{"id":31321,"date":"2011-01-29T18:12:00","date_gmt":"2011-01-30T00:12:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/?p=31321"},"modified":"2021-01-29T18:18:40","modified_gmt":"2021-01-30T00:18:40","slug":"theres-no-security-for-the-believer-in-once-saved-always-saved","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/theres-no-security-for-the-believer-in-once-saved-always-saved\/","title":{"rendered":"There’s No Security for the Believer in ‘Once Saved, Always Saved’"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\n\tby Al Diestelkamp
\nvia\u00a0Think on These Things<\/a>, Volume 41, No. 1, Jan-Mar 2010\n

There is a belief in many Protestant churches, and especially popular among those who would describe themselves as “evangelicals,” known as the doctrine of “The Security of the Believer.” In Calvinism’s TULIP acronym, it is represented by the “P” for “Perseverance of the Saints.” Other terms used to promote this doctrine include “Eternal Security,” and “Impossibility of Apostasy.” Their claim is that one cannot fall from God’s grace, and thus it is commonly known as the doctrine of “once saved, always saved.”<\/p>\n

\"\"Advocates of this doctrine have a great deal of difficulty dealing with the numerous scriptures that contradict but somehow manage to put their own “spin” on them to mean other than what they say or imply.<\/p>\n

Besides having to deal with the scriptural arguments, they also have to come to grips with the fact that some of their “believers” have left the faith, or have again become “entangled” and “overcome” in the “pollutions of the world.” Peter said it “would have been better for them not to have know the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered to them<\/em>” (see II Peter 2:18-22).<\/p>\n

This fact poses a dilemma for the believer in “once saved, always saved.” They cannot deny that some who had been among them (even in leadership roles) are like that dog that “returns to his own vomit,” but they refuse to say that he has fallen from grace.<\/p>\n

You see, the false doctrine of “once saved, always saved” is built on a false concept of the sovereignty of God. Their view of God’s sovereignty is that everything that happens in this world is by God’s decision, and therefore, man cannot choose to do anything. Therefore, if one is saved, he has no part in that decision. They then conclude that if God chooses to save a person, it would be impossible for him to be lost.<\/p>\n

Well, how do these people explain their way out of this dilemma? A hardcore Calvinist might say that despite apparent apostasy, or moral degradation, God will save them anyway. Most, however inevitably grab hold of the only other possible explanation, and claim that such persons were never really saved in the first place. In offering that explanation they are forced to admit that they cannot know whether a person is really saved until after they have died. Then the advocate of “once saved, always saved,” not having completed his life on earth, is left to wonder whether his own salvation is real. Thus, for them, their version of “the security of the believer” is really a doctrine of “the insecurity of the believer.”<\/p>\n

It is hard to read very much in the New Testament without being faced with statements that clearly contradict the “once saved, always saved” doctrine. In fact, I maintain that every inspired New Testament writer included one or more statements or warnings about followers of Jesus jeopardizing their salvation. Let me prove it:<\/p>\n