The “once saved, always saved” doctrine says: Once you accept Christ, and put your faith in Him for salvation from sin, you’re saved—permanently. Nothing you can do will break that bond. The doctrine began with Augustine, a Catholic theologian, but really got propagated under John Calvin in his famous treatise, Institutes. He asserted that man is totally depraved, i.e., unable to reach for God. But God, not because of anyone’s merits, arbitrarily chose certain people to be saved (and others, not chosen, to be damned forever). His theology was opposed by Michael Servetus, another theologian, who believed that man has the ability and the free will to choose God or not choose God. He is not predestined to hell or heaven before he is even born, which is what Calvin was saying. When Servetus studied the Institutes, and returned the book to Calvin, he wrote marginal notes criticizing certain points. Calvin, with his own monumental ego and pride, determined that Servetus was now a dead man, since Calvin believed (and said so) that God moved him to write what he wrote. So as soon as Servetus naively arrived in Geneva, where Calvin ruled, Calvin gave the go-ahead to burn him at the stake. A horrible death. No trial. Today we would call that "conspiracy to murder." As far as we know, Calvin never repented of that despicable act. Do unrepentant murderers go to heaven? No, as Scripture clearly points out. So the “once saved, always saved” doctrine not only sets forth God as capricious, but the doctrine's founder became an unsaved murderer.
Now let’s talk about today. The raw edges of this doctrine are kept out of public view. But Once saved always saved (OSAS) adherents and new converts are still reassured many times of their salvation once they make that leap of faith. That leads to a big problem—complacency. It’s an unavoidable theory that many of them unconsciously gradually assume that sinning, even serious sinning, is not a thing to be worried a lot about. They may say, yes, I may lose fellowship with God, and I may lose some rewards in heaven—but I will still go to heaven, which is the big thing I get to keep--because God in His Word has promised, that once I was saved, I’m always saved. No sinning that I do will keep me from heaven. Doesn’t that seem like a definition of complacency to you?
But the whole doctrine of OSAS is wrong Scripturally as well. The Bible speaks clearly that you must abide in Christ and pursue righteous behavior, or you will lose your salvation. A lot of people would be less confident and more careful of their behavior (and less deceived about their eternal destiny) if they knew this. Of course, we can’t conclude a doctrine is wrong simply because some people are prone to complacency; that could be said about many religious doctrines. To prove a doctrine is wrong, you need Scripture. So let’s get to it.
Let’s go the hard way: we’ll cover some favorite OSAS verses, their “proof texts” that are numbered below—and explain how they don’t quite say what some people think. Then we’ll look at the other side of this argument, at other verses, which clearly say what a lot of people don’t want to hear.
1. Jude 24: Now to Him who is able to keep you from falling, And to present you faultless before the presence of His glory with exceeding joy
Because God is able to keep us from falling, does that mean we could never fall, as OSASers say this verse claims? Don’t make the phrase about how He is “able to keep you from falling” say more than it’s saying. Consider Isaiah 26:3, which says:
You (God) will keep him in perfect peace, whose mind is stayed on You.
Thus God is able to keep us in perfect peace. But are we always in perfect peace? No, because our behavior betrays us; sometimes we aren’t thinking about God, and we are less than peaceful. So God has the capability (“is able”) to “keep us” in perfect peace (or to keep us from falling); but His success is dependent on our behavior! The simple fact is, we can reject God, fail to think about God, and fall on our own. Along those lines, what does it say only 3 verses earlier, Jude 21:
Keep yourselves in God's love…to bring you to eternal life.
This “keeping” involves our activity. Something for us to do—or fail to do. You cannot argue that directing people to “keep” in His will is all God’s responsibility.
Now on the other key word in Jude 24: falling. Aren't there many ways that we might not actively keep God first, and might fall? Some people fall when trials come. Take a look at I Timothy 4:1:
Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons.
The Greek word for “depart from” is “apostasia” which means leaving the faith. In Acts 21:21, the same Greek word is translated “forsake.” Now I maintain that it’s impossible to depart from or forsake something unless you were attached to it in the first place. And it is impossible to apostacize unless you were a believer in the first place. Then you did a bad choice; it might have taken time, little by little. You fell away. What does Hebrews 10:38-39 say to this?
Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him.39 But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.
Vine’s Expository Dictionary says about the Greek for “draw back:” it’s “shrink back into unbelief.” Thus, from belief to unbelief is possible. The result of that is “perdition,” from Greek “apoleia,” a spiritual ruin. Perdition is hell. Again, you don’t draw back from something unless you were with it at first.
Some people fall because they gain power and are not ready for it; they fill up with pride. Consider I Timothy 3:1,6:
If a man desires the position of a bishop…not a novice, lest being puffed up with pride he fall into the same condemnation as the devil.
The Greek word for “novice” is a new convert, but I emphasize he is a convert, per Vine’s dictionary. So he was recently saved. But he could, with pride, fall into “the same condemnation as the devil.” The word “condemnation,” in Greek, is “verdict, resulting from an investigation.” It’s a final judgment. So he clearly has moved from being saved to being unsaved and bound for hell.
2. I Corinthians 5:1-5: It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and such sexual immorality as is not even named among the Gentiles—that a man has his father’s wife! 2 And you are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he who has done this deed might be taken away from among you. 3 For I indeed, as absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged (as though I were present) him who has so done this deed. 4 In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together, along with my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, 5 deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.
OSAS adherents love to cite “that his spirit may be saved” in verse 5 to prove that this man has in the past been eternally saved, and even his adultery will not unsave him. My response is, don’t make the word “may” say more than it does in verse 5. How do you think this man is saved now when verse 13 says: “Expel the wicked man from among you.” The same Greek word for “wicked” is used in Jesus’ quote in Matthew 13:49-50:
This is how it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come and separate the wicked from the righteous 50 and throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
The word “wicked” is clearly an adjective for an unsaved person, which is what this adulterer is now, and needs to be expelled. Why expelled?--another blog. Basically, it's to keep the Church pure--we must remove those who are known unsaved and in gross sin. When Paul says, “..deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh,” he is saying, “Don’t pat one another on the back for your toleration; don’t be nice in the name of forgiving love. Just expel him. I know, without even being there, that he is unsaved—just based on the fact that he is an unrepentant adulterer.” Thus Paul is implying, flat out, Saved people don’t commit adultery. (I will have more to say on this later). And what about the phrase, “may be saved?” It doesn’t say “will remain saved,” does it—which would back OSASers claim. It’s really “maybe he’ll get saved once he sees how Satan, the god of his flesh, treats him.” He could be like the prodigal son (Luke 15), who saw the misery of his life under Satan’s control; he had a final choice, and made the right move. He turned around, and then got saved. So perhaps, in I Corinthians, allowing Satan to have his way with him for awhile (as with the prodigal) may wake him up (or it may not)—he might turn around and get saved before he dies (or he might not). At least he won’t have any well-meaning Christians around him, deceiving him by “assuring” him and not speaking clearly about his unsaved behavior!
3. John 10:27-29:My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. 28 And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand.
Clearly “my sheep” are the beneficiary of this gracious treatment. But what are the characteristics to be one of His sheep? Belief? Getting born again? No, that’s not what Jesus said. What He did say about the characteristics of His sheep: you have to hear His voice, and you have to follow Him. And those verbs (hear, follow) are expressed in present, continuous tense—which means, an ongoing hearing and following. If you’re not in the habit of hearing Him and not purposely following Him in your daily walk, then you can’t say you’ll “never perish.” That’s what the verses said. They are conditional on our behavior, not unconditional.
4. John 3:16: For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.
Here again, the word “believes” is in present, continuous tense. You must continue believing to have everlasting life. It’s not just a “one time I went forward, so I’m saved forever” deal. And the word “believes” is more than just “yes, I believe in my head that Jesus died for me and that’s all I have to show of our relationship.” Vine’s, an excellent expository dictionary of Greek words, says about the word believe, “to trust…reliance upon, not mere credence.” The words “reliance upon” suggests action. If it’s real belief, our hearts will be moved to action. Do we really contemplate the hell that our sins truly deserve; and then, in gratitude for deliverance, repeatedly ask Him what He wants us to do as His servants, how to keep from sinning, and to build treasures in heaven? Do we regularly seek a real relationship with Him? Maybe some of us, after that initial emotion, say "no" to these requirements.
I John really delves a lot into the real meaning of “believe.” Here’s just one example, I John 3:23-24a:
And this is His commandment: that we should believe on the name of His Son Jesus Christ and love one another, as He gave us commandment.24 Now he who keeps His commandments abides in Him.
So belief involves wanting to obey His commandments, and "abiding" in Him. First, have you sincerely tried to obey all the commandments in the Sermon on the Mount? That’s how we abide in Him. But what happens to those who don’t abide in Him? John 15:6 has the answer:
If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned.
You would have to go through a lot of mental gyrations to “prove” that that verse isn’t speaking of hell. It is, folks. By reading carefully these verses, you should conclude that the commandment to love one another, and to abide in Him are necessary and wrapped up with the word “believe.” Since loving Him and abiding in Him are not automatic, and require effort, real belief is thus conditional on our behavior, not unconditional.
5. Hebrews 13:5: Let your conduct be without covetousness; be content with such things as you have. For He Himself has said, “I will never leave you nor forsake you.”
This verse is actually a quote from Deuteronomy 31:6 (part of Moses’ final words to the children of Israel):
….do not fear nor be afraid of them; for the LORD your God… will not leave you nor forsake you.
But then for context you need to peek 11 verses ahead. In Deut 31:16-17a, God gives His last words to Moses, warning him of Israel’s apostasy. It’s a hard word for Moses, and with much warning for us:
And the LORD said to Moses: “Behold, you will rest with your fathers; and this people will rise and play the harlot with the gods of the foreigners of the land…. and they will forsake Me and break My covenant which I have made with them. 17 Then My anger shall be aroused against them in that day, and I will forsake them, and I will hide My face from them, and they shall be devoured.
Read that again: God forsook them! Because they forsook Him. Evidently the word "never" in the Greek (Hebrews 13:5) doesn't have the unconditional meaning we think it has. (It has more of a "til' the unforeseen future"). Now you can try to wriggle out of the clear meaning of these words by citing “dispensationalism:” “Well, He was a God of Law in the Old Testament; thank God for His dispensation of grace now.” But I argue back that God is not a God of change. As James 1:17 says,
Every good gift and every perfect gift …comes down from the Father… with whom there is no variation or shadow of turning.
We do not have two Gods in the Bible. The Old Testament is part of Scripture, and all Scripture is profitable for reproof, for correction in righteousness (II Tim 3:16); and we can learn a lot about Him in the Old Testament—and won’t have to unlearn them when we study the New! The point is this: The God who forsook His people in those days because they forsook Him, will do the same again now. The truth is: He will never leave you nor forsake you—IF you abide in Him. God help us to do so—but we have free will, and can forsake Him.
Further in the Word along this line is II Chronicles 15:2:
Now the Spirit of God came upon Azariah the son of Oded… and said to him: “Hear me, Asa, and all Judah and Benjamin. The LORD is with you while you are with Him. If you seek Him, He will be found by you; but if you forsake Him, He will forsake you.
Seems clear, does it not?
Now another thing you might cite about God never leaving us is to use, as our model, “the great promises to Israel,” whereby God will do miraculous things for Israel in the End times, and those people will be redeemed, so God “never forsook them”—so evidently you think God didn’t mean what he said in Deuteronomy or II Chronicles. But the national promise to Israel is different than the promise to individuals. In the End times, perhaps many Jews will see Jesus as God, accept Him and are redeemed. But in Exodus those OTHER Jews who rejected the spies’ good report rejected God’s promise, and died unbelieving in the desert. The point is, God didn’t change; different Jewish responses did.
Other “nation vs individual” verses that are abused are Romans 11:28-29:
Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. 29 For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.
OSASers love to select the words “election,” “gift” and “irrevocable,” giving themselves complacent assurance, but failing to place them in context. The fact is, the whole of Romans chapter 11 is about how God will gift the nation of Israel in His plan for the future.
Speaking of taking words out of context, yet another abused Scripture is Hebrews 10:12,14:
But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God,… 14 For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified.
This says nothing about perfect assurance for the believer; "those who are being sanctified" doesn't carry that level of guarantee. Also, this Word is for the Hebrews, about how Jesus is our High Priest, comparing His offering His body as a sacrifice once for sin being sufficient for atonement, vs. priests in the Old Testament offering sacrifices annually that don’t take away sin. And please don’t assume that “those who are being sanctified” is all up to God. Don't forget: Sanctification depends on our behavior; and as anyone will tell you, we are not robotically forced into making perfect choices. Thus it is conditional. See an item on this next week.
6. Colossians 2:13: And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses
OSAS adherents cite this verse that God makes us alive and forgives us of all sins, past and future, when we accept Jesus. It's wonderfully true that upon the point of salvation, God makes us alive, in part by giving us the Holy Spirit. But don't forget the Sower in Matthew 13: Some seed came alive, but under shallow soil died. Another point about forgiveness of sin: the verse does not specifically refer to initial salvation guaranteeing us forgiveness for future trespasses; Paul is, after all, focusing about a past event (“has made alive”), at initial salvation. It could be, that's all he meant. For additional light, take a look at II Pet 1:9:
But if anyone does not have them (speaking of fruits), he is nearsighted and blind, and has forgotten that he has been cleansed from his past sins
I think if Peter knew that he could include future sins in this statement, he would’ve mentioned them—but he doesn’t. Another enlightening verse is I 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.
John is writing this to people who are believers already, so it doesn’t make sense that we need to keep on confessing our sins to obtain forgiveness—if we’re already guaranteed forgiveness from future sins.
It would be safe to conclude that John evidently believes we’re not initially saved from future sins, so we need to continue confessing them to continue being forgiven. Introspecting on today's sins at the end of the day in prayer would be a good part of abiding in Christ. It is an important part of Communion, right? So I conclude the “all trespasses” in Col 2:13 is more likely referring to all trespasses up to the point of initial salvation—which was, after all, the time period of Paul’s subject matter. Not future sins.
7. I Pet. 1:3-4: Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who… has begotten us again…, 4 to an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled and that does not fade away, reserved in heaven for you
OSAS adherents will cite our inheritance, as a child of the King, that will never fade away. But this great passage of Scripture doesn’t say that we cannot annul the inheritance by disbelief or unrepentant gross sin. Consider what Jesus said in Matthew 10:33:
But whoever disowns me before men, I will disown him before my Father in heaven.
Definitely wrapped up in the word “disown” is losing one’s inheritance. So it is possible.
While I’m on this subject, I need to bring up another verse that’s misinterpreted by OSAS folks. It’s II Timothy 2:13:
If we are faithless, He remains faithful; He cannot deny Himself.
This is quoted often by OSAS teachers; their interpretation of God being “faithful” here is that He will accept our faithlessness and save us anyway. Their problem in making this assumption is not taking context into account. Take a look at the previous verse, II Timothy 2:12:
If we deny Him, He also will deny us.
Whoa, that says the opposite of what OSASers think 2:13 says. So, to resolve the apparent contradiction, let’s do what you seldom see teachers do—reconcile 2:12b and 2:13. First, you have to see how awful a sin being “faithless” is; it is not coincidentally connected to 2:12’s “denying” Christ. God many times calls faithlessness spiritual adultery. The Jews strayed into idol-worship, took their faith and worship away from God, and were called adulterers. Now before you say, “we don’t do idols in modern society,” you need to expand the meaning of “idol.” It’s anything that we think about as #1 to us except God. Say, we spend all that time at work and not think about bringing God into that experience (such as making sure Jesus’ related commands are maintained); then spend a lot of time collecting, cooking, and eating food without seriously giving thanks; then socializing with friends without raising His name (or thinking about how to do so); or raising our kids without teaching them constantly about God—then I conclude that work, eating, friends, and kids all become idols because God is not #1. We’ve simply substituted modern idols for the ancient wood and stone. God should be a part of our life, like breathing—and it’s faithless to only worship Him on Sundays, then leaving Him out for the rest of the week. We’re just as guilty of substituting God out of our life as the Jews did. Where’s the insistence that we should “abide in Christ” in modern society? Have we watered down the meaning of “abiding?”
The second thing you do to reconcile these two verses in II Timothy is: Expand the definition of God’s being “faithful.” We assume that faithfulness is always positive. Not so. Check out Deuteronomy 7:9,10:
Therefore know that the LORD your God, He is God, the faithful God who keeps covenant and mercy for a thousand generations with those who love Him and keep His commandments; 10 and He repays those who hate Him to their face, to destroy them. He will not be slack with him who hates Him; He will repay him to his face.
God's curse on His enemies is included, is it not, in His being faithful. He is faithful in fulfilling ALL promises. So, that means He is faithful by carrying out His promised curses on the unsaved, as well as loving the saved. If that’s hard to accept, it’s probably because we haven’t thought much about hell. We’re talking about fiery torment, continual pain, continual thirst, no contact with others (read Luke 16:19ff on these). And forever and ever…for eternity. Why not just for 50 years, or 100 years? Why not probation? Why not a second chance, or purgatory? Answer: God HATES sin more than we can imagine—and ultimately His hate will be faithful to His promise and carried out on the unrepentant sinner. Look at the evidence of His anger in the Deuteronomy verse above: God will repay him “to his face.” Now that’s a God with a grudge. A whole new meaning on II Timothy 2:13, is it not? If we are faithless to God, He will be faithful to carry out His promise--i.e., the curse of our sin remains on us. The opposite of what OSASers think.
8. II Timothy 1:12: … Yet I am not ashamed, because I know whom I have believed, and am convinced that he is able to guard what I have entrusted to him for that day.
OSAS adherents claim that Jesus will do the work in guarding our salvation, so we are safe. But then why does Paul urge Timothy, two verses later, “Guard the good deposit that was entrusted to you—guard it with the help of the Holy Spirit who lives in us.” The deposit is our treasure in heaven. It's the same thing as "what I have entrusted to Him." Guarding it is our job. Our behavior is involved. Another verse on this is Hebrews 10:23:
Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful.
Doesn’t that suggest that our righteous behavior ("holding fast") is what’s needed to obtain God’s fulfillment of His faithful promise to bring us to heaven? I think so. A job for us to do. That’s what the verse says.
9. Matthew 7:21-23: Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22 Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’
First, to understand this, the word "know" and its derivatives mean salvation. Jesus seems to be saying, with the words "I never knew you," that the unsaved were in that condition permanently.
The OSAS adherent is trying to make the verses prove that you can't be "known" (saved) and then "not known" (become unsaved). So the OSASer says, about Matthew 7 above, “This is the way it is with all unbelievers; Jesus never knew them; it wasn’t that He knew them, then didn’t know them.
My response is, first of all, look at the virgins in Matthew 25:11. Some had no oil (oil is a symbol of the Holy Spirit). In this salvation metaphor, Jesus has the bridegroom telling the virgins, "I do not know you.” Now, it's gotta be, since all ten virgins were invited, the bridegroom must have known them. So what does he really mean by the statement "I do not know you?"
I have to conclude that the phrase is an idiom—He’s really saying,” you are now so far removed from me in spirit (not having any oil), it’s like I never knew you.” I believe, furthermore, this is what Jesus is really saying in Matthew 7 above: When He says "I never knew you," He is saying, "your thoughts and actions became so far removed from me, it's like I never knew you." Thus, these verses are saying, our thoughts and actions need to be in His Spirit, so He will claim us in that day of judgement. Thus, they do not back the OSAS claim of how it's impossible to lose salvation.
Secondly, study Luke 15:11ff, the prodigal son: He was a son of his loving father to begin with, right? Then he became prodigal, walked away, and didn’t abide with his father any more. Then he sees the light, returns to his father, confesses his sin, and returns to the family and in his good graces. You see where I’m going? Now look at verse 24 of the prodigal story, the words of the happy father:
for this my son was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.’
So think…he was his son before, then he was dead (that’s the word Scripture uses), then he was alive again. He was home at first, then became lost, then was found. Seems pretty clear here, to make the parable relevant to us, as all parables tend to do—he lost his salvation, then regained it.
What additional valuable things do we learn in this prodigal parable, by the way? (1) We assume the father protected the son while he was under his care (as illustrated in John 10:28), but the son had the free will to depart of his own volition. (2) The father’s great love for his son (enough to forgive him freely after his wild life, when he repented) did not prevent the son from becoming lost. Note also that the father did not chase after the son. What Jesus is clearly saying is, God the Father allows free will on this, even to the point of loss of life.
Finally, look again at Matthew 7:21, where those who are heaven-bound must first “do the will of My Father.” That too says continuing salvation is contingent on behavior, which the prodigal didn’t do for awhile—and was lost, or dead--i.e., unsaved for awhile.
NEXT WEEK: MORE ON THIS INFLUENTIAL DOCTRINE
Acknowledgement: Dan Corner, The Believer’s Conditional Security
No comments:
Post a Comment