Once in Grace Always in Grace?

I have read a lot of arguments that Christians can fall away, but at least some of them are really inconclusive. You must both prove that the person who was saved really lost their salvation and you must prove that they really were saved in the first place.

Inconclusive “Insecurity” Arguments

Even if someone is appointed to be Elder in the church (Acts 20:17, 28-30) or even an apostle (i.e. Judas), that doesn’t necessarily mean that that person was ever in grace to begin with.

In other places it may not be speaking about individuals. The branches that were grafted back in (Romans 11:13-23) were not people who had been saved and then lost, but its talking about Israel being lost as a nation or people. The seven churches in Revelation are another example of this. In other places it may just be speaking of the world as a whole (e.g., I Timothy 4:1).

The Bible teaches that there are different rewards given in eternity for one’s service to Him (Matthew 16:27, Luke 19:12-27, I Corinthians 3:12-15). So any passage, such as II John 1:8, which only indicates the loss of reward, but not eternal punishment, is not a valid argument that any believer’s salvation is not eternally secure.

Those who don’t believe in (unconditional) eternal security are not saying that God doesn’t know who is going to be saved and who isn’t. Some of the verses Calvinists use are only acknowledging this fact. But what then do we really mean when we say that a saved person can’t fall away? We are saying that if one had died while in grace, that person would have been saved, but because he walked away from the grace he had received, his salvation is lost.

The Bible speaks of some specific individuals who believed and then were (possibly) lost. The first example is Simon the Sorcerer. It clearly says that he believed (Acts 8:13) and later Peter said to him, “Thy money perish with thee…Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right in the sight of God. Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee.” (Acts 8:20-23) The word for perish implies eternal condemnation. We don’t even know if Simon was ultimately saved or not. He asks them to pray for him and doesn’t even say whether they did or didn’t. Even though it said Simon believed, it seems like his attitude was wrong from the start and therefore his status was questionable. James 2:19 says, “Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.” So I guess even this passage is really inconclusive.

The problem with I Corinthians 9:26-27 is twofold. Does becoming a “castaway” really mean the loss of one’s eternal salvation? How can you really be sure? Furthermore, Paul says that he keeps his body under subjection so that he WON’T become a castaway. One could argue that since he has made his decision to do so, the result is that he can’t fall away. Furthermore, one could speculate that the one who doesn’t make this decision isn’t really in grace.

Galatians 5:4 says, “Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.” This sounds like a pretty promising verse, but does “fallen from grace” really mean a loss of salvation?

It’s hard to find a Scripture that really proves this conclusively. Be careful.

Inconclusive “(Unconditional) Security” Arguments

Likewise, the verses that the (unconditional) “eternal security” crowd uses also seem very inconclusive. A sheep is always a sheep, but it doesn’t necessarily have to always be one of HIS sheep. And just because no one can pluck you out of God’s hand (John 10:25-30), doesn’t necessarily mean that you can’t leave the safety of God’s hand voluntarily. John 6:37 says, “All the father has given to me shall come unto me and he that comes to me I shall in no wise cast out". Again, Jesus will not cast you out, but you can leave of your own volition. I John 2:19 only proves that SOME people in church are false converts (the ones who “went out”). And the above argument about the Bible referring to certain groups of people (the Church in particular) instead of individuals also applies to some supposedly Calvinistic verses (e.g., Philippians 1:6, I Peter 1:4-5, Ephesians 1:5).

Then there’s Romans 8:35-39. One way to explain this verse is to say that it does not teach that we can never be separated from the salvation which is in Christ because love and salvation are two different things. (God loves even the sinner, even if he knows that he will not be one of the ones who will repent and be saved in the end. See Matthew 5:43-44.) An explanation which I prefer, however, is that it does not teach that YOU cannot separate yourself from the love of Christ even though it teaches that all of these other things can’t. This exception can be taken for granted.

Conclusive Arguments

Because the list of inconclusive passages that both sides use seems almost endless, I will stop here and now focus on the ones which really address the issue. I do believe that it is possible for a real Christian to fall away (and thereby lose eternal salvation once had) and here are the verses that are most convincing to me:

Hebrews 10:26-27 indicates that someone can “receive the knowledge of the truth” but then there is only a “certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation” because “there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins” because they sinned “willfully”.

James 5:19-20 says, “Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him; Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.”

II Peter 2:20-22 says, “For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them. But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.”

Some passages indicate that not only can someone fall away, but if they do, they can never (or may never be able to) be restored. I must admit that I find Hebrews 6:4-6 to be particularly puzzling because it seems hard to reconcile with James 5:19-20, other similar passages, testimonies of Christians, and my own experience. My only explanation is that this is not inclusive of all who come to Christ (the context going back to the previous chapter is about those who “useth milk [being] unskilful in the word of righteousness” as opposed to “them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil” Hebrews 5:13-14.) This is definitely counterintuitive to me. For more thoughts on this, click here.

Hebrews 6:4-6 says, “For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.”

I John 5:16-17 says, “If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it. All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.”

But there’s more than Two Sides of the Issue

Most Christians have been convinced that one has to believe one of two positions. One is that once one has received grace, it is impossible to “lose” it (or to throw it away). The other one is that every moment of your life, from the time of your baptism to the minute of your physical death there is always a possibility that you will be caught off guard and lose your salvation in a moment of temporary foolishness. Have you ever considered that the Bible may teach some middle ground position?

Is it possible that one CAN take steps (beyond what’s required to receive grace) which CAN make one’s eternal salvation unconditionally secure even though SOME who have received grace (but who haven’t taken such steps) MAY fall away?

I have heard some preachers use the term “soundly saved” to indicate this. II Peter 1:10 says, “Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall”. Matthew 10:42 (Mark 9:41 is similar) says, “And whosoever shall give to drink unto one of these little ones a cup of cold water only in the name of a disciple, verily I say unto you, he shall in no wise lose his reward.” God can prevent someone from losing their salvation by supernaturally preventing them from committing a “sin unto death” (Genesis 20:3, 6).

The term “soundly saved” also implies that there are some who are saved, but not “soundly”. In the parable of the sower (Mark 4:16 and Luke 8:13), it indicates that some receive the word with joy, but then fall away because they have no firm roots. (The strict Calvinist has to say that either these don’t really lose their salvation or are never really saved to begin with even though they “receive the word with joy”.) Consider also the argument about I Corinthians 9:26-27 above. Some may chose to take the step of keeping one’s body under subjection and some may not, making the difference between one who becomes a “castaway” (which could really be a loss of salvation) and one who doesn’t.

Conclusion

You may disagree with me, but I think that it is clear that a middle ground position (which may be better understood with more studying) is the correct one. But whether you are a strict Calvinist or a die hard Arminian, you do need to “make your calling and election sure”. So what are “these things” that, if we do them, will “make our calling and election sure”? I leave it to you find the answer in the verses preceding II Peter 1:10. (Click here to read about baptism.) Then you will be able to say with confidence, “I will not fall away!”

Is Water Baptism Necessary for Salvation?

Having grown up in the Christian Churches and Churches of Christ, for us the short answer is yes. This is what we teach. Acts 2:38 is one of our battle cries. But I want to take a closer look at this in this piece. Is what my church teaches really right?

The Arguments of the Christian Churches and Churches of Christ

“…Men and brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” Acts 2:37-38 (KJV)

I do believe that just because Peter is instructing them to be baptized, that it doesn’t necessarily mean that it is necessary for salvation. It is not like as if they asked, “What MUST I do to be saved?” as the Philippian jailer did in Acts 16:30. But it does seem incorrect to include “and be baptized” in the sentence if at least one of the purposes of it isn’t the remission of sins.

The clause “…ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost” is in a separate sentence in all English versions that I know of, so this would seem to leave open the question of whether baptism is necessary for the receiving of the Holy Spirit, which is the other major claim that the CCs and C of Cs make of this verse. Acts 10:44-48 is a clear counterexample of this claim. In Acts 19:6, the believers being baptized didn’t receive the Holy Spirit until after Paul laid his hands on them which was after they had been baptized. So there seems to be no “rule” about this.

Another verse that is used this one:

“Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” John 3:5 (KJV)

My only comment on this is that I just can’t say for sure that the water that Jesus is speaking of the water of baptism or something else such as amniotic fluid. But the latter explanation would imply that there will be no unborn babies in heaven. (But so would saying that baptism is necessary for salvation without exception.) But I will save the discussion of the topic of salvation for infants and young children for another time.

“…the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us…” 1 Peter 3:20-21 (KJV)

This verse clearly says that baptism does save. The only alternative explanation that I have ever heard is that the “baptism” here isn’t water baptism. But Ephesians 4:5 says that there is only one baptism. Therefore, I reject this argument. However, nothing in this passage says that it is impossible for someone to be saved without water baptism.

The Arguments of the Other Side

The most common objection to the doctrine of the necessity of baptism for salvation is the idea that this would be “salvation by works” which is thoroughly denounced in the NT (e.g. Ephesians 2:8). But is preaching the gospel a work? Aren’t some people saved because of the preaching of the gospel? “But the one who is being saved isn’t the one doing the work (the preaching),” you might object. Ah! That’s just it. The one who is being saved isn’t the one doing the work of baptism either. You don’t baptize yourself; someone else always has to do the baptizing! All you have to “do” is come forward and say you will, which is just like the rest of the plan of salvation. See also Titus 3:5.

The other arguments involve counterexamples. The most common one is the thief on the cross (see Luke 23:39-43). This opens up various tired old arguments like “When did the New Covenant actually begin?” Of course, the CCs and C of Cs will argue that it was later (at the Resurrection or even the Day of Pentecost), and the other side argues that it was at the moment of Christ’s death. (Jesus died before the thief did, so the argument goes that the thief would have been under the New Covenant at the time of his death.) There are passages of scripture which indicate that the Resurrection of Christ and belief therein is necessary for salvation, and this gives weight to the CC and C of C argument. But I kind of see that the OT and NT overlap and you can’t say everything changed over at one instant. I like to keep myself open-minded about such things. Some CC and C of C Christians will even say that the thief could have been baptized previously, but even if that were true, that would have been John’s baptism. (Acts 19:3-5 indicates that baptism into Christ in New Testament is apparently necessary even for those who already had John’s baptism. This doesn’t contradict Ephesians 4:5 because John’s baptism had passed away.)

The other counterexample that I can see in the NT is the one I mentioned previously in Acts 10:44-48. Surely if some people had received the Holy Ghost, then they also had to be saved at that time.

A Closer Look at What CC and C of C Christians Really Believe

Many of us would NOT agree the following statement:

There is no way that anyone can be saved without water baptism. There are no exceptions.

Though there are some who would. My Bible study teacher told us a story of a man who, on his death bed, wanted to be baptized. There was a bathtub there, and some men tried to get him to it, but he died before they could make it. My Bible study teacher says he thinks that that man was saved. He uses passages (e.g. Matthew 5:22, 28) which say that doing something “in your heart” is equivalent to the physical act. However, he still criticizes the Baptists for not believing that baptism is not necessary for salvation.

We do not believe in infant baptism. The reason why baptism saves is because it is “the answer of a good conscience toward God” (1 Peter 3:21, KJV). This cannot be done by an infant.

Also, baptism must be done by immersion, not sprinkling or pouring. This is because of the meaning of the Greek word and it is also brought out explicitly in some passages. I believe that there shouldn’t even be a word “baptism”. It should be rendered “immersion” in the Bible. Here is a link to some arguments and positions of the noninstrumental C of C.

Conclusion

We cannot tie God’s hands and say that He will never save someone without first having been immersed. But on the other hand, to say that baptism has nothing to do with salvation is, I believe, incorrect. But unlike some in my church, I can consider those who disagree with me on this issue to be my brothers and sisters in Christ as long as they teach that adult baptism by immersion is commanded in scripture. The idea of keeping out “works salvation” doctrine is a legitimate concern. But I don’t think there should be a denominational division over this “necessity” part of the issue. The CC and C of C Christians should stop accusing the Baptists and others of “leaving something out of the plan of salvation”. And they should not accuse us of teaching “salvation by works”.