Category Archives: Calvinism

Can a true Christian lose salvation?

Posted on by
1

Years ago I read this article below by Greg Johnson (original source) and found it very helpful. When people have questions along this line (which they often do) I usually start by pointing them here. I like the article for its great simplicity and depths of insight. – John

One major debate within Christian circles is the question of whether or not a Christian can lose his or her salvation. Arminians argue that true believers can sin so much that they lose their faith and perish. Some Christians respond by arguing that once a person professes faith in Jesus, he is eternally secure in his salvation and—even if he commits complete apostasy (“falls away”) and vocally rejects Jesus Christ—will still go to heaven, for “once saved, always saved.” In light of the biblical doctrine of predestination, how should we understand the security we have under God’s care? There have been three main approaches to the question:

1. Classic Arminianism
• One must persevere in faith to be saved.
• True believers can lose their faith.
• Those dying without faith in Christ are condemned.
“The believer who loses his faith is damned.”

2. Antinomianism
• One need not persevere in faith to be saved.
• True believers can lose their faith.
• Those who lose their faith are saved, since they once believed.
“The believer who loses his faith is saved.”

3. Classic Calvinism
• One must persevere in faith to be saved.
• True believers cannot lose their faith, since it’s God’s gift.
• Those dying without faith in Christ are condemned.
• Those who “lose” their faith never had it to begin with.
• God will preserve true believers and they will be saved.
“The ‘believer’ who loses his faith never really had it—or at least it wasn’t in Jesus.”

Proponents of the first two approaches quote biblical references, but each must strain to explain away the other group’s biblical data. How can an Arminian read Romans 8, then tell true believers that they may screw up and go to hell??? Then again, how can Charles Stanley read Hebrews 6 and 10 and tell unbelievers who once professed faith not to worry, that they will be saved??? Any true biblical teaching must “fit” with ALL the biblical data, without pitting one text against another and without having to explain away a single “jot or tittle” of God’s inerrant Word. I believe that only the classical Calvinist model takes into account all of the biblical data.

Arminians are right when they say the Bible teaches that only those who persevere will be saved, and they’re right in accusing Antinomians of easy-believism and cheap grace. Antinomians (they wouldn’t use the term) are right in telling committed believers that they are secure in Christ and “once saved, always saved.” But both of these views are wrong is assuming that a true believer can lose his faith and fall away from Christ. Faith is “a gift of God—not by works, lest any man boast.” Paul was confident that, since Christ had begun a good work in believers, He would continue that work until completion (Phil. 1). John said that those who fell away were never really true Christians, since true believers don’t leave the faith (1 John 2:19).

Scripture teaches that believers must persevere until the end, but also that believers will persevere until the end by God’s grace. As the Westminster Assembly concluded, Christians might temporarily yield to Satan’s temptations, even to excess, but like Peter when he denied Christ three times, God will still restore and preserve the faith of the Christian, a faith which God gave in the first place! Peter went on to be chief among the apostles! Two biblical principles must be held side-by-side:

1. You Must Persevere until the End: God’s Requirement of His People
God does not merely command us to begin to believe for a time, and then fall away. He requires us to continue to believe until the end, living lives of repentance and covenant faithfulness. Granted, He does not ask for a perfect faith, but He does ask for a real faith, one that produces real, lasting change.
• Colossians 1:21-23
• 1 John 1:5-10; 3:3-6
• Hebrews 10:26-31
• Hebrews 12:1

2. You Will Persevere Until the End: God’s Preservation of His People
We will persevere because God preserves us. God will keep us from falling—not one will be lost of all those who belong to the Son. True believers are not able to leave Christ, for Christ is at work within them.

• John 6:38-40
• John 10:28-29
• Romans 8:28-39
• Philippians 1:4-6
• Philippians 2:12-13
• 1 John 2:19

This first set of texts cannot be used to refute the second (Arminianism); nor can the second set of texts be used to refute the first (cheap grace). The point that makes the two compatible is the biblical teaching that faith (while commanded of everyone) is a gift from God to His elect. If faith is simply a human action of a free will, then it can be lost. But if saving faith is God’s gift, then it cannot be lost.

Can professing Christians fall away? Yes, and they will perish.

Can true Christians fall away? No, for they are kept by the invincible power of God in Christ.

The Bible teaches us that professing Christians who leave the faith were never truly believers (1 John 2:19; and notice the qualification even in Hebrews 10:39).

“They, whom God hath accepted in his Beloved, effectually called, and sanctified by his Spirit, can neither totally nor finally fall away from the state of grace, but shall certainly persevere therein to the end, and be eternally saved.” —Westminster Confession of Faith 17.1, drafted by the Westminster Assembly at the request of the British Parliament 1643-47

Limited Atonement

Posted on by
Reply

In his book Our Sovereign Savior, Roger Nicole explains the main teachings of the Reformed Faith. Chapter 5 of the book concerns the subject of “Particular Redemption.”

Here are a few of the good points he makes:

* When it comes to the debate surrounding “limited atonement” the value of the death of Christ is not in question. There are no limits to the value of Christ’s death: it is sufficient to save anyone and everyone who trusts in Christ.

* The death of Christ blesses everyone in human history and creation at large. There is no limit to the extent of these blessings which are often referred to as “common grace.”

* If a person doesn’t believe that the atonement of Christ is limited only to effectually saving the elect then a that person is only left with one theological option: universal salvation of all people.

* The real issue is the design or intent of the Father when he sent his Son to die on the cross and purchase redemption for sinners.

* Since all sinners do not get saved then there is either a limit in the effectiveness of the atonement or a limit in its intent. Was God doing something to save all sinners and failed? Or was God purchasing the salvation of the elect and succeeded? Historical, orthodox Christianity teaches that God had a limited intent designed for the atonement of Christ: Christ was to die for and purchase and secure the salvation of the elect. The Cross was absolutely successful in accomplishing the particular intent for which it was designed.

* Lorraine Boettner compared this matter to two bridges: (1) one is a narrow bridge that goes all the way across the water, and (2) the other is a very wide bridge that doesn’t go all the way across the water. What good is the second bridge? It is as good as a theology that teaches the atonement was for all sinners but didn’t actually save any.

* The term “redemption” refers to the payment of the full price to purchase a sinners salvation. If the atonement didn’t actually pay the full price and didn’t actually redeem sinners then what good is it?

* The term “propitiation” refers to the atonements satisfying effects upon God’s wrath. If the death of Christ was a propitiation for all sinners then why is God still angry with sinners?

* The term “reconciliation” refers to the healing of a relationship. Since sinners are still considered enemies of God then what good was the atonement?

* The Bible teaches that Jesus Christ died as a substitute for sinners upon the cross, suffering the wrath of God on their behalf. Biblical theology refers to this as the “penal, substitutionary atonement” and “federal headship.” Federal headship refers to the fact that Christ lived and died as our representative before God.

* The doctrine of “universal atonement” teaches that the death of Christ was for all everyone but didn’t actually save anyone. Therefore “universal atonement” completely undermines the biblical definitions of redemption, propitiation, reconciliation, substitution, and federal representation.

* Universal Atonement proponents are forced to defend the concept of the Father electing some sinners; but Jesus wanted to die for all sinners; but the Holy Spirit sides with the Father and against the Son and only saves some sinners.

* May no one ever think that definite atonement prevents anybody from coming, harms anyone or takes from anybody anything that belongs to him or her. On the contrary, definite atonement is a doctrine which shows a finished, accomplished salvation.

HT: Jason Robertson

Three Quotes on Monergism vs. Synergism

Posted on by
2

Excerpts from R. C. Sproul – What is Reformed Theology?:

The doctrine of justification by faith alone was debated during the Reformation on the deeper level of monergistic regeneration. This technical term must be explained. Monergism is derived from a combination of a prefix and a root. The prefix mono is used frequently in English to indicate that which is single or alone. The root comes from the verb “to work.” The erg of monergy comes into our language to indicate a unit of work or energy. When we put the prefix and root together, we get monergy or monergism. Monergism is something that operates by itself or works alone as the sole active party. Monergism is the opposite of synergism. Synergism shares a common root with monergism, but it has a different prefix. The prefix syn comes from a Greek word meaning “with.” Synergism is a cooperative venture, a working together of two or more parties.

When the term monergism is linked with the word regeneration, the phrase describes an action by which God the Holy Spirit works on a human being without this person’s assistance or cooperation. This grace of regeneration may be called operative grace. Cooperative grace, on the other hand, is grace that God offers to sinners and that they may accept or reject, depending on the sinner’s disposition.

Monergistic regeneration is exclusively a divine act. Man does not have the creative power God has. To quicken a person who is spiritually dead is something only God can do. A corpse cannot revive itself. It cannot even assist in the effort. It can only respond after receiving new life. Not only can it respond then, it most certainly will respond. In regeneration the soul of man is utterly passive until it has been made alive. It offers no help in reviving itself, though once revived it is empowered to act and respond.

Here we reach the ultimate point of separation between semi-Pelagianism and Augustinianism, between Arminianism and Calvinism, between Rome and the Reformation. Here we discover whether we are utterly dependent on grace for our salvation or if, while still in the flesh, still in bondage to sin, and still dead in sin, we can cooperate with grace in such a way that affects our eternal destiny.

Arminianism reverses the order of salvation. It has faith preceding regeneration. The sinner, who is dead in sin and in bondage to sin, must somehow shed his chains, revive his spiritual vitality, and exercise faith so that he or she may be born again. In a very real sense regeneration is not so much a gift in this schema as it is a reward for responding to the offer of grace. The Arminian argues that in this universal prevenient grace is primary, in that God first offers grace for regeneration. God takes the initiative. He makes the first move and takes the first step. But this step is not decisive. This step may be thwarted by the sinner. If the sinner refuses to cooperate with or assent to this proffered grace, then grace is to no avail.

In a related article Alan Kurschner writes:
The “Calvinist vs. Arminian” debate is substantially a debate between what is called “monergism” and “synergism.” There is no third option (unless one is willing to affirm Pelagianism). For those who are new to the Calvinist-Arminian debate, the following is a primer on the two perennial branches of theological systems in Christianity. Or to put it another way, there are two very different ways for believers to view their salvation.

In general, the first type (the Arminian-Synergist) affirms what is called “synergism.” Synergists believe that two forces in the universe are necessary to bring about regeneration in the life of the sinner. In specifics, the two forces at work (cooperation) that are necessary to bring about regeneration, or spiritual life, is the will of man and the Holy Spirit (grace).

To put it another way, the work of the Holy Spirit is dependent on the creature’s will, hence, “synergism” (working together). These individuals will sincerely say, “I believe in grace alone.” But in reality, they believe that grace is not alone (sufficient), but that man’s will is necessary for regeneration to be effective.

It could be said that these individuals are “functional” Arminians because even though some will deny the label, their theology functions synergistically (thus, how they identify themselves is inconsistent with what they teach and believe).

The second group of believers (the Calvinist-Monergist) affirm what is called “monergism.” Monergists believe that there is only one force in the universe (grace alone) that brings about regeneration in the life of the sinner. In specifics, because of the deadness of man’s spiritual state, his moral inability, the Holy Spirit performs the miracle of spiritual resurrection (regeneration) in that person, hence, “monergism” (one work). Grace is sufficient to be effective, and does not depend on some action of man.

In other words, the Holy Spirit does not merely whisper in the hardened sinner’s ear, hoping that the rebel sinner will “cooperate”; rather, while the sinner is in a state of hardness and rebellion, the Holy Spirit penetrates in the will of man and performs the miracle of spiritual life (regeneration). That is grace alone. Faith does not precede regeneration, regeneration precedes faith.

But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions– it is by grace you have been saved. Ephesians 2:4-5

Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.” John 1:12-13

He who belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God.” John 8:47

Arminians cannot affirm monergism (grace alone); they must always have the creature’s will as the final determiner of their destiny, not God. Inconsistently, Arminians pray (without knowingly) Calvinisticly, “God, change my unbelieving relative’s heart.” I have never heard them pray, “God, only whisper in my relative’s ear, but don’t change their heart unless you’ve been given permission.” But the Calvinist prays and affirms biblical truth consistently.

John Hendryx:
Synergists teach ‘… and as many as believed were ordained to eternal life.’ but the Bible teaches ‘And as many as were ordained to eternal life, believed.’ (Acts 13:48)

Synergists teach ‘…no one knows the Father except those who choose the Son.’ But the Bible teaches that ‘no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal Him’ (Matt 11:27) They are the ones who ‘choose’ the Son.

Synergists teach that ‘All can come to Christ of their own free will’, but Jesus teaches that ‘no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.’ (John 6:65) and all whom He grants will come (John 6:37)

Synergists teach that ‘you are not Christ’s sheep because you do not believe’, but Jesus teaches that ‘you do not believe because you are not of My sheep.’ (John 10:26)

Synergists teach that ‘the reason you are not of God is because you are unwilling to hear and believe God’s words.’ Jesus, on the other hand, taught, ‘The reason why you do not hear [God’s words] is that you are not of God.” (John 8:47)

Synergists teach that ‘salvation is so easy a cave man can do it” but the Bible teaches that “What is impossible with man is possible with God.” (Luke 18:27)

In the Divine economy men are responsible to believe the gospel, but are morally impotent to do so from their own native resource. This inability (due to our intimate solidarity with Adam’s sin) is something we are culpable for, like owing a debt we cannot repay. So God has every right to call us all to account to ‘repay our debt’, so to speak, even though we do not have the resources to do so. The Church is to call all men to repent and believe the gospel (an imperative) but no one believes. But God, in his great mercy, still has mercy on many, opening their hearts to the gospel that that might believe.

To this sometimes a synergist often quotes “whosoever will may come” to which we reply that this quote does not teach an indicative of what we are able to do, but rather, teaches what we ‘ought’ to do. As Martin Luther said, “Does it follow from: ‘turn ye’ that therefore you can turn? Does it follow from “‘Love the Lord thy God with all thy heart’ (Deut 6.5) that therefore you can love with all your heart? What do arguments of this kind prove, but the ‘free-will’ does not need the grace of God, but can do all things by its own power…But it does not follow from this that man is converted by his own power, nor do the words say so; they simply say: “if thou wilt turn, telling man what he should do. When he knows it, and sees that he cannot do it, he will ask whence he may find ability to do it…” Luther BW,164