The Matter of Eternal Security | Essay
Eternal Security in the Early Church
To fully understand what the Bible says regarding the matter of eternal security, one must first define exactly what this idea entails. The doctrine of eternal security simply means that once an individual is saved, they will remain secure in their salvation for the rest of eternity. While this doctrine has been debated throughout all of church history, I believe scripture provides a clear stance on how a believer should view this matter.
It is always wise to review any matter of doctrine within the scope of church history. For the past 2,000 years, men and women of great intelligence and Biblical knowledge have studied deep into the matters of doctrine and theology. It would be foolish to quickly dismiss the common beliefs of historical church theologians. However, what is often found among the modern review of historical church teachings is a lack of cohesive understanding of the context in which the beliefs were formed. For example, most would agree that mankind was in a severely vulnerable position during the height of COVID-19 in 2020. While this position would be common belief, the individual living in Turkmenistan or North Korea at the time (two countries with zero reported COVID-19 cases), would find the world's situation to appear far less grim due to their context.
To claim that eternal security has only been orthodox in recent Christianity, is misleading at best. While it is true that it did not become a commonly taught doctrine until the reformation, this is not to mean that it was not believed prior. “In the early church, the doctrine of eternal security was not explicitly formulated, but foundational ideas were present” (McGrath, Christian Theology: An Introduction). In fact, one of the primary separations among Catholics and Protestants was this division of eternal security and the loss of salvation due to a failure of obedience or apostasy. While this was not a common matter of disagreement until the reformation, a matter not being taught as formative doctrine does not mean it was never believed.
An example of this can be found in the matter of homosexuality. Throughout church history the matter of sin regarding homosexuality was not a major point of contention. This discussion has always carried great uniformity among different denominations and beliefs that scripture clearly describes the practice to be a sin. However, in recent days the challenge of this belief has become far more prevalent. Hypothetically, if this challenge were to arise in the 5th century as a matter of serious discussion, students of the word of God would quickly begin providing lectures, articles, sermons, and debates on the matter of the sin of homosexuality. If that were the case, one might argue that the sin of homosexuality wasn’t taught until the 5th century, but the context shows it simply wasn’t a major topic of discussion at the time.
In fact, this view of church history suggests that homosexuality was so commonly understood as sin that it wasn't considered important enough to warrant serious discussion. The same process applies to the matter of eternal security. Though it is true that many of the foundational church fathers challenged the idea of eternal security, and this was not a core belief of orthodox Christianity until the reformation, this does not prove that eternal security was an unbiblical doctrine.
One primary argument against eternal security, is based on the foundation of common teachings by the early church leaders. However, it is unwise to simply believe the teachings of early church leaders only on the basis that they lived many years before us. If the denial of eternal security relies on the authority of early church teachers, then their other teachings must also be considered.
Clement of Rome (35-99 AD)
Clement of Rome was considered one of the earliest leaders of the church after the apostles. Following in Paul’s footsteps, Clement wrote letters in very similar content to the church at Corinth. However, close observation will show a deviance from the word of God within less than a century of the canon of scripture being completed.
"Our sin will not be small if we eject from the episcopate those who have blamelessly and holily offered its sacrifices. Blessed are those presbyters who, having finished their course before now, have obtained a fruitful and perfect release, for they have no fear that anyone will eject them from the place appointed for them." (1 Clement 44:4-5)
Clement, though predominantly teaching in accordance with scripture, focused heavily on a matter that was not taught within the word of God, the salvific authority of church hierarchy. Clement held a view of church organization that closely resembles today's Presbyterian and Catholic style of leadership. While on its own this may not be a great matter of discontent, this reliance on Church leadership hierarchy led to an unorthodox elevation of power among church leaders.
Ignatius of Antioch (35-108 A.D.)
Ignatius is another central figure in early christian doctrine. While many would refer to him and his teachings as foundational in the Christian faith, he too had many unorthodox beliefs. Ignatius held to a strong belief in the hierarchy of the church as well, even to the extent of believing that the church is necessary in matters of salvation.
"Let no one deceive himself: if anyone is not within the altar, he is deprived of the bread of God. For if the prayer of one or two has such strength, how much more does that of the bishop and the whole church?" (Letter to the Ephesians, 5:2)
Another particularly concerning matter of doctrine held by Igatius is the rejection of Jewish customs and practices in light of a fulfilled law in Christ. Ignatius went as far to teach that any practice of Judaism or Jewish religious customs could restrict salvation.
"For if we continue to live in the practice of Judaism, we confess that we have not received grace... It is monstrous to talk of Jesus Christ and to practice Judaism. For Christianity did not believe in Judaism, but Judaism in Christianity." (Letter to the Magnesians, 10:1-3)
Tertullian (155-240 AD)
Tertullian, one of the later fathers of the early church, was also a firm believer in the Christian’s ability to lose their salvation. While many respect Tertullian's authority and might accept the idea of losing salvation based on his teachings, doing so should also require observation of his other teachings.
Later in his life, Tertullian became associated with Montanism, a prophetic movement that emphasized new revelations from God. This movement also resulted in a strict adherence to morality, and an imminent return of Christ. He was also an early originator of the term “trinity;” however even in this, he was severely flawed in his doctrine. Tertullian believed that the son derived from the father, and was ontologically subordinate to him.
"The Father is the entire substance, but the Son is a derivation and portion of the whole, as He Himself acknowledges: ‘My Father is greater than I’ (John 14:28)." (Tertullian, Against Praxeas 9) Tertullian believed in many foundational beliefs of Catholicism, including an early version of transubstantiation, and full submission to the church and its leadership.
"There is no pardon for idolatry, murder, or adultery after baptism, for these are offenses of the flesh and the devil. After the grace of God has been received, a man should remain pure and avoid all sins that separate him from Christ." (Tertullian, On Modesty 21)
"For this is the manner in which the apostolic churches transmit their registers: as the church of Smyrna, which records that Polycarp was placed therein by John; as also the church of Rome, which makes Clement to have been ordained in like manner by Peter." (The Prescription Against Heretics, 32)
The argument here is not to villainize the early church fathers, but rather to make the point that belief in any doctrine, based solely on the fact that it was taught and believed by early church fathers, would also logically result in the belief that you must at least observe the rest of their teachings, which many would find to be heretical. A belief in any doctrine cannot be found only in the safety of common thought. One must always base their doctrine on scripture. While the early church fathers were integral in many areas of early church doctrine, and we should by no means dismiss all of their teachings, we must only hold to the teachings that also align with scripture. To believe a doctrine of any man, we must be able to prove that doctrine through scripture first.
It is also interesting to note that many of the early church fathers who rejected the belief of eternal security, also held to a position of full submission to church hierarchy. This reliance on Church leadership is in opposition to common orthodox Christianity, and was integral in the foundation of the Catholic church. Is it possible there is a correlation in the common belief of Catholic tradition and submission to the church, and the matter of eternal security?
Not only do these two matters correlate, they are directly related. One must look no further than the first century to discover why this is the case. Jesus was often challenged by the legalistic sect of Judaism found in the Pharisees. The common belief at the time was a rejection of matters of the heart, or desires to worship and glorify God, and instead to adhere to the strict letter of the law. The religious leaders quickly understood the great power gained in being the only one to interpret the law that was foundational to the entirety of Jewish life. Jesus battled this unscriptural viewpoint of the law, consistently challenging the authority of the religious leaders who deceived Jews into submission under their power based on a faulty interpretation and deliverance of the law.
Matthew 23:23-24 - "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithe of mint and anise and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith. These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone. Blind guides, who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel!"
The Church's Authority and Its Relation to Eternal Security
It is no coincidence that Christianity quickly modeled the same destructive patterns. Within decades of Jesus’s return to heaven, early church fathers had already begun using the teachings of Jesus and the apostles to create a higher level of submission under the church. This provides evidence as to why the canon of scripture was closed at this time. A close correlation of the rise of heretical church leadership positions, and the close of the canon of scripture is no coincidence. If inspired scripture were to be continued beyond our current canon, one would likely find a new common focus emerging of a reliance on the church and leadership, instead of Christ. This indicates that there is a deviance from inspired scripture to what was commonly believed after. A surface level observation of scripture would quickly uncover the drastic change in christian authority found from the canon of scripture to early church writings.
1 Timothy 2:5 – "For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus."
1 Peter 2:9 – "But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light."
Colossians 2:8 - "Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ."
Hebrews 4:16 – "Let us therefore come boldly to the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need."
Ephesians 1:22-23 – "And He put all things under His feet, and gave Him to be head over all things to the church, which is His body, the fullness of Him who fills all in all."
The common teaching of the ability to lose one’s salvation, correlates directly with the rise of authoritative power in the church. The reason for this is twofold. First, eternal security removes power from the church, and second, common Catholic doctrine does not logically agree with eternal security.
To believe in a system of faith that is reliant on church authority over the believer, even in matters of salvation, would result in a belief that one must be able to lose their salvation. If a believer truly had eternal security, the church would lose its power. What power does the church have over the one that can obtain and keep their salvation without the need of the church? What logic could teach that the church is an integral and necessary part of obtaining and keeping salvation, if there was no ability to lose it. While this on its own does not prove the matter of eternal security, it does highlight a few areas of contention.
First, a belief in the rejection of eternal security cannot logically be founded on the idea of beliefs commonly held among church leaders alone. Many church leaders believed in doctrines that are considered heretical today. This also brings to light the interesting correlation between the rise of church authority in Christianity, and the rejection of eternal security. It is no coincidence that these two belief systems became commonly accepted in a similar time frame.
This reliance on church authority in matters of salvation is in a way the foundational argument either for or against eternal security. If one can lose their salvation, there must be some concrete measure to determine what constitutes losing salvation. To determine what that measure is, one must first look at how salvation is obtained in the first place. This is where most christian faiths would hold similar beliefs, even among Catholicism, that salvation, according to scripture, is by grace through faith.
Ephesians 2:8-9 (NKJV): "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast."
Even among the majority of those who hold a strict church leadership authority would agree that salvation is found through the faith of one in the sacrifice of Christ, which is offered because of the grace of God. While some may differ in matters of baptism or election, the initial need of faith in Jesus is integral to salvation. If this is the case, at what point is there a deviation in the ability to keep that salvation?
Understanding the Nature of Salvation in Scripture
The initial point of deviation comes not in the origin and foundation of the faith, but rather in the resulting fruit of that faith. The argument against eternal security is often founded on the lack of fruit in a believer’s life. How can one claim to be a believer if there is little to no fruit of that conversion, and what is the Biblical measure to judge that fruit?
It is wise first to examine in more detail the origin of the faith. In what language does scripture use to describe this initial moment of conversion? It is important to note that the common means of salvation are found in scripture to be through a presentation of the gospel, a belief in that gospel, and then an immediate reflection of that faith.
Acts 8:35-38 -"Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning at this Scripture, preached Jesus to him. Now as they went down the road, they came to some water. And the eunuch said, 'See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?' Then Philip said, 'If you believe with all your heart, you may.' And he answered and said, 'I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.' So he commanded the chariot to stand still. And both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water, and he baptized him."
Acts 16:30-33 - "And he brought them out and said, 'Sirs, what must I do to be saved?' So they said, 'Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.' Then they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house. And he took them the same hour of the night and washed their stripes. And immediately he and all his family were baptized."
Acts 9:17-18 - "And Ananias went his way and entered the house; and laying his hands on him he said, 'Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus, who appeared to you on the road as you came, has sent me that you may receive your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit.' Immediately there fell from his eyes something like scales, and he received his sight at once; and he arose and was baptized."
Acts 8:12 - "But when they believed Philip as he preached the things concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, both men and women were baptized."
Acts 2:41 - "Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them."
Throughout scripture the moment of conversion includes a clear gospel presentation, a moment of belief, and then an expression of that salvation shown in some way. While the expression of the faith is important, scripture is clear that salvation comes at the moment of belief, not in the moment of the expression of that belief. The language used throughout scripture to describe this moment of conversion is particularly important in regards to the matter of eternal security.
The Threefold Nature of Salvation
The language used for the moment of salvation is consistently described as singular, final, and transformative. A singular moment of the past is often used to describe this moment.
Acts 8:12 - "But when they believed Philip as he preached the things concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, both men and women were baptized."
Acts 2:41 - "Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them."
There is a clear singular moment associated with conversion rather than a process or a continuous act. Nowhere does scripture indicate that salvation is a process or a continuous practice. No individual in scripture was added, then added again, or believed, then believed again. A clear language of singularity and finality is shown in the examples of conversion in scripture.
This single moment in the believer’s life, that is described as complete and final, is supported by the description of a drastic transformation. The language used in scripture to define this moment is one of drastic change.
2 Corinthians 5:17 - "Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new."
Romans 6:4 - "Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life."
Ephesians 4:22-24 - "That you put off, concerning your former conduct, the old man which grows corrupt according to the deceitful lusts, and be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and that you put on the new man which was created according to God, in true righteousness and holiness."
Titus 3:5 - "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit."
Scripture is clear that the moment of conversion includes not just a divergence from the former self, but rather a complete change in the former self. This is crucial to the matter of eternal security. If there is a drastic singular moment of transformation to God, then apostasy must result in another drastic transformation away from Him. While some would fall into this category, most would describe the loss of salvation to be a slow process instead of a singular moment. The process of obtaining salvation, must be similar to losing salvation if it is possible. If one can slowly drift from the faith, then they must also be able to slowly drift into it. Salvation cannot be singular, final, and transformative in obtaining, but then be ongoing, erratic, and inconsistent in losing it.
The Symbolism of Baptism and the Finality of Salvation
One of the most beneficial verses to understand this concept is Romans 6:4.
Romans 6:4 - "Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life."
The believer’s salvation is mirrored and founded in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ. When one is baptized after conversion, they are identified in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ. They were dead in their sins, as Christ was dead on the cross, they are buried into belief, as Christ was buried into the tomb, and they are raised to new life in Christ, just as he arose from the dead.
Just as there is no need for Christ to continue to die for the ongoing sins of the world, and continue to rise from the dead, there is no reason for the believer to continue to die in their sins, and be raised to spiritual life over and over again. The death of Christ was final, just as the death of the believer is final, and the resurrection of Christ was final, just as the resurrection of the believer is final.
Romans 6:7-11 - 7 For he who has died has been freed from sin. 8 Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him, 9 knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, dies no more. Death no longer has dominion over Him. 10 For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God. 11 Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Romans 6:4 is clear that we were buried with him, and raised with him, and the result of this is that we should walk in the newness of life. This process shows that the burying and resurrecting of the believer from spiritual death to spiritual life is final and complete. This is an action that has occurred and is finished. In contrast, the walking in the newness of life is not described as finished, but rather as something ongoing. The belief that one could lose their salvation, would make the argument that the walking in newness of life is just as integral to the salvation as the death and resurrection, however scripture separates these two matters. Continuing throughout Romans 6 gives more clarity on the matter.
Positional Holiness and Progressive Sanctification
Romans 6:5-6 - For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection, knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin.
Notice the strict language used to describe the new creation in christ. The believer’s old life, the old man is not only done away with, but he is crucified with Christ. This is not a matter of the old person of the believer becoming dormant, only suppressed by continuous obedience, but he is rather nailed to the cross of Christ. This indicates that the old man is in fact our sin personified, which is paid for by the blood of Christ, and done away with that we should no longer be slaves to it. Our old man is crucified, but it cannot be resurrected, instead it is our new life in Christ that is resurrected with him.
It is clear that a finality and transformation is present in the moment of true conversion, but what is the relationship of obedience to salvation?
Romans 6:12-14 - 12 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body, that you should obey it in its lusts. 13 And do not present your members as instruments of unrighteousness to sin, but present yourselves to God as being alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God. 14 For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace.
A difference in language is clear between the moment of conversion, and the continuous practice of obedience. While our old man is crucified with Christ, we should not let sin reign in our bodies. It is important to understand the idea of positional holiness. When one is saved, they are made positionally holy before God. Instead of God seeing our position as being present among sin, instead he sees the blood of Christ.
This does not mean however that we are free from the continuous present effects and temptations of sin. If this were the case then there would be no need for obedience at all, and if this were the case God would receive no glory in the progressive sanctification of our lives. Instead God makes us positionally holy through the blood of Christ, but then works through us for his glory to draw us away from sin, until the day we are not only positionally holy, but physically holy as well.
Hebrews 10:10 - "By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all."
2 Corinthians 5:21 - "For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him."
Galatians 5:16-17 - "I say then: Walk in the Spirit, and you shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh. For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; and these are contrary to one another, so that you do not do the things that you wish."
Scripture is clear that the process of continual sanctification and salvation is done by God and through God, however it is in our denial of sin, and our desire to live in obedience that causes him to work in us and through us. If we were solely responsible for saving ourselves, and continuing to sanctify ourselves apart from the work of God, then we could be just as responsible for losing that salvation. However, scripture tells us that it is not our work that saves or sanctifies us; it is the work of God in us, by our faith in Him. It is our responsibility, but it is God’s work.
Philippians 2:12-13 - "Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure."
It is apparent from scripture that the moment of salvation is one of singularity, finality, and transformation, only through the work of Christ by our faith in his power to save us and sanctify us. These facts cannot logically support the idea that one could, by their own lack of merit and disobedience, remove the work of Christ, which has been nailed to the cross once and for all.
The Promise of Eternal Life and the Nature of Salvation
Another important aspect of salvation in regards to eternal security, is the presence of eternal life. Eternal means forever.. By definition, and logic, it is impossible to lose something that is eternal. The rejection of eternal security would assert however, whether knowingly or unknowingly, that eternal life begins at the moment of physical death. This assumption would mean that eternal life only refers to physical life. If this were true, no man would actually have eternal life at the moment of conversion, because they would still face physical death. One cannot logically have eternal life, and also face the promise of death. The other alternative is to claim that eternal life begins at the moment of death, which would mean that the believer does not have eternal life at the moment of conversion, a belief that would be heretical.
John 5:24 - "Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life."
1 John 5:11-13 - "And this is the testimony: that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life.
1 John 5:11-13 reaffirms that the eternal life offered is not referring to a continuation of physical life, but rather the new beginning of eternal spiritual life in Christ, which continues past the moment of physical death.. This is important to the matter of eternal security, because it is impossible for the true convert to lose something that is eternal. By definition and description in the word of God, eternal life is eternal, it cannot cease to exist. It is not just a promise to continue physical life after death, but rather the new presence of life within the believer through the work of Christ.
The Challenge of Apostasy and the Fruits of Salvation
There is, however, a matter that casts doubt on the issue of eternal security. This area of contention can be seen through Matthew 7:16-20.
Matthew 7:16-20 - "You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Therefore by their fruits you will know them."
For the one who has a moment of seemingly genuine conversion, who may even follow God in obedience for decades, and then decides to completely apostatize and turn from God, is he still saved, has he lost his salvation, or was he never saved to begin with? These three options are the only possible conclusions.
The first potential conclusion is that this person is still saved. This suggests that someone who has a genuine moment of faith, lived in obedience to God for some amount of time, and then turned away from Him for the rest of their life, would still be welcome in heaven. The problem with this conclusion goes back to the assertion that eternal life is not simply physical, but spiritual. In this situation, the individual was promised eternal life in the future (after physical death), yet they did not obtain it until then. However; it has already been established that eternal life begins at the moment of salvation, not at physical death. Therefore, a person who apostatizes but later returns to the faith, would be asserting that they had eternal life, lost it, and then regained it,, which is logically impossible.
Scripture also supports the idea that an individual who shows no expressions of their faith has no faith.
Matthew 7:16-20 - "You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Therefore by their fruits you will know them."
James 2:17 - "Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead."
James 2:26 - "For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also."
1 John 2:3-4 - "Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. He who says, 'I know Him,' and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him."
There is a similar language found between the description of the apostatizing or disobedient “Christian” and the unsaved. Just as the unbeliever is dead in their sins, so is the one who claims to believe (or claims to have believed at one time) but is disobedient to God.
Measuring Disobedience and Its Relation to Salvation
This logically brings up the discussion of the measure of disobedience. Even the believer commits sins after conversion, but scripture tells us that one who claims to know Jesus but does not obey Him does not know Him at all. How can these two truths coexist?
1 John 1:8 - "If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us."
Romans 7:18-19 - "For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells; for to will is present with me, but how to perform what is good I do not find. For the good that I will to do, I do not do; but the evil I will not to do, that I practice."
The measure is not necessarily based on the amount, frequency, or intensity of the sins, but rather the mindset. This connects back to the earlier point that those who deny eternal security often rely on church authority and works to determine true conversion. For eternal security to be a false doctrine, there must be a heavy reliance on the letter of the law, and some measure of its obedience. There is a reason why scripture does not provide such a measure. There is nowhere in scripture that indicates how many sins a person must commit before their salvation is lost, or how serious those sins must be. Instead, scripture focuses on the mindset and heart of the individual.
Since there is no measure in scripture, those who reject eternal security must create that measure themselves, which is what the Catholic church, many early church leaders, and Jewish religious leaders have done throughout history. Since scripture does not provide us with a measure, religious leaders determined the measure of disobedience required for a denial of the faith themselves. In doing so, the religious leader is now responsible for bringing that individual back to faith by hearing their sins, and determining their worthiness to come back to Christ.
The Jewish leaders, in an effort to determine the measure of disobedience not found in the Old Testament law, crafted their own interpretations providing authority to those underneath their teachings. Scripture does not give us a measure of disobedience required to lose the faith, because there isn’t one, and every man-made measure provided throughout history results in a reliance on sinful men, to determine the worthiness of other sinful men, void of any foundation in scripture.
The conclusion is not that the believer does not sin, but rather that the believer does not have a mindset of sin. There is a significant difference between the mindset of the one who is dead in their sins, and the one who is alive in Christ. The mindset of the new creation in Christ is one of repentance and repulsion against sin, whereas the mindset and nature of the unbeliever is one of familiarity and comfort with sin. Again, scripture gives no measure by which we can judge the mindset of the individual. Instead, scripture places the focus on the results, rather than the response.
It seems evident that the individual who completely apostatized later in life, could not still be saved, and they could not have lost salvation that they once obtained. The only logical conclusion is that they were never saved to begin with. This is difficult for us to understand, until we understand this crucial fact, that we are incapable of measuring the heart. When God sent Samuel to anoint the next king of Israel, Samuel observed the potential candidates, but God told him…
1 Samuel 16:7 - “Do not look at his appearance or at his physical stature, because I have refused him. For the Lord does not see as man sees; for man looks at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart.”
God is the only one able to judge the heart, and He is the only one who can truly see the nature of the fruit tree.
The Fruit Tree Analogy: True and False Believers
An apple tree will always bear apples; no matter how much it tries, it will never bear a peach. The believer in eternal security asserts that it is physically impossible for an apple tree to grow a peach, while those who deny eternal security would argue the intensity of which the apple tree is trying to grow apples. When a tree begins to produce fruit, the nature of the tree is based on the fruit it produces, not on the measure of the fruit itself.
An apple tree does not cease to be an apple tree if it produces one apple or one hundred apples; it remains an apple tree. What changes the nature of the tree is the type of fruit it produces. A tree producing a different fruit is, by nature, another tree altogether. The true believer is an apple tree, and nothing can change the nature of the tree to make it something else. The quantity of apples produced does not change its nature, but it does determine how effective or beneficial the tree is.
Where God sees apples or pears, all we are able to see is fruit, and we are unable to judge the true nature of that fruit. This is why we cannot definitely judge an individual who has seemingly followed God their entire life, and then apostatizes. The nature of the tree is what matters, and the nature of the tree is what God sees and knows. In this example we might see bushels of fruit, and assume that the individual is saved because they have produced a great amount of fruit, but we are blind to the true nature of the fruit. The true nature of the tree is determined by the mindset and attitude behind the fruit, not by the quantity of fruit it produces.
Scripture tells us that there will be many who stand before Jesus and claim to be an apple tree, but He will know their true nature. These individuals have spent their lives claiming to be apple trees, calling their fruit apples, when in fact they were pear trees only producing pears. They may be able to fool those around them, but they cannot fool God.
Matthew 7:21-23 - “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. Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’
It is interesting to note that nowhere in scripture do we find a situation where someone who believes they are not saved suddenly realizes they have been saved all along. The true believer has no need to worry about the assurance of their salvation, but they often worry, while the unbeliever who claims to be a christian is often confident in their salvation. This is not to mean that the believer should always be questioning their salvation, but rather that the evidence of concern for true belief is evidence in and of itself of true conversion.
Notice the words proclaimed by those who stand before God, deceived by their false salvation. They do not claim to have believed in Jesus for the remission of their sins. They do not claim to have repented of their sins in an effort to draw near in humility to God. These individuals point to their works as the basis of their salvation. They lay down their works before the throne of God claiming the presence of the fruit alone makes them worthy, but they discover it is the nature of the tree that truly matters. If one could lose their salvation based on their obedience, the individuals described in Matthew 7 would not have lost their salvation at all. They were seemingly obedient to the works and produced the fruits of righteousness. Except the fruit of righteousness will be proven not in works alone, but in the mindset behind the works. This is why our works are like filthy rags—because God desires a nature rooted in Him, which naturally produces the right fruit, rather than individuals trying to produce fruit from a different nature or attempting to change their nature to fit the fruit they create.
Conclusion: The Greatest Proof
The greatest proof against the denial of eternal security comes from an understanding of our fallen nature. To assert that we could lose our salvation, logically asserts that we can also earn it. There is no doctrine in scripture more clear than that of salvation by grace through faith. It began with God offering grace to Adam and Eve, covering their shame with the skins of an innocent animal. In light of humanities sin, only deserving death and hell, God floods the world but offers grace through Noah. Even though mankind fell into sin again, God brought about salvation to the world through a chosen nation. God provided this nation with a law system that showed their need for a savior, regardless of their obedience or disobedience to the law system. Then God sent His son to die on a cross for mankind, the greatest work in history, to save us from our sins once and for all. However, what Christ declared as finished on the cross, the denial of eternal security attempts to continue.
There are few false doctrines more offensive to God, than the denial of eternal security. This doctrine asserts that Christ’s work on the cross was not enough, and that our works are necessary to secure salvation. We are saved by Christ, and we are kept by Christ. John MaCarthur summarizes the argument of eternal security in one simple phrase. “If you could lose your salvation, you would.” Another way to look at this quote is the inverse, if you could earn your salvation, you would not. Just as the believer cannot earn their salvation, they also cannot lose it. This logical argument asserts that based on the Biblical structure of salvation, it is a physical impossibility, that eternal security can exist.
Scripture is clear: eternal life means eternal life. Something that is eternal cannot cease to exist. It is also evident that humanity is unable to save or sanctify itself, so we are unable to remove the work of salvation from our lives. Therefore, the only logical and Biblical conclusion to the matter of eternal security, is that once someone is truly saved, they are always saved. This truth implies that one must be truly saved to enjoy the promise of eternal security. True conversion, founded through faith in the grace offered by Jesus’s sacrifice on the cross, is the only way to salvation, and once an individual is saved they cannot logically and Biblically become unsaved.
To fully understand what the Bible says regarding the matter of eternal security, one must first define exactly what this idea entails. The doctrine of eternal security simply means that once an individual is saved, they will remain secure in their salvation for the rest of eternity. While this doctrine has been debated throughout all of church history, I believe scripture provides a clear stance on how a believer should view this matter.
It is always wise to review any matter of doctrine within the scope of church history. For the past 2,000 years, men and women of great intelligence and Biblical knowledge have studied deep into the matters of doctrine and theology. It would be foolish to quickly dismiss the common beliefs of historical church theologians. However, what is often found among the modern review of historical church teachings is a lack of cohesive understanding of the context in which the beliefs were formed. For example, most would agree that mankind was in a severely vulnerable position during the height of COVID-19 in 2020. While this position would be common belief, the individual living in Turkmenistan or North Korea at the time (two countries with zero reported COVID-19 cases), would find the world's situation to appear far less grim due to their context.
To claim that eternal security has only been orthodox in recent Christianity, is misleading at best. While it is true that it did not become a commonly taught doctrine until the reformation, this is not to mean that it was not believed prior. “In the early church, the doctrine of eternal security was not explicitly formulated, but foundational ideas were present” (McGrath, Christian Theology: An Introduction). In fact, one of the primary separations among Catholics and Protestants was this division of eternal security and the loss of salvation due to a failure of obedience or apostasy. While this was not a common matter of disagreement until the reformation, a matter not being taught as formative doctrine does not mean it was never believed.
An example of this can be found in the matter of homosexuality. Throughout church history the matter of sin regarding homosexuality was not a major point of contention. This discussion has always carried great uniformity among different denominations and beliefs that scripture clearly describes the practice to be a sin. However, in recent days the challenge of this belief has become far more prevalent. Hypothetically, if this challenge were to arise in the 5th century as a matter of serious discussion, students of the word of God would quickly begin providing lectures, articles, sermons, and debates on the matter of the sin of homosexuality. If that were the case, one might argue that the sin of homosexuality wasn’t taught until the 5th century, but the context shows it simply wasn’t a major topic of discussion at the time.
In fact, this view of church history suggests that homosexuality was so commonly understood as sin that it wasn't considered important enough to warrant serious discussion. The same process applies to the matter of eternal security. Though it is true that many of the foundational church fathers challenged the idea of eternal security, and this was not a core belief of orthodox Christianity until the reformation, this does not prove that eternal security was an unbiblical doctrine.
One primary argument against eternal security, is based on the foundation of common teachings by the early church leaders. However, it is unwise to simply believe the teachings of early church leaders only on the basis that they lived many years before us. If the denial of eternal security relies on the authority of early church teachers, then their other teachings must also be considered.
Clement of Rome (35-99 AD)
Clement of Rome was considered one of the earliest leaders of the church after the apostles. Following in Paul’s footsteps, Clement wrote letters in very similar content to the church at Corinth. However, close observation will show a deviance from the word of God within less than a century of the canon of scripture being completed.
"Our sin will not be small if we eject from the episcopate those who have blamelessly and holily offered its sacrifices. Blessed are those presbyters who, having finished their course before now, have obtained a fruitful and perfect release, for they have no fear that anyone will eject them from the place appointed for them." (1 Clement 44:4-5)
Clement, though predominantly teaching in accordance with scripture, focused heavily on a matter that was not taught within the word of God, the salvific authority of church hierarchy. Clement held a view of church organization that closely resembles today's Presbyterian and Catholic style of leadership. While on its own this may not be a great matter of discontent, this reliance on Church leadership hierarchy led to an unorthodox elevation of power among church leaders.
Ignatius of Antioch (35-108 A.D.)
Ignatius is another central figure in early christian doctrine. While many would refer to him and his teachings as foundational in the Christian faith, he too had many unorthodox beliefs. Ignatius held to a strong belief in the hierarchy of the church as well, even to the extent of believing that the church is necessary in matters of salvation.
"Let no one deceive himself: if anyone is not within the altar, he is deprived of the bread of God. For if the prayer of one or two has such strength, how much more does that of the bishop and the whole church?" (Letter to the Ephesians, 5:2)
Another particularly concerning matter of doctrine held by Igatius is the rejection of Jewish customs and practices in light of a fulfilled law in Christ. Ignatius went as far to teach that any practice of Judaism or Jewish religious customs could restrict salvation.
"For if we continue to live in the practice of Judaism, we confess that we have not received grace... It is monstrous to talk of Jesus Christ and to practice Judaism. For Christianity did not believe in Judaism, but Judaism in Christianity." (Letter to the Magnesians, 10:1-3)
Tertullian (155-240 AD)
Tertullian, one of the later fathers of the early church, was also a firm believer in the Christian’s ability to lose their salvation. While many respect Tertullian's authority and might accept the idea of losing salvation based on his teachings, doing so should also require observation of his other teachings.
Later in his life, Tertullian became associated with Montanism, a prophetic movement that emphasized new revelations from God. This movement also resulted in a strict adherence to morality, and an imminent return of Christ. He was also an early originator of the term “trinity;” however even in this, he was severely flawed in his doctrine. Tertullian believed that the son derived from the father, and was ontologically subordinate to him.
"The Father is the entire substance, but the Son is a derivation and portion of the whole, as He Himself acknowledges: ‘My Father is greater than I’ (John 14:28)." (Tertullian, Against Praxeas 9) Tertullian believed in many foundational beliefs of Catholicism, including an early version of transubstantiation, and full submission to the church and its leadership.
"There is no pardon for idolatry, murder, or adultery after baptism, for these are offenses of the flesh and the devil. After the grace of God has been received, a man should remain pure and avoid all sins that separate him from Christ." (Tertullian, On Modesty 21)
"For this is the manner in which the apostolic churches transmit their registers: as the church of Smyrna, which records that Polycarp was placed therein by John; as also the church of Rome, which makes Clement to have been ordained in like manner by Peter." (The Prescription Against Heretics, 32)
The argument here is not to villainize the early church fathers, but rather to make the point that belief in any doctrine, based solely on the fact that it was taught and believed by early church fathers, would also logically result in the belief that you must at least observe the rest of their teachings, which many would find to be heretical. A belief in any doctrine cannot be found only in the safety of common thought. One must always base their doctrine on scripture. While the early church fathers were integral in many areas of early church doctrine, and we should by no means dismiss all of their teachings, we must only hold to the teachings that also align with scripture. To believe a doctrine of any man, we must be able to prove that doctrine through scripture first.
It is also interesting to note that many of the early church fathers who rejected the belief of eternal security, also held to a position of full submission to church hierarchy. This reliance on Church leadership is in opposition to common orthodox Christianity, and was integral in the foundation of the Catholic church. Is it possible there is a correlation in the common belief of Catholic tradition and submission to the church, and the matter of eternal security?
Not only do these two matters correlate, they are directly related. One must look no further than the first century to discover why this is the case. Jesus was often challenged by the legalistic sect of Judaism found in the Pharisees. The common belief at the time was a rejection of matters of the heart, or desires to worship and glorify God, and instead to adhere to the strict letter of the law. The religious leaders quickly understood the great power gained in being the only one to interpret the law that was foundational to the entirety of Jewish life. Jesus battled this unscriptural viewpoint of the law, consistently challenging the authority of the religious leaders who deceived Jews into submission under their power based on a faulty interpretation and deliverance of the law.
Matthew 23:23-24 - "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithe of mint and anise and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith. These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone. Blind guides, who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel!"
The Church's Authority and Its Relation to Eternal Security
It is no coincidence that Christianity quickly modeled the same destructive patterns. Within decades of Jesus’s return to heaven, early church fathers had already begun using the teachings of Jesus and the apostles to create a higher level of submission under the church. This provides evidence as to why the canon of scripture was closed at this time. A close correlation of the rise of heretical church leadership positions, and the close of the canon of scripture is no coincidence. If inspired scripture were to be continued beyond our current canon, one would likely find a new common focus emerging of a reliance on the church and leadership, instead of Christ. This indicates that there is a deviance from inspired scripture to what was commonly believed after. A surface level observation of scripture would quickly uncover the drastic change in christian authority found from the canon of scripture to early church writings.
1 Timothy 2:5 – "For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus."
1 Peter 2:9 – "But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light."
Colossians 2:8 - "Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ."
Hebrews 4:16 – "Let us therefore come boldly to the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need."
Ephesians 1:22-23 – "And He put all things under His feet, and gave Him to be head over all things to the church, which is His body, the fullness of Him who fills all in all."
The common teaching of the ability to lose one’s salvation, correlates directly with the rise of authoritative power in the church. The reason for this is twofold. First, eternal security removes power from the church, and second, common Catholic doctrine does not logically agree with eternal security.
To believe in a system of faith that is reliant on church authority over the believer, even in matters of salvation, would result in a belief that one must be able to lose their salvation. If a believer truly had eternal security, the church would lose its power. What power does the church have over the one that can obtain and keep their salvation without the need of the church? What logic could teach that the church is an integral and necessary part of obtaining and keeping salvation, if there was no ability to lose it. While this on its own does not prove the matter of eternal security, it does highlight a few areas of contention.
First, a belief in the rejection of eternal security cannot logically be founded on the idea of beliefs commonly held among church leaders alone. Many church leaders believed in doctrines that are considered heretical today. This also brings to light the interesting correlation between the rise of church authority in Christianity, and the rejection of eternal security. It is no coincidence that these two belief systems became commonly accepted in a similar time frame.
This reliance on church authority in matters of salvation is in a way the foundational argument either for or against eternal security. If one can lose their salvation, there must be some concrete measure to determine what constitutes losing salvation. To determine what that measure is, one must first look at how salvation is obtained in the first place. This is where most christian faiths would hold similar beliefs, even among Catholicism, that salvation, according to scripture, is by grace through faith.
Ephesians 2:8-9 (NKJV): "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast."
Even among the majority of those who hold a strict church leadership authority would agree that salvation is found through the faith of one in the sacrifice of Christ, which is offered because of the grace of God. While some may differ in matters of baptism or election, the initial need of faith in Jesus is integral to salvation. If this is the case, at what point is there a deviation in the ability to keep that salvation?
Understanding the Nature of Salvation in Scripture
The initial point of deviation comes not in the origin and foundation of the faith, but rather in the resulting fruit of that faith. The argument against eternal security is often founded on the lack of fruit in a believer’s life. How can one claim to be a believer if there is little to no fruit of that conversion, and what is the Biblical measure to judge that fruit?
It is wise first to examine in more detail the origin of the faith. In what language does scripture use to describe this initial moment of conversion? It is important to note that the common means of salvation are found in scripture to be through a presentation of the gospel, a belief in that gospel, and then an immediate reflection of that faith.
Acts 8:35-38 -"Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning at this Scripture, preached Jesus to him. Now as they went down the road, they came to some water. And the eunuch said, 'See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?' Then Philip said, 'If you believe with all your heart, you may.' And he answered and said, 'I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.' So he commanded the chariot to stand still. And both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water, and he baptized him."
Acts 16:30-33 - "And he brought them out and said, 'Sirs, what must I do to be saved?' So they said, 'Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.' Then they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house. And he took them the same hour of the night and washed their stripes. And immediately he and all his family were baptized."
Acts 9:17-18 - "And Ananias went his way and entered the house; and laying his hands on him he said, 'Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus, who appeared to you on the road as you came, has sent me that you may receive your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit.' Immediately there fell from his eyes something like scales, and he received his sight at once; and he arose and was baptized."
Acts 8:12 - "But when they believed Philip as he preached the things concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, both men and women were baptized."
Acts 2:41 - "Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them."
Throughout scripture the moment of conversion includes a clear gospel presentation, a moment of belief, and then an expression of that salvation shown in some way. While the expression of the faith is important, scripture is clear that salvation comes at the moment of belief, not in the moment of the expression of that belief. The language used throughout scripture to describe this moment of conversion is particularly important in regards to the matter of eternal security.
The Threefold Nature of Salvation
The language used for the moment of salvation is consistently described as singular, final, and transformative. A singular moment of the past is often used to describe this moment.
Acts 8:12 - "But when they believed Philip as he preached the things concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, both men and women were baptized."
Acts 2:41 - "Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them."
There is a clear singular moment associated with conversion rather than a process or a continuous act. Nowhere does scripture indicate that salvation is a process or a continuous practice. No individual in scripture was added, then added again, or believed, then believed again. A clear language of singularity and finality is shown in the examples of conversion in scripture.
This single moment in the believer’s life, that is described as complete and final, is supported by the description of a drastic transformation. The language used in scripture to define this moment is one of drastic change.
2 Corinthians 5:17 - "Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new."
Romans 6:4 - "Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life."
Ephesians 4:22-24 - "That you put off, concerning your former conduct, the old man which grows corrupt according to the deceitful lusts, and be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and that you put on the new man which was created according to God, in true righteousness and holiness."
Titus 3:5 - "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit."
Scripture is clear that the moment of conversion includes not just a divergence from the former self, but rather a complete change in the former self. This is crucial to the matter of eternal security. If there is a drastic singular moment of transformation to God, then apostasy must result in another drastic transformation away from Him. While some would fall into this category, most would describe the loss of salvation to be a slow process instead of a singular moment. The process of obtaining salvation, must be similar to losing salvation if it is possible. If one can slowly drift from the faith, then they must also be able to slowly drift into it. Salvation cannot be singular, final, and transformative in obtaining, but then be ongoing, erratic, and inconsistent in losing it.
The Symbolism of Baptism and the Finality of Salvation
One of the most beneficial verses to understand this concept is Romans 6:4.
Romans 6:4 - "Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life."
The believer’s salvation is mirrored and founded in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ. When one is baptized after conversion, they are identified in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ. They were dead in their sins, as Christ was dead on the cross, they are buried into belief, as Christ was buried into the tomb, and they are raised to new life in Christ, just as he arose from the dead.
Just as there is no need for Christ to continue to die for the ongoing sins of the world, and continue to rise from the dead, there is no reason for the believer to continue to die in their sins, and be raised to spiritual life over and over again. The death of Christ was final, just as the death of the believer is final, and the resurrection of Christ was final, just as the resurrection of the believer is final.
Romans 6:7-11 - 7 For he who has died has been freed from sin. 8 Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him, 9 knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, dies no more. Death no longer has dominion over Him. 10 For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God. 11 Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Romans 6:4 is clear that we were buried with him, and raised with him, and the result of this is that we should walk in the newness of life. This process shows that the burying and resurrecting of the believer from spiritual death to spiritual life is final and complete. This is an action that has occurred and is finished. In contrast, the walking in the newness of life is not described as finished, but rather as something ongoing. The belief that one could lose their salvation, would make the argument that the walking in newness of life is just as integral to the salvation as the death and resurrection, however scripture separates these two matters. Continuing throughout Romans 6 gives more clarity on the matter.
Positional Holiness and Progressive Sanctification
Romans 6:5-6 - For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection, knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin.
Notice the strict language used to describe the new creation in christ. The believer’s old life, the old man is not only done away with, but he is crucified with Christ. This is not a matter of the old person of the believer becoming dormant, only suppressed by continuous obedience, but he is rather nailed to the cross of Christ. This indicates that the old man is in fact our sin personified, which is paid for by the blood of Christ, and done away with that we should no longer be slaves to it. Our old man is crucified, but it cannot be resurrected, instead it is our new life in Christ that is resurrected with him.
It is clear that a finality and transformation is present in the moment of true conversion, but what is the relationship of obedience to salvation?
Romans 6:12-14 - 12 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body, that you should obey it in its lusts. 13 And do not present your members as instruments of unrighteousness to sin, but present yourselves to God as being alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God. 14 For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace.
A difference in language is clear between the moment of conversion, and the continuous practice of obedience. While our old man is crucified with Christ, we should not let sin reign in our bodies. It is important to understand the idea of positional holiness. When one is saved, they are made positionally holy before God. Instead of God seeing our position as being present among sin, instead he sees the blood of Christ.
This does not mean however that we are free from the continuous present effects and temptations of sin. If this were the case then there would be no need for obedience at all, and if this were the case God would receive no glory in the progressive sanctification of our lives. Instead God makes us positionally holy through the blood of Christ, but then works through us for his glory to draw us away from sin, until the day we are not only positionally holy, but physically holy as well.
Hebrews 10:10 - "By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all."
2 Corinthians 5:21 - "For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him."
Galatians 5:16-17 - "I say then: Walk in the Spirit, and you shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh. For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; and these are contrary to one another, so that you do not do the things that you wish."
Scripture is clear that the process of continual sanctification and salvation is done by God and through God, however it is in our denial of sin, and our desire to live in obedience that causes him to work in us and through us. If we were solely responsible for saving ourselves, and continuing to sanctify ourselves apart from the work of God, then we could be just as responsible for losing that salvation. However, scripture tells us that it is not our work that saves or sanctifies us; it is the work of God in us, by our faith in Him. It is our responsibility, but it is God’s work.
Philippians 2:12-13 - "Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure."
It is apparent from scripture that the moment of salvation is one of singularity, finality, and transformation, only through the work of Christ by our faith in his power to save us and sanctify us. These facts cannot logically support the idea that one could, by their own lack of merit and disobedience, remove the work of Christ, which has been nailed to the cross once and for all.
The Promise of Eternal Life and the Nature of Salvation
Another important aspect of salvation in regards to eternal security, is the presence of eternal life. Eternal means forever.. By definition, and logic, it is impossible to lose something that is eternal. The rejection of eternal security would assert however, whether knowingly or unknowingly, that eternal life begins at the moment of physical death. This assumption would mean that eternal life only refers to physical life. If this were true, no man would actually have eternal life at the moment of conversion, because they would still face physical death. One cannot logically have eternal life, and also face the promise of death. The other alternative is to claim that eternal life begins at the moment of death, which would mean that the believer does not have eternal life at the moment of conversion, a belief that would be heretical.
John 5:24 - "Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life."
1 John 5:11-13 - "And this is the testimony: that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life.
1 John 5:11-13 reaffirms that the eternal life offered is not referring to a continuation of physical life, but rather the new beginning of eternal spiritual life in Christ, which continues past the moment of physical death.. This is important to the matter of eternal security, because it is impossible for the true convert to lose something that is eternal. By definition and description in the word of God, eternal life is eternal, it cannot cease to exist. It is not just a promise to continue physical life after death, but rather the new presence of life within the believer through the work of Christ.
The Challenge of Apostasy and the Fruits of Salvation
There is, however, a matter that casts doubt on the issue of eternal security. This area of contention can be seen through Matthew 7:16-20.
Matthew 7:16-20 - "You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Therefore by their fruits you will know them."
For the one who has a moment of seemingly genuine conversion, who may even follow God in obedience for decades, and then decides to completely apostatize and turn from God, is he still saved, has he lost his salvation, or was he never saved to begin with? These three options are the only possible conclusions.
The first potential conclusion is that this person is still saved. This suggests that someone who has a genuine moment of faith, lived in obedience to God for some amount of time, and then turned away from Him for the rest of their life, would still be welcome in heaven. The problem with this conclusion goes back to the assertion that eternal life is not simply physical, but spiritual. In this situation, the individual was promised eternal life in the future (after physical death), yet they did not obtain it until then. However; it has already been established that eternal life begins at the moment of salvation, not at physical death. Therefore, a person who apostatizes but later returns to the faith, would be asserting that they had eternal life, lost it, and then regained it,, which is logically impossible.
Scripture also supports the idea that an individual who shows no expressions of their faith has no faith.
Matthew 7:16-20 - "You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Therefore by their fruits you will know them."
James 2:17 - "Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead."
James 2:26 - "For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also."
1 John 2:3-4 - "Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. He who says, 'I know Him,' and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him."
There is a similar language found between the description of the apostatizing or disobedient “Christian” and the unsaved. Just as the unbeliever is dead in their sins, so is the one who claims to believe (or claims to have believed at one time) but is disobedient to God.
Measuring Disobedience and Its Relation to Salvation
This logically brings up the discussion of the measure of disobedience. Even the believer commits sins after conversion, but scripture tells us that one who claims to know Jesus but does not obey Him does not know Him at all. How can these two truths coexist?
1 John 1:8 - "If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us."
Romans 7:18-19 - "For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells; for to will is present with me, but how to perform what is good I do not find. For the good that I will to do, I do not do; but the evil I will not to do, that I practice."
The measure is not necessarily based on the amount, frequency, or intensity of the sins, but rather the mindset. This connects back to the earlier point that those who deny eternal security often rely on church authority and works to determine true conversion. For eternal security to be a false doctrine, there must be a heavy reliance on the letter of the law, and some measure of its obedience. There is a reason why scripture does not provide such a measure. There is nowhere in scripture that indicates how many sins a person must commit before their salvation is lost, or how serious those sins must be. Instead, scripture focuses on the mindset and heart of the individual.
Since there is no measure in scripture, those who reject eternal security must create that measure themselves, which is what the Catholic church, many early church leaders, and Jewish religious leaders have done throughout history. Since scripture does not provide us with a measure, religious leaders determined the measure of disobedience required for a denial of the faith themselves. In doing so, the religious leader is now responsible for bringing that individual back to faith by hearing their sins, and determining their worthiness to come back to Christ.
The Jewish leaders, in an effort to determine the measure of disobedience not found in the Old Testament law, crafted their own interpretations providing authority to those underneath their teachings. Scripture does not give us a measure of disobedience required to lose the faith, because there isn’t one, and every man-made measure provided throughout history results in a reliance on sinful men, to determine the worthiness of other sinful men, void of any foundation in scripture.
The conclusion is not that the believer does not sin, but rather that the believer does not have a mindset of sin. There is a significant difference between the mindset of the one who is dead in their sins, and the one who is alive in Christ. The mindset of the new creation in Christ is one of repentance and repulsion against sin, whereas the mindset and nature of the unbeliever is one of familiarity and comfort with sin. Again, scripture gives no measure by which we can judge the mindset of the individual. Instead, scripture places the focus on the results, rather than the response.
It seems evident that the individual who completely apostatized later in life, could not still be saved, and they could not have lost salvation that they once obtained. The only logical conclusion is that they were never saved to begin with. This is difficult for us to understand, until we understand this crucial fact, that we are incapable of measuring the heart. When God sent Samuel to anoint the next king of Israel, Samuel observed the potential candidates, but God told him…
1 Samuel 16:7 - “Do not look at his appearance or at his physical stature, because I have refused him. For the Lord does not see as man sees; for man looks at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart.”
God is the only one able to judge the heart, and He is the only one who can truly see the nature of the fruit tree.
The Fruit Tree Analogy: True and False Believers
An apple tree will always bear apples; no matter how much it tries, it will never bear a peach. The believer in eternal security asserts that it is physically impossible for an apple tree to grow a peach, while those who deny eternal security would argue the intensity of which the apple tree is trying to grow apples. When a tree begins to produce fruit, the nature of the tree is based on the fruit it produces, not on the measure of the fruit itself.
An apple tree does not cease to be an apple tree if it produces one apple or one hundred apples; it remains an apple tree. What changes the nature of the tree is the type of fruit it produces. A tree producing a different fruit is, by nature, another tree altogether. The true believer is an apple tree, and nothing can change the nature of the tree to make it something else. The quantity of apples produced does not change its nature, but it does determine how effective or beneficial the tree is.
Where God sees apples or pears, all we are able to see is fruit, and we are unable to judge the true nature of that fruit. This is why we cannot definitely judge an individual who has seemingly followed God their entire life, and then apostatizes. The nature of the tree is what matters, and the nature of the tree is what God sees and knows. In this example we might see bushels of fruit, and assume that the individual is saved because they have produced a great amount of fruit, but we are blind to the true nature of the fruit. The true nature of the tree is determined by the mindset and attitude behind the fruit, not by the quantity of fruit it produces.
Scripture tells us that there will be many who stand before Jesus and claim to be an apple tree, but He will know their true nature. These individuals have spent their lives claiming to be apple trees, calling their fruit apples, when in fact they were pear trees only producing pears. They may be able to fool those around them, but they cannot fool God.
Matthew 7:21-23 - “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. Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’
It is interesting to note that nowhere in scripture do we find a situation where someone who believes they are not saved suddenly realizes they have been saved all along. The true believer has no need to worry about the assurance of their salvation, but they often worry, while the unbeliever who claims to be a christian is often confident in their salvation. This is not to mean that the believer should always be questioning their salvation, but rather that the evidence of concern for true belief is evidence in and of itself of true conversion.
Notice the words proclaimed by those who stand before God, deceived by their false salvation. They do not claim to have believed in Jesus for the remission of their sins. They do not claim to have repented of their sins in an effort to draw near in humility to God. These individuals point to their works as the basis of their salvation. They lay down their works before the throne of God claiming the presence of the fruit alone makes them worthy, but they discover it is the nature of the tree that truly matters. If one could lose their salvation based on their obedience, the individuals described in Matthew 7 would not have lost their salvation at all. They were seemingly obedient to the works and produced the fruits of righteousness. Except the fruit of righteousness will be proven not in works alone, but in the mindset behind the works. This is why our works are like filthy rags—because God desires a nature rooted in Him, which naturally produces the right fruit, rather than individuals trying to produce fruit from a different nature or attempting to change their nature to fit the fruit they create.
Conclusion: The Greatest Proof
The greatest proof against the denial of eternal security comes from an understanding of our fallen nature. To assert that we could lose our salvation, logically asserts that we can also earn it. There is no doctrine in scripture more clear than that of salvation by grace through faith. It began with God offering grace to Adam and Eve, covering their shame with the skins of an innocent animal. In light of humanities sin, only deserving death and hell, God floods the world but offers grace through Noah. Even though mankind fell into sin again, God brought about salvation to the world through a chosen nation. God provided this nation with a law system that showed their need for a savior, regardless of their obedience or disobedience to the law system. Then God sent His son to die on a cross for mankind, the greatest work in history, to save us from our sins once and for all. However, what Christ declared as finished on the cross, the denial of eternal security attempts to continue.
There are few false doctrines more offensive to God, than the denial of eternal security. This doctrine asserts that Christ’s work on the cross was not enough, and that our works are necessary to secure salvation. We are saved by Christ, and we are kept by Christ. John MaCarthur summarizes the argument of eternal security in one simple phrase. “If you could lose your salvation, you would.” Another way to look at this quote is the inverse, if you could earn your salvation, you would not. Just as the believer cannot earn their salvation, they also cannot lose it. This logical argument asserts that based on the Biblical structure of salvation, it is a physical impossibility, that eternal security can exist.
Scripture is clear: eternal life means eternal life. Something that is eternal cannot cease to exist. It is also evident that humanity is unable to save or sanctify itself, so we are unable to remove the work of salvation from our lives. Therefore, the only logical and Biblical conclusion to the matter of eternal security, is that once someone is truly saved, they are always saved. This truth implies that one must be truly saved to enjoy the promise of eternal security. True conversion, founded through faith in the grace offered by Jesus’s sacrifice on the cross, is the only way to salvation, and once an individual is saved they cannot logically and Biblically become unsaved.
Pastor Zachary Sperback,
For more articles, sermons, and information about Scriptura Church visit us at scripturachurch.com or contact us at the info below.
Email - info@scripturachurch.com
Phone - (765) 566-7171
Email - info@scripturachurch.com
Phone - (765) 566-7171
Posted in Essays
Posted in eternal security, salvation, fruits, early church, early church fathers, sanctification
Posted in eternal security, salvation, fruits, early church, early church fathers, sanctification