If the Bible speaks of even one person who commits apostasy, then Charles Stanley and Eternal Security bites the dust, so to speak. Although this argument has been broached from all avenues, it isn't settled and never will be! Even if a verse outright said "Eternal security is a lie!" those who believe it would never relent. In all fairness those who believe in conditional security are as adamant. However, all that I seek is truth!
In my Bible I have underlined every verse having to do with assurance of salvation. Some passages seem to favor eternal security, others conditional security, and still others seem to support both! The following verse is evidence of this:
Ephesians 2:8 "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God..."
This verse is the most often used by those who espouse eternal security. The argument is that since salvation is a gift of God, he saves you even though you don't deserve it! Furthermore, since grace is an undeserved gift, no "work" you do can gain it. Since you do nothing to gain salvation, then there's nothing that you can do to "lose" your salvation. Lose is in quotes because those who believe in eternal security are always careful to say "Those people believe that you can lose your salvation. Ha! HA!" Conditional security says nothing about "losing" salvation, but failing to hold onto faith, thus giving up salvation; called apostasy.
"Ye are saved through faith" is a key phrase. We all agree that it takes faith in Jesus to be saved. However, the efficacy of salvation lies in the duration of faith. Those with an eternal security mindset seem to place faith as a one-time event. A person feels remorse, expresses belief in Jesus, repents, gets baptized and is thus saved. For the remainder of their life they have Christian liberty to sin as much and often as they desire! Those of the conditional security mindset believe that faith must be persevering and steadfast until death. If the Christian willingly denies Jesus or ceases to commune with God, that person has given up the faith he or she had at salvation and is in apostasy. They become reprobate (damned). The argument then lies on how the believer perceives faith. My belief, and I won't quote scripture here, is that faith is steadfast and enduring. (I leave it to the reader to review faith since I've written much on faith previously).
There are several instances in Scripture where a believer abandons God. I'll use one from the New Testament:
Acts 8:9 "But there was a certain man, called Simon, which beforetime in the same city used sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that himself was some great one: 10 To whom they all gave heed, from the least to the greatest, saying, This man is the great power of God. 11 And to him they had regard, because that of long time he had bewitched them with sorceries. 12 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. 13 Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done."
Luke says that Simon believed as did the others who became Christians and was also baptized. Some believe that baptism saves and some that it's symbolic of salvation. Regardless, Simon believed and was baptized. This is being "born again" as taught to Nicodemus by Philip who was the saved through the ministry of Philip. However, Simon didn't take long to get confused about what he believed:
Acts 8:18 "And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money, 19 Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost. 20 But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money. 21 Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right in the sight of God. 22 Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee. 23 For I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity. 24 Then answered Simon, and said, Pray ye to the Lord for me, that none of these things which ye have spoken come upon me."
Firstly, Simon, although a new Christian, became confused. He failed to bury the old person with baptism. He saw the opportunity to prosper with his new-found faith! (He was just like many Christians today!) Peter judged Simon to be a sinner, rebuked him as he should and told him to repent so that he may be forgiven of his sins.
So far those who believe in eternal security should have no argument with Simon. He was a "saved sinner". In their view, even if Simon never repented, he's still saved, but Peter told him to repent! Simon was contrite. He asked Peter to pray to the Lord for him. According to eternal security dogma there was no cause for Simon to repent except to please God. He would be saved regardless. However, it seems that Simon was sincere in his contrition and deserved another chance as long as he held onto his faith. However, even though Simon believed, was baptized and repented; those adherents of eternal security would say that Simon was never saved at all!
Not only do they say that about Simon, the same logic is used today, when a saved person "goes bad". They say "He was never saved to start with!" That's circular logic to support bad theology! If Simon was saved and failed to maintain his faith, he gave up his salvation, and since this one man did that, it stands to reason that conditional security is a valid doctrine. There's not two baptisms! Simon had the same one Christians have today.
However, in all honesty it would appear from Scripture, that Simon never gave up his faith. As far as Scripture goes, he's still appears to be a Christian. However, later non-canonical writings tell of the apostasy of Simon. Claudius made statues of Simon as a Holy God because Simon did miraculous acts. Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem, wrote in the Catechetical Lectures about 350 A.D. that Simon Magus appeared in the clouds with demons and was defeated by Peter and Paul in joint prayer. Other literature tells of Simon preaching his own gospel in opposition to Holy Scripture. Indeed, I believe that Simon was the "thorn" in Paul's side. (I've written of the evidence of this argument earlier).
Those who commerce with demons are surely enemies of God. Hence, secular and early religious writings would indicate that Simon, who was born again under the preaching of Philip, was in apostasy and became reprobate, a Scriptural condition of the damned.
Therefore, since Simon Magus renounced God by deed (works), evidence of that one person doing that supports the position of "conditional security". Since Simon was in apostasy, likewise Christians today are free to exercise their own will and abandon the one who offered salvation!
Do I believe that a Christian must believe in conditional security to be a Christian? Not at all! However, conditional security is a motivator for Christians to pattern themselves after Christ. Being righteous isn't a sacrament (saving), but it is a demonstration of the love of God. Christians are told to keep the commandments: love God and others! How can one never praise God and still love him! How can one love others yet murder? The answer is Not "They weren't saved to start with!", but that their faith was planted on rocky ground and failed to grow! Their faith turned to doubt and their doubt to unbelief!
Don't get angry with my analysis if you disagree. I'm not angry with those who differ. I have the assurance that if I maintain my faith that I will be saved! Others that they believed and were saved. Which position offers the most assurance. I'll take conditional security! I look forward to finishing the race and being told "Well done good and faithful servant!" Those who tire of the race and lack perseverance should be wary of gaining the trophy of eternal life! If they're wrong, they're toast.
No comments:
Post a Comment