I’ve been wanting to spend some time examining the subject of whether or not salvation can be lost.
It’s funny how hard it is to even describe that topic. I didn’t know until recently that people make a distinction between “perseverance of the saints” and “once saved, always saved.” “Eternal security” is a more formal expression of the latter viewpoint. But, theopedia.com says, “assurance of eternal life” is not the same as any of the above. Confused? I know I am.
Some people favor In-n-Out salvation, seeing salvation as something that is received and lost on a regular basis.
Others see a Safe Bet salvation, where you can be fairly sure of your salvation, except in a few extreme circumstances.
Others take the Wait and See approach, feeling that you can never really know until the very end.
I’ve seen the arguments that say that since salvation is a new birth you can’t be unborn and therefore can’t be “unsaved.” These often go with “if he fell away, he was never really saved anyway.”
I want to try and examine as many relevant texts as possible. I’ll try and be respectful towards views that don’t agree with mine, but I know I’m not always successful at that. And I want to be open to revising or rescinding my views as we go along.
As I get ready to launch into this, I’d like to know your thoughts. What are some passages to be considered? What concepts come into play? What ideas need to be included?
The grace only crowd, know they are saved. But ask them how they know and they are not so “grace only” because they have followed the rules, and Jesus don’t lie.
Tim I am of the “you can never really know until the very end.”
I believe the following tells us we will not know until we have been judged, If you know you are saved, why not just go to the line on the right, oppsee when you turn around you would be on his left.
I guess since God said he would leave the job of judgment up to his son, I will too. Why not just ask where you belong, he knows the way.
Mt:25:32: And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:
Mt:25:33: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.
Rv:20:13: And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
I don’t believe in once saved always saved, but neither do I believe in once saved barely saved. I believe in security in my salvation. I’m in the hand of Jesus (John 10:28) and I no one can remove me from that hand.
Looking forward to reading your thoughts.
Tim, you’ve probably already thought of this, but I think you should at some point cover 1 Cor 3, Hebrews 6, and 1 John. The word KNOW is amazingly prominent in John’s letter, so I think he definitely has something to say about KNOWING whether we are saved. For the record, I’m not in any of the eternal security camps, but I’m not in the In-n-Out camp either. I believe we can have full confidence in our salvation, but we are free in Christ to reject it — to commit treason against our Lord.
No one has ever seen God; if we love one another, God abides in us and his love is perfected in us. By this we know that we abide in him and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit. And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent his Son to be the Savior of the world. Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God. So we have come to know and to believe the love that God has for us. God is love, and whoever abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him. By this is love perfected with us, so that we may have confidence for the day of judgment, because as he is so also are we in this world. There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not been perfected in love. We love because he first loved us. (1 John 4:12-19 ESV)
Tim, I’m lost again, (not spiritually, but mentally) Tim said,
“I didn’t know until recently that people make a distinction between “perseverance of the saints” and “once saved, always saved.””
Like I say I could be wrong, but the only time I find the word “perseverance” is is in the following.
Eph 6:18 Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints;
Does this not mean we should continually (never stop) pray for all Christians everywhere?. And if Christians are already saved, why the admonition? persevere is something we do through determination. I am open to be corrected .
Tim, since you responded with grace when we had this discussion at my blog; I’ll join this one too! I love this discussion and have never been more certain of anything in my life.
I believe in the complete work of Christ, that He is Sovereign and powerful, and that God is God (not man); therefore I believe in eternal security.
I also would like to point out that it is difficult to simply discuss eternal security without going into other doctrinal areas. I don’t see how we can’t get into perseverance of the saints or election or depravity (what the flesh is even capable of doing)… but I’ll flow with it as you take it Tim.
You just asked for scriptures at this point and before I do that; for those of you who look at Hebrews 6:4-6 please read the rest of the chapter; particularly v.9 and on! “we feel sure of better things – things that belong to salvation…” Read the whole chapter.
Scriptures that speak to eternal security:
1) Parable of the sower (I can hear the crowd now, “that proves the opposite!” … not so.)
2) John 10:26-30
3) Romans 8 (all of it really): but v.1 and v.37-39 if I had to narrow it down.
4) John 6:37-40
5) Philippians 2:12-13
6) Ephesians 1 and 2: specifically 1:13-14 (big time)
7) 1 Peter 1:3-5
8) 1 Peter 5:8-10
9) Jude v.24-25
10) 1 Thess 5:23-24; specifically v.24
11) 1 Cor 1:8-9
12) Jeremiah 32:40
13) Philippians 1:6
14) 2 Tim 4:18
15) Rev 7:10
16) The entire book of Hebrews
And just to throw in to the discussion, those that show if one “falls away” then they were never in Christ:
1) 1 John 2:19 “…for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us…”
2) 1 John 3:6
3) Hebrews 3:13
Lastly, Consider what it would mean if someone was saved, then unsaved. That would mean that Jesus’ blood wasn’t enough to save them (though, it was at one point I guess?). That would mean that Jesus in fact, did NOT die for all of that person’s sins. Are you willing to say that? Say it: “Christ’s blood is not enough to keep me.”
OK, apparently the number 8 with the ) make a smiley face with sunglasses. That was not intentional. :) <– that one was though
Jr writes: And just to throw in to the discussion, those that show if one “falls away” then they were never in Christ.
Nick here: Don’t you see that that just moves the lack of confidence a step backwards? The question transforms from, “Can I fall away?” to “Am I REALLY in?”
Jr writes: Are you willing to say that? Say it: “Christ’s blood is not enough to keep me.”
Nick here: “Christ’s blood is not enough” to force me to remain with Him if I choose to reject Him.
Eternal security only works in a worldview where God is the only one with free will.
JR, I was just reminded of that problem with the emoticon when reading Jay Guin’s blog today… who coincidentally is addressing the same topic.
I think I can turn off that setting. I’ll try to do so.
Grace and peace,
Tim Archer
P.S.—There, got it.
One question that will be raised is to what extent, if any, does God grant free-will. Another question, is what role does obedience play (in Romans 1.5, Paul’s task is to bring the “obedience of faith” – NRSV – among the gentiles).
As for passages…Obviously the book of Romans and 1 John but I also believe the book of Hebrews and Revelation has something to say (and if I remember, there were some warnings to repent or lose). I do believe that any thorough study on this subject must avoid proof-texting and instead look at passages in their contextual trajectory. It is too easy for people of every persuasion to just proof-text (cut and paste) the verses which, apart from contextual trajectory, appear to support their already forgone conclusions.
As for where I currently stand…I don’t believe the “perseverance of the saints” or “once saved, always saved” as I understand them is correct but neither do I believe that one can easily lose salvation and must continually exert his/her own effort to keep such salvation (the view I was taught growing up). I do believe there is some free-will involved and that a person can throw away the gift of salvation if they so choose.
Any ways…this will be an interesting discussion.
Grace and peace,
Rex
Tim, You are a brave soul in the order of our friend Jay Guin.
I’ll make a prediction. The conflict will not be resolved here or there (Jay’s blog). And, nothing will be said that has not already been said thousands of times. But, in spite of those facts. I believe it is good for brothers to discuss the word of God with charity and patience.
Most of you know that I believe in eternal security. That being said, I contend that “if” a person can be saved and then lost the following is true. 1. That person who was saved and is now lost cannot be saved again. 2. If he was truly born again and fell away it was because of sin.
This leaves some interesting questions. Did Christ bear ALL our sins upon himself? Does his blood cover ALL sins. The answer is no if a person falls away. Almost everyone agrees that salvation is a free grace gift, and that human effort is not what earns the gift of eternal life. How then is this life lost by human acts? If you participated with God in your salvation, God did his part and you did your part, then for sure you can fail on your part and be lost. The problem is the Bible teaches the opposite. Dead men don’t do anything and the Bible is clear that the unsaved are “dead”.
Finally, someone explain this mystery for me. The coc practice is this. A man is baptized, is faithful for a while and at sometime wanders away and “looses his soul”. (This is in harmony with the saved then lost teaching) Here is what puzzles me. When the man comes “back to the Lord’, openly confesses his sin, is penitent and is “restored”.
1. Was he really lost? 2. If he was really lost why does he not have to be baptized again if baptism is essential to entry into salvation? We “say” we believe he was lost but our practice shows we really don’t believe he was lost, he only needed to be “restored”.
Can anyone give a Bible example of one person who was saved, then lost, and then saved again?
Royce
Royce writes:
“That being said, I contend that “if” a person can be saved and then lost the following is true. 1. That person who was saved and is now lost cannot be saved again. 2. If he was truly born again and fell away it was because of sin. This leaves some interesting questions. Did Christ bear ALL our sins upon himself? Does his blood cover ALL sins. The answer is no if a person falls away.”
I don’t think the answer is No. Christ bore the punishment for all our sins. His blood covers all our sins. That never changes. Falling away is not a punishment for the believer who commits some random sin. Falling away is an intentional rejection of the Savior – treason, as it were. It is a forgiven sin, just like the parable of the prodigal shows. The Father didn’t force either son out into the far country, but neither does He force either son to stay with Him. The son did not have to ask the father for forgiveness. He just came home. And those options are available as long as we live in the world until the race is over and we’ve kept the faith.
No one is lost beyond salvation until they lose the ability to respond to the gospel — either they harden their heart beyond return (and even then the Holy Spirit may crack it open), or they die.
You’re absolutely right about our faulty practice of restoration — while we can and should rejoice that they’ve come home, the very fact that they’ve come home shows that they never fell.
I just trust God.
Am I the only one who read ,
Lk:15:29: And he answering said to his father, Lo, these many years do I serve thee, neither transgressed I at any time thy commandment: and yet thou never gavest me a kid, that I might make merry with my friends:
30: But as soon as this thy son was come, which hath devoured thy living with harlots, thou hast killed for him the fatted calf.
31: And he said unto him, Son, thou art ever with me, and all that I have is thine.
32: It was meet that we should make merry, and be glad: for this thy brother was dead, and is alive again; and was lost, and is found.
This the youngest son had already collected his inheritance, and spent it, but he was not turned away when he returned.
We are talking about eternally saved, and eternally lost, if something don’t change. (he was lost, but now is found)
Royce asked “Can anyone give a Bible example of one person who was saved, then lost, and then saved again?”
I believe the parable in Luke 15 is just that.
Tim,
Great topic. I love your critical thinking. Just got back from Haiti. Churches (now meeting outdoors) are packed. Many Haitian’s are talking about God’s punishment for past sins… I certainly don’t agree, but I think there is a link between this idea and the “eternal security” question. Looking forward to thinking through this issue with you via your blog.
Tim
We’re talking about being saved then being unsaved; being born-again of the Spirit, then being un-born-again; being covered by the blood of Jesus, then not being covered by the blood of Jesus; Jesus dying for all of my sins, then Jesus not dying for all my sins; Jesus’ atoning work on the Cross being sufficient, then Jesus’ atoning work on the Cross being insufficient. (I cringe just typing that)
Shall we continue to hold on to our human self-worth and pride at the expense of mocking the work of Christ and His finished work for the elect (His Bride) at the Cross any longer?
Tim asked for passages so I gave passages; however I would be happy to say the following (to escape the “out of context” argument): Read all of John 6. Read all of John 10. Read all of John. Read Ephesians. Read Romans 8. Read Romans. Read the Old Testament. Read the Bible. But this comes with an important stipulation:
Take off the man-centered glasses when reading Scripture.
The world does not revolve around us; nor was it made for us. It and we were made for the glory of God; period. He is the Creator, we are the created. We don’t make the rules. He doesn’t have to succumb to our sensibilities as sinful creatures. He can do whatever He wants with His creation. He doesn’t have to match up with what we think is “fair”; for if He really was “fair” He would be absent of grace and we would all rightly be judged to hell as the repugnant beings we are in comparison to Holy Holy Holy. I don’t want a fair God; I want a merciful God full of grace. Thankfully, that is what we have.
God is God-centered; not man-centered. He created and He does all things for His own glory and praise; not man’s. Oh man (universal), get over yourself.
“Whatever the LORD pleases, he does, in heaven and on earth…” (Psalm 135:6)
To God: “all the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing…and none can stay his hand or say to him, ‘What have you done?’” (Daniel 4:35)
Good discussion, brothers! Tim, I look forward to your posts on the subject.
“Perseverance of the saints” makes perfect sense and is not only a possible conclusion but a necessary conclusion IF other premises of predestination are true, i.e., unconditional election and irresistible grace. If God unilaterally secures us in the tractor beam of salvation, then it stands to reason that it would be impossible to be released from it. As Nick commented, “eternal security only works in a worldview where God is the only one with free will.” Yet, the whole of Scripture (not just proof texts) affirms our moral freedom and will. Salvation by grace through faith is ours to accept, and ours to reject if we so choose. We can choose faithfulness or treason, as Nick puts it.
I agree with Trey that the Good Shepherd holds us safely and securely in His hand, from which no one can snatch us. Yet, like the prodigal, we can demand our freedom, insist on our will, and go our own way. God takes no hostages and holds no prisoners.
While Hebrews 6 has been mentioned specifically, I would also like to throw Hebrews 10:26-31 into the mix. It addresses those who have received the knowledge of the truth and have been sanctified by the blood of the covenant. Yet, the prospect is considered that these sanctified ones can trample the Lord of their salvation under foot and spit in the face of Grace. The terror of “falling into the hands of the living God” was not a call to repentance to the unsaved, but a sobering reminder to God’s own people.
Jr.,
I disagree with how the question of the believer’s security was historically treated in the Churches of Christ but the warnings given to the churches in Revelation were not ‘cheap talk’. It seems that their existance would suggest taht it is at least a possibility that Christians can still face the wrath of God. Further, the Apostle Paul’s warning to Christians in Galatia about those who continue living a life of the flesh/sinful nature (Gal 5.21) should at least keep open the possibility for a Christian to live in such a way as to lose salvation. Now what interests me is that when we speak of God’s judgment, I almost always hear of it spoken in terms of individualistic judgment. No one ever raises the question that if the warnings of judgment in Revelation are made to churches and not infividuals…could it be that God still pronounces judgment on entire Christian communities?
Laymond,
The story of the lost son is most likely not about an individual but an allegorical story to the plight of the gentiles…that is, they left the heavenly creator and father only to squander the life he gave them but through Jesus, their father has come out looking for them to welcome them back to his household.
Grace and peace,
Rex
Permit me to add my titbit to you discussion. Mat-10:22b, says but he that edureth to the end shall be saved. This is the pricipal admonitionin all times and places to the apostles, diciples, servants and followers of Christ. unless one eduresto the end, all is lost. Cyprian wrote,
Confession is the beginning of glory, not the full desert of the crown, nor does it perfect our praise, but it initiates our dignity….But after confession, his peril is greater, because the adversary is more provked…. For this cause, he ought the more to stand on the side of the Lord’s gospel.
Other scriptures enjoining endurance and continuity to the end are: Mat 24:13; Mark 13:13; 1Cor 13:7 and Rev 3:11 and many more.
Read 1 John 1: 1-10
Rex, you have the right to believe what you will, but you don’t have the right to change the story.
Rex said, “The story of the lost son is most likely not about an individual”
If we keep things in context, it is defiantly about an individual, I can’t see where you can read Ch.15 and draw any other conclusion, because the whole ch. is about the value of one thing that is lost. and to the extremes to which the owner will go to retrieve it.
But I am open to hear how you came to your opinion.
Laymond,
The entire narrative of Luke/Acts is about God saving mission to the Gentiles that goes through Israel/Jews of which the Messiah Jesus comes from. But that is not just my opinion…there is a lot of quality scholarship that shares that same opinion. If you ever want to pick up an easy to read yet very thurough study on Luke/Acts, pick up a copy of Jacob Jervell, “Luke and the People of God.” You most likely will need to order it online as I don’t think it is still being published…that is, if your interested.
Grace and peace,
Rex
Rex said, “But that is not just my opinion…there is a lot of quality scholarship that shares that same opinion.”
(quality scholarship)
I know we have been warned, a war of scripture will not solve anything, but whenever possible I prefer to let the bible speak for me.
1Cor:3:20: And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain.
21: Therefore let no man glory in men. For all things are yours;
Nice discussion going on here. I am happy to see so many participate. I found it through Jay’s blog and since I am commenting there I doubt I will comment here very much.
However, I do want to suggest that parables are intended to make one central point. Someone has said they were never intended to walk on all fours. I don’t think the point of the parable of the prodigal son is that one can lose their salvation. When the father says the son was dead and lost isn’t it simply saying the son was as good as dead rather than he was saved and then lost his salvation and then was saved again? The point is that the father received his son back with rejoicing which was very different than the reaction of the older brother. I also think the parable is NOT teaching that God does not know everything as I have seen suggested elsewhere.
As to letters written to churches in Revelation, I think the suggestion that the letters are directed to whole churches, city/region wide is correct. Individuals should make the application to their own lives, but the letter is addressing an entire church and the characteristics of local congregations, whole cities and whole denominations change over time. It would be altogether appropriate to admonish the Baptists or Presbyterians or whoever to remain faithful.
I think this is also true of the epistle to the Hebrews. It is written to a whole race of people with a history of having been the elect nation that repeatedly obeyed, became apostate, repented and obeyed and became apostate again. Finally a hardening has come upon them until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled. But even now, God has not ultimately rejected his people whom he foreknew. If any of us were writing to any large group of people, or even an individual that we loved wouldn’t we admonish them to be faithful to God , even if we were confident that they would. How many times has a parent told a teenager before the teenager went out for the evening “Remember whose you you are.” It is simply an admonition to behave properly. In the case of the Hebrews they had such a history as to make the admonition very appropriate. In such a large group of people we all know they must have true believers as well as make believers.
I’ll leave it at that and return to lurking. May God’s peace be upon us all.
Randall
Randall, welcome to The Kitchen. I know that you are someone who has spent a good bit of time studying this subject, and I welcome your input.
I do want to comment a bit on the letters from Revelation, since that is something I’ve spent time studying over the last few years. The letters operate on two levels. Some of what is said is directed to whole congregations: the warning to Ephesus is that their entire church can lose its status as a church of God.
Other parts of the letters are to individuals and groups within the congregations. There will be commendation to faithful members and rebuke (with warning) to those that are unfaithful. And each letter makes it individual at the end. “To the one that overcomes….” If we miss the individual aspect of these letters, we miss a vital element.
Grace and peace,
Tim Archer
Regarding the NT…to my knowledge all the books except for 1 & 2 Timothy, Titus, and Philemon would have been written to and for churches rather than individuals.
One of the outlying topis this discussion touches upon is the bibilical doctrine of grace, which for many has unintentionally been shaded by Reformation theology and especially that of Martin Luther and John Calvin (which is neither all bad or all good). In simple terms, this view has excluded works/deeds from having anything to do with our final judgment because salvation – grace that is – is not works based. However, in the last chapter of Revelation admist all of the prophetic promises of hope and warnings of judgment Jesus says “See, I am coming soon; my reward is with me, to repay according to everyone’s work” (Rev 22.12, NRSV). The word “ergon” is translated “work” in the NRSV and more idiomatically at “what he has done” in the NIV.
Does this deny the doctrine of grace? Perhaps it is antithetical to some people understanding of the doctrine but if that is the case, then this verse must be allowed to critique and adjust such view. And since even the Apostle Paul sought to bring about the “obedience of faith” (Rom 1.5) among the gentiles, I am don’t think the words of Jesus here in Revelation are out of harmoney with Paul as I once would have believed. So if responding in obedience is the type of faith God seeks as a reponse to his grace and if, according to Jesus, everyone will be finally judged according to their works/deeds, what bearing does that have on our security as saved children of God?
Grace and peace,
Rex
P.S. For the record, in light of what I just wrote (which is an attempt to think outloud), while I believe it is possible to lose salvation, I still believe it is dificult to do so requiring an act(s) (ergon) against God. But I stand to be corrected.
I think 3rd John belongs on your list…
Rex: What you are proposing is Christ-plus; which is exactly what the reformers were battling Rome over and is exactly what Paul was arguing against in Galatians. What you propose here is Rome and is a reversion to pre-reformation thinking. Semi-pelagianism is not the Gospel.
Christ’s righteousness is imputed to believers. Our judgment has already taken place and it was at Calvary. There is nothing i can “do” to be judged any other way than in Christ Jesus. At the end of days; the Father will look at me and either see His Son or He won’t. If He sees His Son I’m golden; if He doesn’t I’m smoke. Jesus is my Savior; my works are not. NT Wright’s position on this is absolute poison.
No amount of “works” will get you jack. “all our righteous deeds are like a polluted garment” (Isaiah 64:6).
“We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners; yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.
But if, in our endeavor to be justified in Christ, we too were found to be sinners, is Christ then a servant of sin? Certainly not! For if I rebuild what I tore down, I prove myself to be a transgressor. For through the law I died to the law, so that I might live to God. I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose.” (Gal 2:15-21)
Let me repeat that: “for if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose”
Are you willing to be judged according to your works or according to Christ’s? Woe to any man relying on the former.
This does not surprise me; getting back to our topic; that those who say one can lose salvation are those who say we will be judged according to our works. Both diminish Christ’s work and life and strips Him of glory. Because when all is said and done… it’s still all up to man.
Is Christ’s blood enough for you or not? Or did He not quite get it all done for you… you have to still “do” something to earn your victory or reward? This is not the Gospel.
JR, I’m guessing that you know better than to claim that say what Rex is saying is equivalent to what the Roman church was doing at the time of the Reformation. Such comparisons don’t seem to help our discussion much. It is a reminder, however, that much of what the Reformation had to say about grace and works was a reaction to abuses seen in the Roman church.
To all of us I’d suggest avoiding over-generalizations and emotional accusations. I understand where they come from, but can quickly turn rational discussions into name-calling fests. (I write that, by the way, as much for me as for anyone else).
Grace and peace,
Tim Archer
Tim,
Thanks for the additional information and clarification on the letters to the churches. I have no problem with the understanding the letters to include notes to certain individuals and that everyone should make an application to their own lives. Paul had many notes in his letters to various churches. I simply wanted to suggest that the letters are written generally to churches in various cities/regions and not addressed to particular people.
As to the comments above regarding our works being judged: some have suggested this may refer to degrees of reward rather than our standing before God regarding justification. Wonder what y’all think about that as I have not spent much time studying that line of thought. I do think the scripture is clear regarding justification by grace alone through faith alone in the sense in which Luther and others said it. Please recall Luther’s comments that man is saved by faith alone, but not that faith which is alone; also man is saved by faith not works, but by a faith that works.
I am unfamiliar with anyone that teaches that works are not important and a normal and necessary part of our walk with God. They are related to salvation, but they are not the CAUSE of our salvation. They are certainly evidence of it and prompted by our recognition of what God has done for us. I remember someone asking the following question: If someone accused you of being a Christian would there be enough evidence to convict you? I think that is an appropriate question to ask ourselves anytime. Peter says to be diligent to make certain of God’s calling and choosing us. That’s pretty good counsel.
Peace,
Randall
Jr.
No I am not offering up a semi-pelagianism theology. What I am trying to do is wrestle with a canon of scripture that includes both Galatians and Revelation and in doing so, asking 1) the exegetical question of what type of works/deeds was Jesus refering to in Revelation 22.12? and 2) the theological question of what the answer to question 1 has to offer to a biblical doctrine of grace/salvation and how that might change the post-reformation sorteriology that is prevelant.
I don’t believe a person can earn grace through works. Nothing a person does will ever warrant Jesus dying upon the cross for the forgiveness of sins. Nothing a person does will ever justify their sins. Sins are justified through through the blood of Jesus alone. But is it possible that Jesus is telling us that their are saved people who, to use some Pauline language, give up living by the Spirit and return to living by the flesh? Is it possible that such a person’s deeds have rejected the grace of God and thus brought about judgment upon them? Since I chose to use Pauline language, it is interesting that such a person is even considered to face condemnation by Paul (Gal 5.21).
What I am suggesting (which btw I in no way mean to be taken as a settled conclusion) is not the same thing as the abuses being promoted by the church prior to the Reformation which erroniously led people to believe they could buy their pardon through indulgences. What I am wrestling with is the idea that maybe after nearly 500 years removed from the historical context the reformers were living in that we can now see something that have been in scripture all the while but were not as aparent to the reformers and the movements that followed them because their historical situation innocently blinded them to such scriptures. I say that with a humility that acknowledge many good contributions made by the reformers that we are still beneficiaries of and with the acknowledgment that we too do not living in a cultural vacume and have our own historical-cultural shades that innocently hide certain aspects of scripture from us as well.
I hope that explains a little more.
Grace and peace,
Rex
Perhaps I overgeneralized. It was not intentional. I was going to ask for clarification as to the differences but Rex beat me to it in responding before I could. So I thank you, Rex, as that helps to see where you are coming from.
This, then, is where we differ. You stated: “But is it possible that Jesus is telling us that their are saved people who, to use some Pauline language, give up living by the Spirit and return to living by the flesh?”
I would simply say in my view, that is an impossibility. There is nobody that is saved, who has received eternal life, and who, in the words of Jesus will be “raised up on the last day” that will ever lose these firm promises. (nor is there any biblical example of this).
God “will complete the work He began in you”. Warnings about behavior does not negate this; but is used to demonstrate who are His and who are not. This is no different from “working out your salvation with fear and trembling.” We must check out our lives and see if we are demonstrating a life of repentance. Are we proving to be in Christ or living a lie? There isn’t an unbeliever in this world that conducts his or her life in this way. The fact that the Spirit who lives within us gives us such a conscious confirms our being purchased.
Fundamentally I see the following in regards to the topic of salvation: Some of you think you had something to do with being saved. Before you object, let me clarify what I mean here: You “came to believe” on your own without any Spiritual awakening given to you from God that He does not give to all people. When you heard the Word preached, you came to believe while the person next to you did not; and that had nothing to do with God’s influence to you over that other person. You were more advanced in some way whether spiritually or intellectually. You made that choice absent of any special work of God for you over another.
Therefore, it is also in your hands to lose this thing you have gained (salvation) by choosing to reject it. Thus, you are saved then unsaved. You are born-again, and then un-born-again.
Please correct me if I am wrong here.
[I also believe in this discussion we must address the following:
Did Jesus die for every single person who has ever and will ever live and therefore every single person who has ever and will ever live had their sins forgiven? This also would raise a significant difference in how we see salvation and what we view Christ accomplished on the Cross.]
Grace to you –
Jr.,
You said. “Warnings about behavior does not negate this; but is used to demonstrate who are His and who are not.” With all do respect, an explination like this sound more like reading reformed dogma back into the text which speak of judgment and warning in order to make them conform to the dogma. The warning in Revelation was given to churches/Christians who had already been washed in the blood of Jesus and were in Christ. There is nothing in the context to suggest they were intended for anyone else except Christians and there is nothing in the text to suggest that they were meant as anything except to say that their works/deeds would have an effect on their final judgment.
So the exegetical question is what did Jesus mean by his use of the word ‘ergon’? I don’t think there is anything in the context to suggest that Jesus was saying that our works will earn us the blood of Christ. What I am suggesting and wrestling with is the fact that Jesus seems to be saying now that we have been washed in the blood, given the Spirit, become part of his church, etc…if we continue living by the ways of the world (the flesh) then we can only expect judgment.
Here is where a distinction between rebellious sin and sin committed by weakness might be helpful. In Romans 7-8, I believe Paul has in mind the Christian (all of us) who are pursuing righeousness, pursuing the Spirit and yet still in our weakness stumble and sin. Such a person has no need to fret because, out of God’s grace through the blood of Jesus, there will be no condemnation. That Christian is different from the Christian who turns around and rebelliously gives himself back to the passions of his flesh or, in the case of Revelation, renounces his confession of Jesus Christ. The later person is the one I believe Jesus has in mind. The former person is the one I believe Paul generally has in mind when he speaks of our security.
However, I suspect we also differ on how free-will comes into to play…i.e., are we saved because God accepted us, because we accepted God’s grace, or somewhere in between.
Grace and peace,
Rex
BTW…no offense has been taken. I have enjoyed this blog discussion because whether we agree with every person’s comment or not, I feel that everyone commenting has made an effort to work from scripture rather than just a baseless opinion.
Well, we either receive eternal life when we believe into Christ or we don’t. If we receive eternal life, then isn’t it eternal? I think the confusion comes about because in reading the bible most people simplify salvation to a one time act. When actually the Bible portrays a progressive salvation that has a definite start, progress and conclusion. So one can be saved, being saved and will be saved and all be true. In addition to the matter or salvation there is the matter of reward and punishment. Because of the misaiming of Catholic teaching regarding purgatory, most Bible readers are not comfortable examining the verses which clearly show believers could be judged and either rewarded or punished. Thus they shove these verses into the saved/not saved consideration. Confusing, sure, but go back and read your Bible without the colored glasses of your preconceptions and it gets much clearer. Salvation is a gift and won’t be taken back. Reward/Punishment is based on faithfulness and will be determined at the judgment seat of Christ. Should you receive punishment, you won’t perish but will still be saved. Grace to all the saints.
Hi Vern,
Welcome to The Kitchen. It’s nice to have someone approaching from a different point of view. We get mainly Church of Christ people here, and it can put a definite slant on things.
That being said, I think we need to remember that we all are wearing the colored glasses of which you speak, it’s just that different people wear different shades. Open discussion is one of the ways we begin to discover which tint we’re looking through.
Grace and peace,
Tim Archer
Wow, there has been a lot of going back and forth on this issue. I hope to interject some thoughts that have not been submitted. 2 Tim. 2:15 KJV
If you don’t know the verse, take time to look it up. Paul is our apostle for today. He is the gentile apostle. Some of you have hit some great points in establishing the difference between Jew and Greek. There is no difference now. Christ in his earthly ministry called gentiles dogs. “Low I have come for the lost sheep of Israel.” He came for his people in his generation. The knowledge of the mystery was kept secret as Paul writes,
that a change has taken place that the offering of salvation has come to the gentiles. Time past, but now and ages to come, are changes that have taken place. One key point that no one seems to acknowledge is the destruction of the Jewish Temple in 70 A.D.
My God, what a change in the creator’s dealings with man. The only earthly place that God came upon the earth to be with man. Some may think that the Holy Spirit took the temple’s place. But that is only conjecture. The Holy Spirit that Jesus told his disciples about of course was rejected by Israel, along with the Messiah.
I think we have gotten off the path a little bit. I would like to address two things, I will make it short and sweet or sour for some, I guess. Yes I believe once saved always saved but I go a little bit farther as you can tell by my blog name. Anyway, Romans 3:9 Jews and Greeks all found guilty
Rom. 3:11 There is none that understandeth, there is none, that seeketh after God. Romans 3:10 There is none righteous no not one. Ok we have settled the point that it can’t be us. It has to be the faith of Christ and the faith he has in himself that what he did, satisfied the sin debt of man. With that said I will conclude my point with Gal. 2:15 We who are Jews by nature and not sinners of the Gentiles, knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but BY THE FAITH OF JESUS CHRIST, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we may be justified by THE FAITH OF JESUS CHRIST, and not by the works of the law. for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. Again, its not your faith that saves but the faith of Christ. The relationship is between God and Christ and we get the benefit. As Paul writes in all his letters we have peace with God thru Christ Jesus.
I know that the book of Revelation has been mentioned in this thread.
To be honest, this book became quite easy to understand when I approached reading it from the perspective of a Jew. Since the apostle John wrote it and it was a revelation from the risen Christ it becomes quite clear who the audience should be. The little flock in Jerusalem.
The Jewish remnant in hiding and scattered. If you assume that the book is written in 90 A.D. the temple is destroyed and Jews are now scattered. That is why the 7 churches are really the 7 synagogues.
Remember the Catholics were in charge for 1200 years.
As for Revelation, I’d highly recommend studying up on the literary genre known as apocalyptic literature. Understanding this literary style, common in the first century, helps us read the book in its expressed context. It’s not that difficult. No need to impose hidden meanings on the text.
You might even look at some of the materials from the book I just published, Letters From The Lamb.
As for the other topic, we’ll continue discussing it next week.
Grace and peace,
Tim Archer
Tim: I am very skeptical of the fact that the word of God and the bible we have today is inerrant. The Catholics have a reputation of laying out some pretty weird stuff. Transubstantiation, Purgatory, Peter as the head of the Universal church, The Inquisition, All the Popery, translations of the manuscripts, Latin Liturgy, Mary Queen of Heaven. I don’t trust them.
They were the only game in town for centuries………….
“How We Got The Bible” by Neil Lightfoot is a nice popular read on the subject. I feel that the text of our Bible is well attested. No other work from its time has nearly the amount of evidence supporting it.
Fortunately, the Catholic church wasn’t all there was. The Armenian church, Syrian church, Greek church, etc. helped preserve the text, and their animosity toward the Catholic church helped balance their influence.
Grace and peace,
Tim Archer
Pingback: Top 2010 posts in The Kitchen | TimothyArcher.com/Kitchen