If We Sin Wilfully

Let It Say What It Means

The Book of Hebrews was written specifically to warn Christians against apostasy.  The writer does this by showing Christ’s superiority over all other person's, events, or “isms”.  

The message of the book is abundantly clear, and yet Bible scholars who insist on unconditional eternal security argue away the straightforward message of the book.  

The Book of Hebrews is a treatise, its main purpose is to argue against the doctrine of unconditional eternal security.  In this book, there are many warnings against apostasy.  

In fact, Hebrews has so much to say about it that it would be impossible to use all of the arguments in what is to be a decent-sized post. 

To believe Wuest's following paragraph is to deny the truth presented by the Scriptures.  The Epistle to the Hebrews is unique among the New Testament books in that the entire book is concerned with a situation that obtained in the first century, which does not exist today.…the application of this basic interpretation, must apply only to the first century conditions in this case there can be no secondary application for today.

In opposition to this opinion, Jerome Smith writes the following.  To suggest, as many contemporary expositors do, that the warnings against apostasy in the book of Hebrews were addressed only to Jewish Christians who were in danger of forsaking Christianity and falling back into Judaism, and therefore cannot apply to believers today, is at best a shaky assumption, and at worst is taking away from the Word of God by wrongly rendering its warnings inapplicable to present day believers.

In this respect, it can also be pointed out that the canon of Scriptures was not decided on until the fourth century.  Why would the Church fathers have included the letter to the Hebrews, in the canon, if it were intended for first-century Christians only?! 

Another suggestion that many contemporary expositors make is that the people written to were associates of the Christians, but that they had never been born again.  Therefore, the warnings against apostasy are to non-believers only.  

If the book is read carefully, and without forcing one’s own theological viewpoints into the words given, that theory is easily shown to be false!

It is agreed that the Book of Hebrews has much to say about apostasy.  What is not agreed on, is, were the recipients Christians or non-Christians.  If that question were answered, the whole issue of unconditional eternal security could finally be put to a permanent rest.  

If one reads the Book of Hebrews, without making it say all kinds of things, that are not written there, it becomes obvious that the book of Hebrews was written to a mixture of young and mature Christians.  

Obviously, then the debate should be settled in favour of eternal security and not in favour of unconditional eternal security.  However, not every Bible student is willing to let the Bible speak for itself if what the Bible says does not agree with his or her theories.

Matthew Henry’s stance on the book of Hebrews is this: The design of this epistle was to persuade and press the believing Hebrews to a constant adherence to the Christian faith, and perseverance in it.

Let us look at a few verses in Hebrews to try to show that the readers, to whom this book was written, were actually Christians, not just professed Christians.  If it can be shown that they were real Christians, then the theory of unconditional eternal security has no validity in the book of Hebrews, or indeed, in the Bible’s teachings.

A Letter to Hebrew Christians

Therefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our confession, Christ Jesus. 3:1 KJV

Therefore, brothers and sisters, holy partners in a heavenly calling, consider that Jesus, the apostle and high priest of our confession. 3:1 NRSV 

It is obvious that the writer thought of his readers as being his brothers and sisters in Christ.  However, the argument is made that he meant fellow Jews and not born again believers.  

It is difficult to maintain the argument that he meant brothers in the flesh, (Jews) for the writer knew that the Israelites, as a nation were not holy.  Also by using the words, our high priest, he confines the statement to born again believers.

Mr Smith denounces the theory that Christians cannot “fall away”.  He writes, The Scripture frequently warns against the possibility of apostasy as a very real danger. Logically, only real believers can apostatize, unbelievers cannot. These warnings in Hebrews must not be explained away as applicable only to Hebrew Christians who were at that time in danger of falling back into Judaism, if only because the same warnings are given with equal urgency to the Gentile Christians to whom Paul wrote in his several epistles.

For if we sin wilfully after having the knowledge of the truth, there is now left no sacrifice for sins: But a certain dreadful expectation of judgment, and the rage of a fire which shall consume the adversaries. Heb 10:26-27 

How much more blatant could the writer have been?  He pointedly says if we sin wilfully after having the knowledge of the truth we have no more hope for another sacrifice for sins!

But we are not of those who draw back to perdition, but of those who believe to the saving of the soul. 10:39 

About this verse, Wuest writes, The Word of God is very clear in its statements to the effect that a person once saved can never be lost. Therefore, this person who draws back to perdition must be an unsaved person. 

Perhaps, if he had read the verse immediately preceding this one he would have realised his error.  In the Greek text, it flows like this, but the just man of me by faith will live, and if he withdraws, is not well pleased the soul of me in him.  But we are not of withdrawal to destruction.   

In the NIV that same verse reads like this, But my righteous one will live by faith, and if he shrinks back, I will not be pleased with him, But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed. The writer of the book says nothing about pretending to follow Christ.  

Obviously, according to these words, those who have lived by faith can be destroyed if they shrink back.

It seems, therefore, that there really are no valid arguments in the Scriptures that substantiate the theory of unconditional eternal security.  

Mr Thiessen, in his book of theology, devotes 7 pages to the topic of ‘perseverance’.  Perseverance is another way of saying eternal security.  In those seven pages, he makes only scant reference to those verses that contradict his theory with words such as, if and but.  He would rather just ignore those Scripture verses that do not suit his taste. 

Let Mr Jerome Smith close the topic.  We need to exercise care in formulating our doctrinal systems that we do not wrest Scripture by arbitrarily denying even the possibility of what so many texts repeatedly warn against.

Warning after Warning after Warning!

The Choice Is Ours

The continuing argument is that Christians do not have a choice as to whether or not they will continue to be Christians.

Thiessen quotes Boettner to prove his point.  Since it is a change in the inner nature, it is in a sphere in which man does not have control.  If this is true why do evangelicals, like Mr Thiessen, urge sinners to repent of their sins?  Since, according to him, in the inner nature, where the new birth happens, people have no control over the matter, in any case.  

We may as well not urge people to repent and turn to Christ because, according to this theory, Jehovah will work it out the way He wants to anyway.

People who believe in the free will of man must surely see the inconsistency of believing that a non-Christian can choose for himself, whether or not, to become a Christian, but that a Christian loses his free will at his conversion. 

The same people who insist that Christians have the choice in every matter of their spiritual life; whether to live for Christ or to live selfishly their entire life, do not give Christians the same volition as to their eternal well-being. This seems inconsistent and certainly anti-biblical!

For this reason, when I could no longer endure it, I sent to know your faith, lest by some means the tempter had tempted you, and our labour might be in vain. 1 Thes. 3:5. 

Paul calls them, brothers in Christ. 1:3.  Then he voices this concern, about the Thessalonians losing their faith.  If the loss of salvation is not possible, how could Paul possibly imagine that his labour would be in vain?  

Galatians 1:11 and 1 Thessalonians 1:3 tells us that Paul thinks of these men as his brothers in Christ.  If they were his brothers in Christ and if the doctrine of unconditional eternal security were true, his work could not possibly be in vain, because surely these men would someday be in heaven because of Paul’s labours. 

Even in this context, Paul throws in a warning and says, For we now live, if you continue to stand firm in the Lord. 

About 1 Thes. 3:5  Mr Smith writes, To what purpose are the warnings to believers in Scripture, if what is warned against is not possible in the first place? 

From The Apocalypse

In each of the following verses, the thought is, To him who overcomes.  

Be faithful until death, and I will give you the crown of life. He who overcomes shall be clothed in white garments, and I will not blot out his name from the Book of Life. Rev. 2:10. 

He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To him who overcomes I will give to eat from the tree of life, which is in the midst of the Paradise of God. Rev. 2:7.

He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. He who overcomes shall not be hurt by the second death. Rev. 2:11.

He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To him who overcomes I will give some of the hidden manna to eat. And I will give him a white stone, and on the stone a new name written which no one knows except him who receives it. Rev. 2:17. 

He who overcomes shall be clothed in white garments, and I will not blot out his name from the Book of Life; but I will confess his name before My Father and before His angels. Rev. 3:5.   Here the Lord very pointedly says that the overcomer’s name will not be blotted from the Book of Life.  From that statement, one must infer that a Christian's name can be blotted out of the book of life. 

Behold, I am coming quickly! Hold fast what you have, that no one may take your crown. He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God. Rev. 3:11. 

To him who overcomes I will grant to sit with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne. Rev. 3:21. 

He who overcomes shall inherit all things, and I will be his God and he shall be My son. Rev. 21:7.  Even our son-ship is said to be dependent on our overcoming. 

The conclusion one must arrive at is that eternal security is a conditional promise.  Unconditional Eternal security is a doctrine that fits into the much overused "if it feels good, preach it" category.

Conditional Eternal Security

If You Hold Fast

 Continuing on where the previous post left off:

Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you—unless you believed in vain. 1 Cor. 15:1-2 

Paul states three positives about the Corinthian Christians.  

1. He calls them brethren. By this, Paul means fellow Christians. 

2. He says, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received.  They have received the Word of God as Paul preached it and they were born again.

3. He says, by which (word) also you are saved if you hold fast that word which I preached to you. 

These things are in place, the people are Christians and yet Paul lays it on the line by saying, if you hold fast.  Seemingly, this leaves no room for the theory of unconditional eternal security but in spite of that, Wycliffe says, Believed in vain does not indicate loss of salvation as a possibility. The apostle means…that a faith that does not persevere is not true saving faith.  

Paul, however, said that they were saved.  Why do some say that the apostle does not mean what he said?

You are being saved (as Wuest has it).  Both Thiessen and Wuest have already said that being saved is a continuing action.  It is not, you have been saved.  It says that the continuing salvation pertains only if you hold firmly.  

The people He is writing to already believe, Paul said so by calling them brethren, still, he is concerned that they might believe in vain.  In other words, lose their salvation.

you who were once estranged and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds, he has now reconciled in his fleshly body through death, so as to present you holy and blameless and irreproachable before him - provided that you continue securely established and steadfast in the faith, without shifting from the hope promised by the gospel. Col. 1:21-23 

Paul said he has now reconciled you.  That is, they have received the new life. He did not write: you fooled some people and caused them to think that you had accepted Christ, but actually, you never did.  This, however, is the flavour of the argument that is used by those who insist on unconditional eternal security. 

Here, again, the whole promise rests on these words, provided that you continue securely established and steadfast in the faith.  If you don't continue, of course, the opposite is true.

Hold On Tightly

For I know whom I have believed and am persuaded that He is able to keep what I have committed to Him until that Day. Hold fast the pattern of sound words which you have heard from me, in faith and love which are in Christ Jesus. That good thing which was committed to you, keep by the Holy Spirit who dwells in us. 2 Tim. 1:12-14.

Verse 12 is often used as a proof text for unconditional eternal security; that is erroneous Bible teaching.  In the context, the argument for unconditional eternal security takes a real beating.  Notice that the following two verses each start with a warning.

verse 13, Hold fast the pattern of sound words. 
verse 14, That good thing which was committed to you, keep. 

If falling from grace were not possible, warnings like this would be redundant. What Paul is saying is that God is capable of guarding that which he (Paul) had entrusted to Him, but that Jehovah will not force people against their wishes, just like He did not force people at their initial repentance.  This verse is an argument for conditional eternal security but not for unconditional eternal security.

But the one who endures to the end shall be saved. Mat. 24:13.

Concerning Matthew 24:13, Mr Thiessen writes, To this we simply reply that that has nothing to do with the main argument. If a man is saved he will continue; if he isn’t saved he will not continue.  

Surely, a person must have his mind closed to insist that this has nothing to do with the main argument.  This is the main argument of this verse!  What Christ is saying, is that if you do not endure you will lose your salvation.  How could one quit enduring if one had never been involved in that which one is enduring?

And you will be hated by all for My name’s sake. But he who endures to the end will be saved. Mark 13:13.

The only way to believe in unconditional eternal security after reading these verses is to read them wearing mental blinders.  Christ makes the contrast very clear by using the word, but.  To have started out on the right path and then turn on to the wrong path does not lead a person to the right destination.

If we endure, We shall also reign with Him. If we deny Him, He also will deny us. 2 Tim. 2:12

The words to notice here are, If we endure.  Wuest has translated them as, If we are persevering.  It seems almost pointless to ask, what if we do not persevere in the faith.  Still, Paul answers by saying, If we deny Him, He also will deny us.  

Some argue that in this phrase, Paul is speaking of those who had never accepted Christ as their Lord.  However, by using that line of reasoning one is completely leaving the words, If we endure, out of the equation.  Here the word, we, refers to those who already are Christians, as is clearly shown in the text preceding this statement, for if we died with Him, we shall also live with Him.

The next post will continue with more Bible verses to prove that the doctrine of unconditional eternal security is not found in the Bible.