It has increasingly frustrated me how that people will take a straightforward verse of Scripture and deny it by twisting it like a lawyer. This is the first in a series I call "Why Can't They See?" This first segment will deal with the soteriological system called Armininanism so named for the Dutch Reformed theologian Jacob Arminius. This was a direct reaction to the system called Calvinism named for the famous Protestant reformer, John Calvin, which emphasized arbitrary election as to salvation. Arminianism basically emphasizes the free will of man to accept or reject Christ, which is well enough. The most repulsive tenet of Arminianism, however, is their belief that believers are able to resist sin but are not beyond the possibility of falling from grace through persistent unrepented-of sin. This is a belief of a group of Baptist churches which are called Freewill Baptists. I recently had a conversation with a pastor who came from a Freewill Baptist background. His position is that it is possible, not probable, for a saved person to fall from grace and perish, if they repudiate their faith. I took him to John 5:24 and asked him why it says that one who is a believer (saved) shall not come into condemnation. His reply was that if one "keeps believing" that he will not come into condemnation because of the participle being in the present tense, indicating continuous action. The verse I want us to look at is John 3:16, which I believe to be the center of the Bible.
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."
1) The word "whosoever" in that verse means all. This means that there is no exceptions to the promise God makes to the believer. It applies to all who are saved. This is a verse that these same people, or any Missionary Baptist, would use to reject the limited atonement of Calvinism. However, they prove themselves to not really believe it.
2) The word for "not" is "un" which is a particle of negation, which means it is not possible for whatever is negated to occur.
3) The word for "perish" is in the middle voice, which indicates the action is reflected back upon the one doing the action. This means that it is not possible for a believer to perish himself. This directly contradicts the teaching of Arminianism which attempts to rebut eternal security, or "once saved always saved" by arguing that it is not God that rejects the believer, but the believer who comes to reject his faith.
4) Why is it called "eternal life"? Eternal means without cessation. If we could lose it, it wouldn't be eternal.
5) In John 5:24, it says that a believer "hath" eternal life, or we are not waiting to see if we have gained eternal life through our endurance in the faith. We have it presently. "Shall not come into condemnation" means you cannot fall from the state of grace at any point in the future.
6) Jesus said in John 10:28: "And I give unto them eternal life..." David in Psalm 51:12 called it "thy salvation", or God's salvation. Peter wrote in 1 Peter 3:5: "Who are kept by the power of God through faith..." If we say that it is even probable (it matters not whether you say it is probable or possible because what is essential is can you or can't you) for a saved person to lose their salvation and perish in hell, then you are 1) calling God a liar, and 2) saying Christ is not sufficient. Again, in John 3:16, that was the very purpose that Christ was given is so that we would not perish, or lose our salvation! Also, faith is not a work. It is accepting Christ's sacrifice on the Cross of Calvary and trusting Him to do what we cannot do for ourselves.
7) The whole crux of their argument is built upon Hebrews 6:4-6. I wanted to explain that it was saying that if (hypothetically) we could lose our salvation, it would be impossible to be saved again (most who say you can lose it will say you can be repeatedly saved again), because you have put Christ to shame, or shown Him to be insufficient to save. He would not let me finish.
Can someone please help me to understand why proponents of this false doctrine say that you can lose your salvation with such clear proof to the contrary? Also, does this belief keep a person from being saved if they trust Christ alone for salvation?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Bro. Landmarker,
ReplyDeleteI believe for the first time since I have started reading your blog, I agree with everything that you said :) My opinion is that the verses that deal with for-ordained or pre-ordained provide the thought that God has a select few. Also the terms chosen by God, or God's chosen people allow some to see this as a prime selection process.And then the old stand-by verse of falling from grace. I have often wanted to go to such a church and walk down the to the front and tell the pastor i wanted to be saved. the only thing that has kep me from this is that I am already saved and that would just be wrong.
He probably will say that John 3:16 places the "eternal life" at the end of a person's life, and that whosoever is believing at that moment will inherit it.
ReplyDeleteI agree with all you said also.
Perhaps a stronger verse is John 3:36? Notice the present tense "hath" or "has" instead of "shall not perish" or "shall have".
I used John 5:24 actually. I had used John 3:16 when talking to a Pentecost preacher's son whom I worked with at McDonald's as a teenager. He gave the argument you said. That's why I thought John 5:24 would seal it because it says that a believer "hath" eternal life. He said you must "continue to believe."
ReplyDeleteThe present tense of the "hath" everlasting life in both John 3:36 and 5:24 both negate any argument he brings. You can't "have eternal" anything based on future conditions.
ReplyDeleteNo one has yet ventured to help me answer my question: if a person trusts Christ alone for salvation, if a person believes it is possible to lose your salvation, can they be saved?
ReplyDeleteIf they trust Christ alone for Salvation...by repenting of thier sin to God and placing thier faith in the Lord Jesus Christ then they are saved and cannot lose thier salvation.
ReplyDeleteSo let me make sure I understand your answer...you believe that the doctrine of eternal security is one that is taught AFTER salvation?
ReplyDeleteyes...did Paul come preaching eternal security or Christ crucified? He preached the plan of Salvation...John actually wrote I John in order to better indoctrinate the believers concerning eternal security (that ye may know) he said multiple times.
ReplyDeleteIsnt that the plan of the Great Commission? Lead them to Christ, baptize them THEN teach them the all things commanded in the scripture.
I didn't know of security of the believer when I was saved. I just knew I was a sinner, lost, on my way to Hell, and by trusting in Christ and asking Him to save me, He would and I could go to Heaven. I think this will be the case with MANY who are saved at a young age. Since I was saved, I've never doubted that salvation, and I have since learned about eternal security.
ReplyDeleteAs to your question, I'm a little confused. You said if they trust in "Christ alone" AND they believe they can lose salvation... I think what you are asking is if a person trusts in Christ's salvation and works to keep it? Is this the question you are posing?
If so, I don't know for sure.
I would speculate that a person cannot believe that they can "say a prayer" and then work to be good to "keep" salvation, and be saved. I do believe, however, a person can be saved without any knowledge or understanding of the keeping or losing salvation issue, and a that a person can be saved and later be convinced they can lose that salvation.
To be totally clear, I want to clarify that when I witness to someone of the gospel, or preach it, I do include eternal security. I don't do it b/c I think I have to... I just don't really separate the two in preaching or teaching.
ReplyDeleteBro. James,
ReplyDeleteThe reason I asked the question is that this preacher with whom I had the conversation told me that it shouldn’t be a test of fellowship because it is an issue that is taught AFTER salvation and that there is no explicit evidence either way. My first impression had always been is that if you don’t believe Christ is going to keep you, are you really trusting Him? Secondly, there is absolutely no way that I can fellowship a preacher or a church that teaches this heresy, whether he calls himself Baptist or not. Thirdly, how can he say there is no evidence either way?
Contemplating further, I myself have doubts whether a person can truly be saved and at the same time believe that they can lose it. A Scripture that just came to
mind is 1 John 5:10,11: "...he that believeth not hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son. And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son." That being said, I would probably have to agree with you: that one could be saved and be IGNORANT of the issue altogether, or truly trust Christ and be at a later point convinced that they could lose it. Isn’t that what was happening to the Galatians? This was also the testimony of a great preacher friend of mine: Bro. Sammy Eldredge. He was raised Church of Christ in Denison, TX. He had begun to be convicted by a young friend of his who had been saved. One night while a teenager riding around the streets of Denison, he and a friend accepted Christ. That next Sunday, when he returned to his Church of Christ church, the preacher really disturbed him when he preached that if you have sinned this week, you are lost again.
Bro. J,
Was 1 John written to teach believers that salvation is itself eternal or to give them assurances, or evidences, that their personal experience was genuine: that they had truly repented, believed, and been saved in the first place?
Actually, that's how assurance is presented in the Bible: as evidence that one was saved in the first place and not as conditions to maintaining it.