Grappling with Once-Saved-Always-Saved Premise

Believers are likely to latch onto the once-saved-always-saved assurance (as taught by certain denominations) if they do not personally have trouble trying to reconcile this maxim with the anomalies routinely witnessed among different Christian communities.  The worst-case counter-example will be when renowned mega-church leaders fall dramatically into abject disrepute and leave in their wake such adverse impact that the large followings they attracted thereafter become disillusioned and rudderless.  In a similar vein, supposedly staunch followers are wont to feel distraught when interacting with immediate relatives or close friends who have openly renounced their Christian faith in favour of other religions.  As for the pew-warmers in church, even they may find occasion to query the beliefs of their ostensibly Christian bosses who keep resorting to business practices that run afoul of biblical ethics.

 

Given the prevalence of such counter-examples, what is the basis for pastors and counsellors to continue teaching Christians how to seek comfort in the once-saved-always-saved promise?  The starting premise must naturally be what Jesus told the Jews confronting Him in the temple porch: “I give them eternal life and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand.” (John 10:28)  Reinforcing this forceful declaration is His re-assurance in the very next verse that “My Father, Who has given them to Me, is greater than all and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand.” (John 10:29)  Looking at these two consecutive verses together is sufficient to establish that none will ever be able to snatch whomever is under the inviolable protection provided by not only the Son but also the Father.

 

If any Christian thinks he need not read any further and can now exit this blog-site, he ought to ask himself honestly whether eternal life has really been guaranteed based on his presumption of being securely ensconced within His hand.  Irrefutably documented in John 10:28 is the testimony of Jesus granting eternal life to only them who, as identified in John 10:29, are those given by the Father to Him.  Affirmation that this is indeed so has subsequently been furnished by Jesus when praying whilst lifting His eyes to heaven: “Those whom You gave to Me I have kept, and none of them is lost …” (John 17:12)  The inference then is that eternal life is for those who are going to, as foreknown by God, embrace the gospel message and accept His salvation offer.

 

As an aside, it is interesting to additionally consider the latter portion of John 17:12 where “… none of them is lost except for the son of perdition that the Scripture might be fulfilled.”  Even though still active among the 12 at the time of Jesus’ prayer in John 17:12, Judas has been singled out as already lost and therefore excluded from “those whom You gave to Me”.  That Jesus foretold this as being in accordance with scripture lends support to the conviction that God foreknew Judas would become “the son of perdition” way before his actual act of betrayal in the Garden of Gethsemane.

 

The next scriptural passage of relevance to the present discussion is found in Paul’s theological exposition where, first of all, Romans 8:28 draws attention to pre-destination as a natural concomitant of foreknowledge: “whom He foreknew, He also pre-destined to be conformed to the image of His Son”.  The divinely-ordained progression that ensues is meticulously spelt out by the erudite apostle in Romans 8:29: “whom He pre-destined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; whom He justified, these He also glorified.”  At which point in time do both of the past-tense verbs ‘foreknew’ and ‘pre-destined’ refer to specifically?  It transpires that another Pauline epistle has explicitly addressed this issue: “God chose us in Him from the foundation of the world … having pre-destined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself …” (Ephesians 1:4-5).  Paul’s second epistle to the church at Thessalonica does shed some light with II Thessalonians 2:18 stating that “God from the beginning chose you for salvation …” but, in all frankness, its term “from the beginning” does not quite convey the vivid clarity of the earlier expression “from the foundation of the world”.

 

There is no doubt that the pronouns ‘He’ and ‘His’ appearing in Romans 8:28-29 refer only to the Father (as Romans 8:28 already contains the phrase ‘His Son’).  Interestingly, there is a Petrine epistle alluding to the Father’s foreknowledge too: “… to the pilgrims of the Dispersion …, elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father …” (I Peter 1:1-2)  Thus far, the discussion has dwelled on Christians foreknown by the Father; actually, the chosen race may similarly draw encouragement from Paul’s comprehensive exposition that “God has not cast away His people whom He foreknew” (Romans 11:2) as well.

 

Included in I Peter 1:2 is the term ‘elect’ which must be taken into consideration — in addition to ‘foreknew’ and ‘pre-destined’.  Although not incorporated into the divinely-ordained progression spelt out by Paul in Romans 8:29, this term is featured in different New Testament books as can be seen from the following selection of sample verses:

●     “false christs and false prophets will rise … to deceive, if possible, even the elect” (Matthew 24:23)

●     “but the elect have obtained it and the rest were blinded” (Romans 11:7)

●     “to the elect lady and her children whom I love in truth” (II John 1).

 

In truth, sinners are plainly told that “… if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved” (Romans 10:9).  The question arising from this verse (often cited during evangelistic efforts) is whether confession and belief are likewise requisites for compliance by those identified in I Peter 1:2 as belonging to the “elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father”.  The answer is obvious when this phrase is viewed in the entirety of I Peter 1:2 which reads thus: “elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ.”  Hence, confession is necessary if the sins of the elect are to be atoned by the blood of the Lamb while belief is the foundational bedrock upon which obedience will develop as a character trait of the elect who are certainly not spared from the sanctification process effectuated by the in-dwelling of the Spirit.  Furthermore, the elect have been enjoined by Peter to “be even more diligent to make your call and election sure” (II Peter 1:10); if the elect dutifully pursue what have been specified in II Peter 1:5-7 by the apostle whom the Messiah commissioned to care for His flock, they then have his unreserved assurance that “you will neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ” (II Peter 1:8) “for so an entrance will be supplied to you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ” (II Peter 1:11).

 

Before the present discussion can be drawn to a conclusion, there still remains the task of reviewing the counter-examples outlined in the introductory paragraph.  For those fallen leaders who had been performing signs and wonders, did they forfeit their salvation along the way?  A clue is available from Jesus’ response that “I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practise lawlessness” (Matthew 7:23) when confronted by many claiming “Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name and done many wonders in Your name?” (Matthew 7:22)  As for so-called Christians who either continue to behave like non-believers or eventually reneged on their faith in Him, Jesus’ rebuttal is simply that “not everyone who says to Me ‘Lord, Lord’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven but he who does the will of My father in heaven.” (Matthew 7:21)  Given God’s foreknowledge together with Jesus’ denial of having known them, these wannabe Christians must not have been among the elect in the first place and so the question of whether they lost their salvation is in point of fact entirely irrelevant.  Bearing this in mind is helpful when seeking to comprehend the following not-so-familiar situation narrated in the gospel: “… many believed in His name when they saw the signs which He did, but Jesus did not commit Himself to them because He knew all men and had no need that anyone should testify of man for He knew what was in man.” (John 2:23-24)

 

 

 

 

PS:  This is not the appropriate forum for re-visiting the misconception of limited atonement.  Neither may the present discussion be perceived as a veiled attempt at re-vitalising such a notion.  Those interested in this particular issue ought to check out another blog article (entitled “Addressing certain Concerns associated with Limited Atonement”) which was uploaded on 30 August 2023.