Friday 22 November 2013

Once Saved, Always Saved? (part 4)

Welcome back to our discussion on whether or not the doctrine of Eternal Security, also known as Once Saved - Always Saved (OSAS), is true.

The last time, we looked at the direct words of God and saw that God Himself says that it is true.

Those whom God saves, He keeps saved.

His sheep don't stay saved because they choose to, but because God chose to save them and keep them.



I intentionally didn't quote scripture after scripture because that would be overkill. For those who belong to Christ, once He says something, that should settle it in our minds what God's viewpoint is on the matter.

Yet, we find that many people openly defy the words of the Omnipotent God. They will not verbally admit that Jesus was wrong, but their actions... teaching contrary to what their Lord says, shows that they indeed believe Jesus is wrong.

As I've previously shown, if Jesus is wrong in anything, especially this, then by default... He can't be God.

It's because of this why I believe that the majority of people who deny that God keeps people saved, do so in complete ignorance of what they are doing (this in itself has all sorts of implications, especially in regards to church leadership... but that's a different discussion altogether).

So, let us begin looking at the thoughts used to reject the crystal clear teaching of the Christ Jesus.

Most people who deny the security of God will usually run to the doctrine of man's "free" will.

They will say that God gave us free will, and those who lose (or give up), their salvation... freely choose to do so.

Now, this line of thought is easily dealt with from the very words of Christ that I gave previously and the parable of the 4 soils.

Jesus tells us that those who seem to choose to turn from Christ, are those who had no root.

But, people who deny the security of God will pretend as though those verses don't exist and still hold to the "free will mantra".

So, the best way to prove this idea is to show as being completely false via the scripture.

Let's begin.

The reality of this idea is that it makes God's sure word, null and void. God's word can never be trusted because man can easily disrupt, and completely obliterate God's plan by his will.

This idea basically says that man is stronger than God. Although God has His wills (yes, it is plural), man has his will, and man's will ultimately trumps God's will and plans.

Of course, those who deny God's security are also quick to deny that they are saying this. But sadly, this is exactly what they are saying.

When we look at salvation, we're told that those who are saved were chosen to be saved from before the world existed.
Ephesians 1:3-6
Blessed be the God and Father of our Lords Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: according as he has chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: having predestined us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will, to the praise of the glory of His grace, wherein He has made us accepted in the beloved.
When was the plan for our salvation formed and implemented? From before the world was created.

In other words, they are saying that the over 6,000 year plan and purpose of God can be wiped out by the will of the person who takes their free will and gives up/loses their salvation.

All of creation, the flood, the calling of Abraham, the raising up of the children of Israel, and virgin birth, the resurrection, etc. – was leading up to each and every one of our salvation.

That’s what the bible clearly says. Yet, man is so strong, so powerful, that we trump the Omnipotent’s plan’s and purposes?

All throughout the bible, there is clearly a struggle between the wills (again… plural) of God, and the will of man.

These often clash. But the winner is shown to never be man’s will.

Let’s look at some scripture.

When God instructed Jonah to go to Nineveh, and he didn’t want to go, did Jonah’s will destroy the plan of God?

When the people of the earth gathered to build the tower of Babel, in defiance of the Lord to spread across the earth, did their will destroy the plan of God?

When the children of Israel were worshipping the golden calf that they had made, and God wanted to destroy them, did Moses’ will destroy the plan of God?

Did the constant rebellion of the children of Israel since Mt Sinai (in other words, them following after their own will), destroy the plan of God?

Did Abram’s and Sarai’s plan to beget Ishmael, destroy the plan of God?

Did Abram’s selling of his wife, on two separate occasions, destroy the plan of God?

Again, all throughout the bible we see this tension between the wills of God, and the will of man.

If Esther didn’t speak to the king to save the children of Israelites, would that have destroyed the plan of God?

Yet, is it not written…
Numbers 23:19
God is not a man, that He should lie; neither the son of man, that He should repent: has He said, and will He not do it? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good?
You see, there are two issues at work here.

The first one is trusting in the word of the Lord. The people, who deny God’s security, don’t trust His word.

Often, they know what God says, yet they reject it do to their unbelief.

The second issue is that they see the many times when God gives man choices that can have profound consequences and they try to make the argument that God deals with us in this way 100% of the time, and He doesn't.

They look at God's allowance of Adam to sin, causing the cursing of the entire creation, and apply this to our salvation.

Yet they won't apply God's prevention of allowing any one to sleep with Sarai other than Abram, even going so far as to threaten a pharoah and a king if they dared to touch her.

It's this view that we should apply to salvation.

What's the difference you ask?

Adam wasn't told that God would keep Him from the tree of Good and Evil.

But, Abram was told that Sarai would give him a son, and God always keeps His word.

We have been told by Christ that the Father gives Him His sheep, and that Christ gives them eternal life, He will not lose anything that the Father gives Him, and they will never perish.

And God always keeps His word.

But, this time, instead of threatening to kill, someone did die.

To ensure our salvation, Jesus took the full force of the Father's wrath and laid down His life for His sheep.
He then filled those sheep with the Holy Spirit, which sealed us - this is the eternal life He gives us. And because we are indwelt by the very Spirit of the Almighty God, we shall not perish.

Since the fall, man's will has always been at odd's with God's will.

There are some things that God allows us to use our will to do (like Adam), but there are certain things that God will not allow us to use our will to do.

Look at Balaam (Numbers 22). From the very first instance he knew that he wasn't to go with King Balak's men to curse the children of Israel.

God told him not to go.

Balaam persisted though and God said fine and was looking to kill him on his way.

God allowed Balaam to go against His will. However, God did not allow Balaam to curse the children if Israel in any if the three attempts Balaam made.

In other words, when it came to cursing God's people, God would not let it happen. No matter how persistent Balaam was.

These, I believe, are really the problems. Unbelief, and not rightly dividing/understanding the word of God.

It's also so strange that those who are in denial of God's security, when adversity comes, they are quick to recall the scriptures when it says...
Romans 8:31
... If God be for us, who can be against us?
They can clearly recognise that Paul asks this question rhetorically. They are fully aware that Paul is clearly saying that if God is for you, then no one can be against you.

The problem is, though, that to deny God's security, is to actually believe that man can actually be against us, and prevail.

So on one hand they affirm that we are secure in God, and then on the other hand they deny that we are secure in God.

Similarly, when fear is identified, they are quick to recall the scriptures when it says...
Matthew 10:28
And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
They can clearly recognise that Christ is making the distinction that God is infinitely greater than man, so if we're to fear anyone, it should be God.

The problem is, though, that to deny God's security, is to actually believe that we should fear man more than God, since man can actually thwart the plans and purposes of God by his sheer will.

When I put it that way, you can clearly see the absurdity of the argument. Those who deny the doctrine of Eternal Security, will disagree obviously, but that is exactly what they are doing.

The finality of this idea... that man can, by sheer will, make himself unsaved, is to say that God's plans and purposes can't be accomplished unless man wills it to be accomplished. It's to say that man can't be saved unless man wills it to be so. It's to say that man won't stay saved unless man wills it to be so. And if at any time man wills it not to be so, then God's plan of salvation for that person which scripture teaches was from the foundation of the earth, comes to nought.

This is the fruit of denying the words of our Lord as He spoke in the book of John.

Let's not fool ourselves. When man goes against the general will of God, it's because God allows Him to. But when God has spoken something, He will utterly trample on man's will in order to make sure that His word comes to pass.

Christ has spoken, declaring to us the will of the Father. That all those that the Father calls, will be given to Him. And that of all those, Christ will not lose none. And since God has spoken it, He will utterly trample on the will of man to make sure that His word comes to pass.

Join us next time as we start to investigate the very scriptures used to try and show that Jesus was wrong.

No comments:

Post a Comment