see the Day approaching.
(Hebrews 10:23-25)

JimiSurvivor, a few things need to be separated here.

1. Where is the ad hominem?​

You accused me of using ad hominems. I asked you to identify them, but simply repeating the accusation doesn't establish it. If I attacked the person instead of answering the argument, show where.

2. Jeremiah 31:32 proves the old covenant was broken—not that the New Covenant is breakable​

Jeremiah says Israel broke the former covenant, but immediately contrasts it with the New Covenant:

“I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts.”
—Jeremiah 31:33

Ezekiel says:

“A new heart also will I give you... and cause you to walk in my statutes.”
—Ezekiel 36:26–27

Notice the difference:

Old covenant: Israel broke it.
New Covenant: God promises to give, write, put, and cause.

So Jeremiah 31:32 cannot simply be used to prove that the New Covenant can be broken in the same way.

3. Hebrews 10:22–25 proves perseverance is commanded, not that it is independently supplied​

I agree that believers are commanded to:

draw near, hold fast, assemble, encourage one another, and persevere.

But a command does not establish autonomous ability.

Paul says:

“For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.”
—Philippians 2:13

God commands the response, and God works in His people to produce it.

4. Hebrews 10:29 is a serious warning, but “sanctified” does not automatically mean eternally regenerated​

You appeal to:

“the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified.”

But hagiazō (“sanctify”) does not automatically mean regeneration or eternal justification. The same verb is used of the unbelieving spouse in 1 Corinthians 7:14.

More importantly, Hebrews says:

“For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.”
—Hebrews 10:14

So if you want Hebrews 10:29 to mean someone was eternally perfected and then lost that perfection, you have to establish that from the text.

And immediately afterward Hebrews distinguishes:

“them who draw back unto perdition”

from:

“them that believe to the saving of the soul.”
—Hebrews 10:39

The warning is real. The judgment is real. But the text does not explicitly say that a justified, regenerated person lost eternal salvation.

5. Augustine​

Your statement that no one for 400 years taught total inability or unilateral divine determination is a historical claim, not something established by saying, “I have read them.”

If you want to make that case, give the primary sources.

And even if no early father articulated Augustine's doctrine precisely, that would not prove the doctrine false. Historical development does not determine biblical truth.

The question remains what Scripture says:

“Not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.”
—Romans 9:16

“As many as were ordained to eternal life believed.”
—Acts 13:48

“It is given... to believe on him.”
—Philippians 1:29

“No man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.”
—John 6:65

So yes, faith is required. Perseverance is required.

But that does not establish that the decisive faith and perseverance originate independently in man.

God commands the response.
God gives the grace.
The sinner genuinely responds.
And God brings His people to the end He ordained.

 

[JimiSurvivor]

No. It has nothing to do with salvation. It is simply the highest estate of Christian living.

It seems to me that being grafted into the Vine signifies our initial experience of becoming partakers of Christ's life.

 

[Cameron143]

It seems to me that being grafted into the Vine signifies our initial experience of becoming partakers of Christ's life.

Sure, but that's not something we do so it can't be meritorious.