Once Saved Always Saved? Part 2 of 2

(Continued)

Now, concerning Heb 6:4-8, there are different interpretations. The main ones include:

1. Those in Heb 6:4-8 are Christians who have fallen away and lost their salvation;
2. They are Jews who have tried Christianity but returned to Judaism;
3. This passage talks about the loss of rewards for backsliders but not the loss of salvation;
4. This is a hypothetical case to warn Christians about the dangers of apostasy, but it did not happen.

I will discuss each briefly and then tell my position:

Saved and then lost. This assumes that Christians are preserved by their perseverance. If they endure, they are saved. If they don’t, they will be lost. But according to:

• 1 Pet 1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, 4 to obtain an inheritance which is imperishable and undefiled and will not fade away, reserved in heaven for you, 5 who are protected by the power of God through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.

Christians are protected by God’s power, not the strength of their perseverance. So, this interpretation is not valid.

Jews who are not yet Christians. According to this view, these are seekers who tasted the goodness of the gospel but never embraced it and returned to the law when they faced trials. Let’s check what they have experienced to see if they are believers:

Enlightened. To give light, to shine, light up, or illumine. The same Greek verb phōtizō occurs one more time in Heb 10:32 But remember the former days, when, after being enlightened, you endured a great conflict of sufferings.

So, the group in Heb 6 enjoyed the same enlightenment as the Christians in Heb 10.

Tasted of the heavenly gift (v 4), tasted the good word of God (v 5), tasted the powers of the age to come (v 5). Tasted translates the Greek verb geuomai, which means to try the flavor of, partake of, or enjoy. Heavenly gift is not further defined. Some suggest it to be the free “gift of God” (Rom 6:23) or eternal life. Others believe the gift is grace (Eph 2:8). Some interpret “the word of God” as the Scriptures or the gospel. Some equate “the powers of the age to come” to be “signs and wonders and various miracles” (Heb 2:4). This school contends that since the Heb 6 group only “tasted” the benefits of belief but did not swallow them, they were only seekers but not yet believers. However, besides Heb 6:4 and 5, tasted also occurs in Heb 2:9 But we do see Him who was made for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone.

Jesus did not just “taste” death partially. He died the most cruel death invented by men, for men! Hence, the premise that “tasted” falls short of full participation is not substantiated.

Partakers of the Holy Spirit. Greek adjective metochos. Sharing in, or a partner in a work or office. Some interpret this to be sharing or having fellowship with the Holy Spirit. Again, this word’s other usage in Heb indicates otherwise:

• Heb 3:1 Therefore, holy brethren, partakers of a heavenly calling, consider Jesus, the Apostle, and High Priest of our confession;
• Heb 3:14 For we have become partakers of Christ if we hold fast the beginning of our assurance firm until the end,
• Heb 12:8 But if you are without discipline, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate children and not sons.

If a person shares in the heavenly calling, Christ, the Holy Spirit, and the Father’s discipline, having a part with all three Persons of the Trinity, he is an insider, not an outsider! Heb 6:4 is particularly relevant because of Rom 8:9b, “But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him.”

My conclusion based on the evidence is that these are not just Jews but Christians.

Lose rewards but not salvation. Proponents claim that the writer of Hebrews is not talking about losing salvation in chapter 6, only the rewards of salvation. What does the text say? We have already examined what these people experienced in v 4-5 to be part of the salvation process. What about v 6? Fallen away translates the Greek verb parapiptō, which means to deviate from the right path, turn aside, wander, to error. It occurs only once in the NT in Heb 6:6. What is the outcome of this falling away from true faith? It is impossible to renew them again to repentance. They have repented before. If they fall away, they cannot renew their repentance again. Repentance from what? The word repentance is the Greek noun metanoia, translated uniformly as repentance in the KJV, a change of mind or reversal of decision. Of particular interest is its occurrence in Hebrews besides v 6:

• Heb 6:1 Therefore leaving the elementary teaching about the Christ, let us press on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God,
• Heb 12:17 For you know that even afterward when he (Esau) desired to inherit the blessing, he was rejected, for he found no place for repentance, though he sought for it with tears.

Both were genuine repentance, not false. I conclude that Heb 6:6 is about the consequence of falling away from faith in God, not just rewards not even specified in the entire paragraph.

Hypothetical for warning. This school contends that this verse presents a hypothetical case based on KJV (NKJV, RSV):

• Heb 6:6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

They believe the “if” in “if they shall fall away” is a matter of possibility, but had not happened. Opponents point out that the premise does not stand, as there is no “if” in Greek. The phrase is a participle and can be translated as “having fallen away” (see Interlinear). Another objection is, “If this were hypothetical, why bother warning someone against something that can’t happen?”

Nevertheless, there is some merit in this interpretation given:

• Heb 6:9 But, beloved, we are convinced of better things concerning you, and things that accompany salvation, though we are speaking in this way.

My view is that of the four common interpretations, the first three have serious difficulties. I am not fully satisfied with the fourth, but the problems are less serious than the others. My interpretation principles are to start with exegesis instead of imposing a theological system to explain an idea, and to use clear passages to clarify more obscure verses.

On balance, I believe the “once saved, always saved” view to be valid, as this article tried to demonstrate.

Once Saved Always Saved? Part 1 of 2

Q. Heb 6:4 For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6 and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame. 7 For ground that drinks the rain which often falls on it and brings forth vegetation useful to those for whose sake it is also tilled, receives a blessing from God; 8 but if it yields thorns and thistles, it is worthless and close to being cursed, and it ends up being burned.

Can you explain “Once Saved, Always Saved”? Can a truly born-again Christian walk away from God and lose his position as God’s child?

I will answer the primary question before addressing Heb 6:4-8. The primary issue is whether our salvation ultimately depends on God’s promise or on us. My position is it depends on God, not our ability to hang on. Let us review two passages of what God promised:

• John 10:27 My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; 28 and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand.
• Rom 8:33 Who will bring a charge against God’s elect? God is the one who justifies; 34 who is the one who condemns? Christ Jesus is He who died, yes, rather who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us. 35 Who will separate us from the love of Christ? Will tribulation, distress, persecution, famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? 36 Just as it is written, “For Your sake we are being put to death all day long; We were considered as sheep to be slaughtered.” 37 But in all these things we overwhelmingly conquer through Him who loved us. 38 For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, 39 nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

The conclusion is no enemy is greater than God to snatch us out of the Lord’s and the Father’s hands. Nothing will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus. The natural question is, “OK, no one is greater than God, but can’t we walk away from God ourselves?”

My response depends on whether that person is really a born-again Christian. If he is a genuine Christian, then God will discipline a wayward child to bring him back:

• Heb 12:5  and you have forgotten the exhortation which is addressed to you as sons, “My son, do not regard lightly the discipline of the Lord, Nor faint when you are reproved by Him; 6 For those whom the Lord loves He disciplines, And He scourges every son whom He receives.” 7 It is for discipline that you endure; God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there whom his father does not discipline? 8 But if you are without discipline, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate children and not sons.

However, if he is a counterfeit Christian, then his walking away from God is a case of:

• 1 John 2:19 They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out so that it would be shown that they all are not of us.

They are Christians in name only, but their lack of perseverance shows that they do not have saving faith and were not truly born-again.

Books have been written by both proponents and opponents of eternal security to support their position. Space does not allow me to address their arguments in this short article, but the above sums up my view.

(To be continued)

Lazy Wicked Servant (2 of 2)

(Continued from yesterday)

Furthermore, how he felt about his master betrayed the fact that he knew nothing about the grace and mercy of God. Although Christians have complaints, they know the Lord to be a compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness. There is none of that in the third servant’s ungrateful heart.

Finally, what is “outer darkness”? This expression appears in two other places in the NT besides Mt 25:30:

• Mt 8:12 But the sons of the kingdom will be cast out into outer darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” In context, those with faith will sit down with the patriarchs in the kingdom of heaven, while the unbelieving Jews will be cast out.
• Mt 22:13 Then the king said to the servants, ‘Bind him hand and foot, take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’ In this parable of the wedding feast, the guest without a wedding garment (Christ’s righteousness) was thrown out of the wedding banquet (marriage supper of the Lamb Rev. 19:9). He was not chosen, a non-believer.

To be in “outer darkness” is to be excluded from the kingdom of God. And “weeping and gnashing of teeth” meant remorse from rejecting salvation when it was offered, not just regret over loss of reward.

3. Theology. I still maintain that the best test of genuine faith is the Lord’s criterion of “fruitfulness”:
• Mt 7:16, 20 You will know them by their fruits;
• Mt 12:33 for the tree is known by its fruit (Lk 6:44).
The first two servants differed in the quantity of profit (5 vs. 2 talents), but both returned the same proportion of gain (100%). Both applied themselves to the best of their ability. The third servant produced no fruit at all, proving himself wicked, lazy and unworthy. He was a nominal Christian only, not a genuine believer.

So, based on the context, the text, and theology, I conclude that the unworthy servant is not a complacent genuine Christian, but a nominal Christian without true grace in his heart. Many, indeed, will say to Jesus on that day, “Lord, Lord”, but will not enter the kingdom of heaven (Mt 7:21-22). Be careful how you live. Don’t be self-deceived that you are saved.

Lazy Wicked Servant (1 of 2)

Q. In Matthew about the wicked lazy servant: “So take the bag of gold from him and give it to the one who has ten bags. For whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them. And throw that worthless servant outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” Does it mean being a complacent Christian leads to hell?

A. The key rests on whether the wicked lazy servant is a genuine Christian, and what does the outer darkness mean. Some believe the one-talent servant to be a complacent Christian because:

• He was a servant, just like the other two;
• He was entrusted with one bag of gold or one talent.

They believe the Lord would not entrust His wealth to unbelievers. Therefore the worthless servant must be a Christian. Those who subscribe to “once saved always saved (OSAS)” believe he lost his reward, and the “weeping and gnashing of teeth” meant remorse at his loss. Those who don’t hold to OSAS believe he lost his salvation, as “outer darkness” meant hell. Who is correct?

I do not hold either of these views. I believe the third servant is not saved at all. Here are my reasons:

1. Immediate Context. The parable of the talents in Mt 25 is sandwiched in between the parable of the 10 virgins and the parable of the sheep and the goat. I’ve argued in an earlier post that the five foolish virgins were not Christians because they had no oil:

Five Foolish Virgins

and won’t repeat myself here. The goats were not Christians either. So based on the pattern contrasting the saved versus the unsaved, the third servant should be a non-Christian.

2. Text. The interpretation turns on the differences between the 3 servants. The amount the master entrusted to each, according to his ability, is different. However, since the first and second servants, who got 5 and 2 talents respectively, received identical commendation from the master for the same 100% return, I believe the key is not in the dollar amount received. The crux is in the effort in relation to the amount received, which in turn is dependent on the servant’s attitude towards the master.

The third servant’s opinion of his master is that:
• He was a hard man;
• Unreasonable – harvesting where he had not sown.
As a result he was afraid of losing the gold and hid it in the ground. I believe that’s only an excuse, because if he were truly afraid he would have done something to avert the master’s reprimand e.g. depositing the money with bankers to earn some interest. But he did nothing.

(To be continued)

Seed on Rocky Ground

Q. In the Parable of the Sower, did the seeds falling on rocky ground lose their salvation?

A. The answer hinges on whether those seeds have genuine salvation. Some believe they do, because:

• v 5 It sprang up quickly, because the soil was shallow.
• v 20 The seed falling on rocky ground refers to someone who hears the word and at once receives it with joy.

Their deduction is since the plant sprang up, there is life. There is life because the rocky ground receives the word with joy. Therefore, according to them, only the “path” is not saved. The “rocky ground”, the “thorny ground”, and the “good soil” are all saved. Then how do you account for the plants on rocky ground withering, and those on thorny ground choking? Their reason is “because they are carnal Christians (1 Co 3), and therefore unfruitful”. Those who don’t subscribe to “once saved always saved” believe they lost their salvation; those who do believe they lost only their reward, as God can’t trust them anymore and has to end their earthly, not eternal, life.

I disagree with this interpretation. I believe only the good soil is saved, the other three are lost. According to the Lord, the real test of whether a person is saved is fruitfulness:

• Mt 7:16-20 You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. So then, you will know them by their fruits. The context is on entering the kingdom of heaven, not just gaining or losing rewards. Also Lk 6:43-44.
• Mt 12:33 Either make the tree good and its fruit good, or make the tree bad and its fruit bad; for the tree is known by its fruit.

Only the good soil bears fruit, and brings forth some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty. It entered through the narrow gate and is saved. The others tried to enter by the wide gate and are lost. The rocky ground did not lose its salvation. It never had salvation to begin with. The joy was only a shallow, emotional response, not deep repentance. Examine your life to be sure you are truly saved – not by your works, but by your faith which expresses itself in grateful obedience and is fruitful.

Five Foolish Virgins

Q. Did the 5 foolish virgins lose their salvation? How does it square with “once saved, always saved”?

A. The key is “are the 5 foolish virgins Christians?”. Some believe they are, based on:
• They are virgins, and virgins are figurative of the body of Christ 2 Co 11:2 I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy. I promised you to one husband, to Christ, so that I might present you as a pure virgin to Him.
• They had oil, and oil is symbolic of the Holy Spirit’s anointing 2 Co 1:21 Now it is God who makes both us and you stand firm in Christ. He anointed us.

However, if they were genuine Christians, the bridegroom, representing Christ, would never have replied ‘Truly I tell you, I don’t know you.’ (Mt 25:12). More likely, virgins simply mean chaste persons Rev 14:4 These are those who did not defile themselves with women, for they remained virgins.

Furthermore, Mt 25:3 says “The foolish ones took their lamps but did not take any oil with them.” The text is clear that they did not have oil. There is no “extra” in the original. Then how come v 8 says The foolish ones said to the wise, ‘Give us some of your oil; our lamps are going out.’ To understand this, we need to know the kind of lamps they were carrying. The Greek word is lampas, which means a torch. They are for outdoor use, able to stand the wind without the flame going out, not the oil lamps for indoor use. They can be lit, but go out quickly unless supplied with oil, which the foolish virgins did not have.

Now Rom 8:9 says, “You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ.“ So, the foolish virgins were in the company of the wise ones, took their lamps like they did, except that they did not have any oil i.e. the Holy Spirit. They looked like Christians, but they did not belong to Christ. They even called Him “Lord, Lord” (v 11), just as in Mt 7:22-23, “Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’”

Why were the wise virgins so selfish in not sharing the oil? They were not mean, just being realistic, because you cannot be saved riding on the coattails of others, be they your parents, spouse or friend. Everyone must come to a relationship with God for him/herself. There is no second-hand saving faith.

So this is not a case of true Christians losing their salvation. They may be moral persons in church, but they were never saved to begin with. I believe in perseverance of the saints, but these were not saints, just nominal Christians at best.