Ok in my last post I said that would discuss my feelings on the P tenet of Reformed (Calvinist) Theology
To refresh:
P-Perseverance of the Saints-"Perseverance of the Saints is a doctrine which states that the saints (those whom God has saved) will remain in God's hand until they are glorified and brought to abide with him in heaven. Romans 8:28-39 makes it clear that when a person truly has been regenerated by God, he will remain in God's stead. The work of sanctification which God has brought about in his elect will continue until it reaches its fulfillment in eternal life (Phil. 1:6). Christ assures the elect that he will not lose them and that they will be glorified at the "last day" (John 6:39). The Calvinist stands upon the Word of God and trusts in Christ's promise that he will perfectly fulfill the will of the Father in saving all the elect."- This is the doctrine of "Once Saved, Always saved" or "The Eternal Security of Believers"
OK here are my thoughts on this issue. I do have some problems with the doctrine of "once-saved, always saved" and here is why. Let me be clear to start; I do not believe that one can "lose" his salvation, but I do believe that someone can, after trusting in Jesus for the forgiveness of sins, reject Him so completely that they are no longer saved. Scriptural evidence for that includes Matthew 24:11-13
"Matthew 24:11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many. 12 And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. 13 But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.
Other Scriptures that seem to indicate this (that one can walk away from the faith) include the Parable of the Sower:
Mat 13:20 But he that received the seed into stony places, the same is he that heareth the word, and anon with joy receiveth it;
Mat 13:21 Yet hath he not root in himself, but endureth for a while: for when tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word, by and by he is offended.
Mat 13:22 He also that received seed among the thorns is he that heareth the word; and the care of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, choke the word, and he becometh unfruitful.
I looked up the definition of the word offended in the Strong's concordance and here is what it has to say:
"σκανδαλίζω
skandalizō
skan-dal-id'-zo
To "scandalize"; from G4625; to entrap, that is, trip up (figuratively stumble [transitively] or entice to sin, apostasy or displeasure): - (make to) offend."
Another reason I do not believe in the doctrine of once saved always saved is because of personal experience. I know people who truly loved God at one time who at this moment are not saved because they chose to reject God in favor of something else. For those who say those people I am referring to were never saved, that contradicts Scripture because it denies the power of God to save them in the first place.
An additional problem that I have with the concept of once saved always saved, is that there are some who will use this doctrine to do whatever they want because if one's salvation is secure it doesn't matter what they do. This is contradicted by Romans 6:1
My father's pastor said one time "I believe in the Eternal Security of Eternal Believers (ie, those who endure to the end). Now that, I agree with!
I know many dear brothers and sisters who do not agree with what I have just said and they will use John 17:12, and Romans 8 as a defense of the Doctrine of once saved always saved, and I can understand where they are coming from. This is an issue where I have agreed to disagree.
As I told one such brother who I love in the Lord, If people are truly trusting in Jesus and following hard after Him, the issue of Eternal Security become completely moot, because they have made their calling and election sure
Anyway these are my thoughts on this issue. God Bless and have a great day!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I think "once-saved always-saved" is bumper-sticker theology. It's awfully crass, and about the only reason I can think of for putting it that crudely is to excuse "sin[ning] that grace may abound". So I understand your objections to that phrase.
However, I do believe in the "eternal security of believers". To use your well-chosen example of the Parable of the Sower, consider this: Does the stony ground, or the hard ground, have any power in and of itself to remove the stones, or to break itself up and make it fertile?
Recall that the stony ground does not fundamentally change its character at any point. The failure of the plant/fruit only reveals the stony ground to be what it was all along.
To put it a bit more directly: How do you know that your friend "truly" loved God at that one time?
To say that they were never saved does not at all reject God's power to save. It may reject our outside ability to know "for sure", though. In fact, Calvinism would go so far as to say that God only and ultimately chooses who is or is not saved.
I have more to say on your other post later. Sorry to be a bit out of touch these next few days!
Post a Comment