A Defense of the Perseverance of the Saints - Part I
- Sam Storms
- Nov 7, 2006
- Series: Eternal Security
What it would mean
for God the Father
if a true believer
could fully and finally fall away
We will examine the issue of perseverance
by noting what it would mean for each of the three members of the Trinity should
it be possible for a Christian to fall fully and finally from salvation. This
lesson focuses on the Father. The next focuses on the Son and
Spirit.
What it would mean
for God the Father
1.
He would not be worthy of glory nor of our adoring praise and
worship
Jude 24-25
Here it says God is
able to keep you from
stumbling (cf. Rom. 16:25; Eph. 3:20). Left to ourselves, we
would stumble so as
to fall finally and forever. But the issue at stake isn't whether
you are able to
persevere but whether God is able to preserve and keep you. Here
we see that whereas we might be inclined to choose a sinful course of action
that would ultimately lead to our stumbling, God is able to intervene and
override our rebellious determination and to cause us to stand blameless before
him with great joy (cf. 1 Pt. 1:19).
It is because God is
able to do this that
he is worthy of "glory, majesty, dominion and authority, before all time, now
and forever." Our security is not dependent on our ability, but on God's. Our
security is not dependent on feeling secure or saved. Security is an
objective fact, not a
subjective feeling.
Note finally the connection between vv.24
and 25. How do we know God is able? We know because he is the God of glory,
majesty, dominion and authority. If God can't keep his own he is hardly worthy
of such accolades. If God can't preserve his people he is to be pitied, not
praised.
Romans 5:6-11; 8:32
See the notes on this text and the
argument from the greater to the lesser. I.e., if ever there were a time God
might forever turn his back on you it was when you were an alien, an orphan, an
enemy, hostile and outside the kingdom. But if he loved you
then, how much
more so
now that you are an
ally, a child, a friend and a citizen of the kingdom and family of God. If God
took the greatest step necessary to save you when you were his worst enemy, will
he not take whatever lesser steps are necessary to keep you saved now that you
are his child?
2.
His purpose in redemption would fail and unravel
Romans 8:29-30; Phil.
1:6
See the notes on Rom. 8:29-30. Again, the
objects of predestination are numerically identical with the objects of
foreknowledge ("those whom He foreknew, He predestined"). The
objects of calling are numerically identical with the objects of predestination
("those whom He
predestined, He called"), and so on. Those who are, as it were, as good as
glorified (note the past
tense) are those who,
in eternity past, were foreknown. Not one has been lost in the process.
This is another way of saying, as Paul
does, that "He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ
Jesus" (Phil. 1:6).
3.
His will would be frustrated and fail of fulfillment
John 6:38-40
The argument of Jesus in these verses
must be carefully noted:
On several occasions in John's Gospel
divine election is described in terms of God the Father giving certain persons
to God the Son (6:37, 39; 10:29; 17:1-2,6,9,24). In each of these cases the
giving of men to Christ precedes and is the cause of their receiving eternal
life. Those who are given to the Son include not only the present company of
disciples who believe in Jesus but also the elect of future ages who will come
to faith through the gospel. Jesus looks upon them as already his (John
17:20-21; see also John 10:16; Acts 18:10), even though they have not yet
believed in his name. They are his because they were given to him by the Father
in eternity past.
What is of special importance to us is
what Jesus says about how those whom the Father has given to him come to him and
whether or not those who come can ever lose their salvation. It will prove
helpful to look at this in terms of three
impossibilities.
(1) The first
impossibility. Jesus
says that it is morally and spiritually impossible for a person to come to
Christ apart from the "drawing" of that person by God the Father (6:44,65). May
I strongly emphasize the words morally and spiritually. The reason people do not
come to Christ is not because they lack a will, or a mind, or feelings, or even
lack opportunity and occasion. Their not coming to Christ is due to their moral
and spiritual refusal
to do so, a refusal in which they willingly and freely
delight. If they cannot
come it is not because God will not let them. It is because it is their nature
not to want to come. In sum, their not coming is not because of a physical
defect but because of a moral refusal.
(2) The second
impossibility. Jesus
also says that it is impossible for someone whom the Father "draws"
not to come to him.
He says in verse 37, "All that the Father gives Me shall come to Me"' In other
words, just as it is impossible for a person to come to Christ apart from the
Father drawing him/her, so also is it impossible for a person not to come to
Christ if the Father does draw him/her. Two crucial elements are involved here.
On the one hand, if a man is to be saved he must come to Christ. An active,
willing embrace of Jesus Christ in faith is essential. On the other hand, this
active, willing embrace of Jesus Christ is guaranteed by virtue of the Father
having given certain people to Jesus Christ. John Murray explains it this
way:
"Jesus does not say: all that the Father
giveth me are brought to me. He uses the term that denotes motion on the part of
the person - 'will come to me.' Coming to Christ is the movement of commitment
to Christ, coming that engages the whole-souled activity of the person coming.
It is not that he may come, not that he has the opportunity to come, not that he
will in all probability come, and not simply that he is empowered to come, but
that he will come.
There is absolute certainty; There is a divine necessity; the order of heaven
insures the sequence" (59).
Therefore, it is impossible that an elect
person, a "given-by-the-Father-to-the-Son" person, might fail to come to faith
in Christ. Or to put it positively, all the elect shall come to faith in Christ.
God's drawing of them is efficacious. The Father will never fail in drawing to
salvation those whom he has given to the Son.
Before we move to the third
impossibility, observe one more crucial fact. Since this drawing of people by
the Father to the Son is always efficacious, it cannot refer to the so-called
enabling grace of Arminianism. Do you recall what the Arminian believes? He
believes that God restores in all men a power or an ability sufficient to enable
them to come to Christ. Clearly this "universal enablement" cannot be the
drawing that Jesus describes, Why not? Because millions and millions of men and
women do not, in fact, come to Christ! And yet Jesus says that all who are given
by the Father are drawn by the Father and shall come to Christ. There is no
escaping the clear and unequivocal language of our Lord Jesus Christ: no one can
come unless drawn by the Father; but if one is drawn by the Father he shall come
.
(3) The third
impossibility. To the
previous two impossibilities Jesus adds a third. He has already said it is
impossible to come to him unless the Father draws. He has also said it is
impossible not to
come if the Father does draw. Now he says that when a man does
come through the drawing of the Father it is impossible for him to be cast out.
Look again at verse 37: "and the one who comes to me I will certainly not cast
out." The point is that those whom the Father gives to the Son, who therefore
come to the Son, will be received by the Son and shall never
perish.
The verb translated "cast out" in verse
37 is used several times in John (2:15; 6:37; 9:34f.; 10:4; 12:31) and always
means to cast out someone or something already in. Thus the emphasis here is not
so much on receiving the one who comes (although that is true enough in itself)
but on preserving
him. In other words, "6:37 argues not only that the ones given to Jesus will
inevitably come to him, but that Jesus will keep them individually . . . once
there" (D. A. Carson, 184).
Who would suggest that Jesus Christ would
refuse to accept what his Father has given him? If the Father was pleased to
make a gift of certain sinners to his most blessed Son, you may rest assured
that the Son will neither despise nor deny his Father's gracious generosity. The
certainty of ultimate and absolute salvation for those who come to the Son is
reaffirmed in verses 38-40. Their life in Christ is eternal and irrevocable
because that is the will of the Father; a will or a purpose that the whole of
Christ's person and work was designed to secure, a will or purpose that shall
ultimately be (Ps. 115:3; 135:6; Dan. 4:34-35; Eph. 1:11; Acts 4:28). What did
Jesus come to do? He came to do the Father's will (v.38). What is the Father's
will? The Father's will is that all those he has given to the Son be fully and
finally saved (v. 39). Oh, what a glorious thought it is,
that,
"My name from the palms of His
hands
Etemity will not
erase;
Impress'd on His heart it
remains,
In marks of indelible
grace."
And still again we
sing:
"Fear not, I am with thee, O be not
dismayed,
For I am thy God, I will still give thee
aid;
I'll strengthen thee, help thee, and
cause thee to stand,
Upheld by my gracious, omnipotent
hand."
"The soul that on Jesus hath leaned for
repose,
I will not, I will not desert to his
foes;
That soul, though all hell should
endeavor to shake,
I'll never, no never, no never
forsake!"
4.
It would mean that the Father has refused to answer the prayers of His
Son
John 17:11,15
5.
God, supposedly all-powerful, would be exposed as impotent and
helpless
John 10:28-29; Rom.
8:35-39
Jesus grounds his confidence in the
safety of his sheep in the incomparable omnipotence of his Father. It is because
there is no one greater or more powerful than God the Father that the sheep are
secure. Was Jesus mistaken in his assessment of the Father's power and
purpose?
Several observations regarding John 10
are in order:
a) "And they shall
never perish" - Lit.,
they shall not, by no means ever, perish. This is an absolute, unequivocal,
unassailable negative. Would Jesus have said this if in fact many of his sheep
shall perish? If so
much as one true child of God can ever perish, Jesus has deceived
us.
b) "And no one shall snatch them out of
my hand" - Not the attacking wolf (v. 12), nor the thieves and robbers (vv.
1,8), nor anyone. "No one" means "no one."
c) "My Father, who has given them to
me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's
hand" - God the Father himself stands behind God the Son in keeping the sheep in
the fold. Jesus holds us tightly. God holds us tightly. Who can steal from God?
Who has the strength or the cunning or the power to outwit and outmuscle
Almighty God?
d) In v. 28 Jesus says "no one
will snatch them"
whereas in v. 29 he says "no one can snatch them." Some may attempt to snatch
them. But they cannot succeed because the Son and the Father are united in
purpose and power to keep them secure.
e) "O.K., perhaps no one
else can snatch me
from God's hand. But what if I myself wriggle free and jump out of my own
accord?" Is your
power of choice greater than God's? Is your will more powerful than his? Look again
at Jesus' words: "No one . . . " = all . . . me, others, you! If eternal
security is false, then Jesus is saying: "No one can snatch them out of my
Father's hand; oh, that is, except for every one of the
sheep." PT: if you
mean everyone you
don't say no one!
Jesus doesn't say: "No one except for the person himself." In Rom. 8:38-39
all creatures are
excluded as a threat to loss of salvation. In John 10 the Creator
himself is excluded as
well.
If Jesus wanted to teach eternal
security, how could he have done it better or more explicitly than the way he
does it here? If you
wanted to assert eternal security, how could you do it better than by using the
words of Jesus in John 10?
Two objections:
(1) "They won't perish so long as they
remain sheep." But:
a) The text doesn't say that.
b) The assertion of the text is precisely
that sheep always do
remain sheep! The point of the text is: "Once a sheep, always a
sheep." If Jesus wanted
us to believe that some of his sheep could cease being sheep and suffer eternal
death, why did he say his sheep will never suffer eternal death and no one can
snatch them from him or from his Father? Surely Jesus is not guilty of the
crassest form of double-talk. In other words, “they shall never perish” = “they
shall always stay sheep!”
(2) "What if some sin or failure or
weakness or lapse of faith occurs repeatedly?"
a) How repeatedly? How much sin does it
take to lose one's salvation?
b) See again the argument of Rom. 5:8.
c) What does a good shepherd do with wandering sheep? See
Luke 15. He wouldn't be a good shepherd if he didn't restore them when they
wander.
d) Our security is ultimately dependent
on God's character, not ours. People say: "If we change, we lose our salvation."
No. We can't lose it, not because we can't change, but because
God can't.
6.
God, supposedly righteous, would be exposed as a liar and an
impostor
Hebrews 13:5-6 (cf. with
6:17-19)
7.
God would prove to be faithless
1 Cor. 1:7-9; 10:13; 1 Thess.
5:23-24
Many argue that salvation is tenuous
because of the potential for a believer to succumb to temptation, the ultimate
fruit of which may be loss of spiritual life. But Paul's point in 1 Cor. 10:13
is that "they will be able to endure because God will not permit the testing to
exceed their power of resistance" (Judith M. Gundry-Volf, Paul and
Perseverance: Staying in and Falling Away, [Louisville: Westminster / John Knox
Press, 1990], 72).