Q&A 18: What about passages used to support loss of salvation? - Part II
Vern Peterman · May 23, 2010
Questions & Answers, No. 21
Holly Hills Bible Church
https://hollyhillsbiblechurch.org/teaching/messages/49262413971

Transcribed from the recording by SermonAudio, so expect the occasional misheard word.

Before we step into what's in the handout, I want to go through a little bit of church history quickly. And that is the question, where do we get this loss of salvation teaching? First of all, for centuries, the prominent church in at least Western Europe, and basically the same teaching is held in Eastern Europe and areas influenced by what are known as the Orthodox churches, The prominent church in Western Europe for many centuries was the Roman Catholic Church, which of course taught loss of salvation, right? And the Orthodox Churches basically teach loss of salvation as well. The churches that broke away from the Roman Catholic Church and the Reformation did not teach loss of salvation, but We've had a whole bunch of different Protestant groups break off.

Essentially, there are now something on the order of 30,000 Christian denominations. That's a few. So lots and lots. But looking at the major groups, the Lutherans were kind of the first group to prominently break off. There actually, over the centuries, were a number of Christian groups. Many of them got completely wiped out by the Roman Catholic Church. And I mean completely erased from the earth. Even evidence of the groups is hard to find in some cases. But the Lutheran Church was one that broke away.

And then from that, we had the Reformed Churches with John Calvin. And that's primarily where the security of salvation came from. However, with one caveat, and that is, you ever heard of the tulip? And that little P is perseverance of the saints in the Reformed Church's set of doctrines. And they've got this weird little quirk where they say, well, you can't lose your salvation. However, if you don't persevere, it proves you never had it.

So too much falling and stumbling, you're in question. which is also why the common thing now, mostly espoused through John MacArthur, Lordship Salvation, where Christ has got to be Lord right up front, not as a matter of growth. Right? So that's one problem with Lordship Salvation, is that it puts growth as a secondary item, because he's got to be Lord right now, or else you're not saved. Right? That's right.

I don't know how many of you have met Jim McCulley. He's a fellow whose family has been with us for the last several months here, actually since about last fall. And he made a point one Thursday night study that the tendency is for people to load up the gospel. Either they front load it or they back load it. And the front-loading it is, well, you've got to believe and have Jesus as Lord. The back-loading is, you've got to keep it up. You've got to keep yourself saved.

Here's also the Anabaptists. And if you were to say, which group are we from? It's actually kind of from that group because Remember, the Lutherans and the Reformed groups still have infant salvation. The Anabaptists would say, no, baptism is for those who believe. That's the biblical basis. Instead, the Lutheran and Reformed churches and some of those that broke off from them said, no, we still stick with the infant baptism because they hadn't figured out that that's not biblical. So there's that. By the way, Anabaptists and Baptists are two different Even though the names sound similar, two different things.

The Anabaptists, basically the Anabaptists, although it shows them breaking off from the Reformed, there's actually been Anabaptists for many centuries. And the reason is, just after the year 400, the Roman Empire, under the influence of what was becoming the Roman Catholic Church, made it a capital offense for parents not to baptize their infants. So for centuries, from about 412, 413, about in there, when they made the law up until into the time of the Reformation and even somewhat thereafter, it was capital offense not to baptize your infants. In which case, they would kill the parents and baptize the infants anyway, right? So, at any rate, there were many, many Anabaptists, but a lot of them just didn't survive.

Yes? You say Anabaptists? Anna is the the Anabaptists, okay? Yeah, yes That's right the the Anna remember it's not anti it's Anna which means which means Referring to the re-baptism In other words, if someone was an Anabaptist and they had been baptized as an infant, they would get baptized again not recognizing the infant baptism because they said baptism is for those who believe and an infant can't believe, right? So that's the point there. But we make the point here too that the Anabaptists and the Baptists are not the same. I'm going to skip past this because I just made the point.

The Anglican Church, which was a break off from the Roman Catholic Church and essentially somewhat attached itself to the Reformed group, It was the one that, remember King Henry VIII, he wanted another wife and they said, you've had enough, you know. So he broke off from the Roman Catholic Church because here he was, he had this English channel between him and the main continent and so they had a hard time getting to him militarily. And so he broke off so that that established the Anglican Church as a separate church from the Roman Catholic Church and he could go ahead and marry the next wife, right. So that's the origin of the Anglican Church.

From there, there you have also, next one over is the Presbyterian. Presbyterian Church was when John Knox from Scotland went to visit John Calvin in Geneva and say, hey, this is great. And he went back to Scotland and started a revolution. And that's the origin of the Presbyterian Church. because the revolution was against Mary, Queen of Scots, who was Catholic.

So anyway, that was justification for that. But because it came from a reformed group, similar doctrines to the reformed Calvinist folks. And then, here's a Baptist who broke off from the Anglicans, and essentially had a lot of initially reformed ideas.

Today, there are all sorts of Baptists. They've taken a whole spectrum. You've got everything from really almost reformed-type Baptists to Baptocostals, you know. So there's lots of them. Now, then finally, here's the Methodist branch, and that's really the modern root of the Protestant lose-your-salvation teaching. And here's the interesting pattern.

Whenever somebody tried to reform an existing church, it never worked, and so they had to start a new one. That's what happened. Remember, Martin Luther wanted to reform the Catholic Church. How well did that work? Not so good, right? So he ended up breaking off and starting his own little group. And same thing happened here. John Charles Wesley tried to reform the Anglican Church. And guess how well that worked? Not so well. And so they ended up starting Wesleyanism or Methodism.

But they had the teaching that you could lose your salvation. And the groups descended from that today are the ones who teach that you can lose your salvation, including the Nazarenes. A lot of the old line Pentecostal churches teach that. And then, of course, you still have the same Roman Catholic Church teaching and those who come from that teaching loss of salvation. And almost all the cults teach loss of salvation. Why would all the cults, with rare exception, teach loss of salvation? It keeps you working. See?

It's a threat. You know, I could show you copies. I won't because it's a waste of time. I could show you copies of the report cards that the JWs have to turn in every week, reporting all the time they spent going door to door and how many things they handed out and all that stuff. They got to do their time and make sure they get it turned in so they keep their salvation intact. Otherwise, they have annihilation and they, you know, you get wiped out You know, you lose your salvation and you don't go to hell, you just cease to exist.

Yeah? The question would be, how could you lose your salvation if you weren't saved anyway? Yeah, well, that's a very good question. Yeah. But see, the thing is, if you teach you to lose your salvation, it doesn't mean that your gospel is automatically bad, but it calls it into question. Did you have a question or are you just scratching your head? Okay. All right. Okay. So that's one thing. Also last week, however, I want to move on to this. We talked about in John 15. There's that John 15 to where it talks about, you know, the ones that aren't bearing fruit, he takes away. And we said that really is intended to be lifted up.

And the practice these days, of course, is you keep the lowest branches out of the soil by putting them on wires. Well, making wires back in biblical times was a lot of work and it just was not something they could do very well. So what they tend to do is to lift up the vines on rocks. And then once the branches started to come out like this, they would start branching out, then they would lift it up with sticks or rocks.

And so the branch that is not bearing fruit because it's down low in the ground gets lifted up. It's lifted up. It's not a threat of, you better bear fruit or you're going to lose salvation. It's instead the Lord, remember the Father is the vinedresser, the Lord lifts up those branches that are hanging low and down at a place where they're not able to get away from the soil and get away from the threat of rotten insects and things of that sort.

So they're lifted up as you see here in the illustration. I tell you what, I went through a kind of an internet conversation, you know how they've got these little chat rooms and stuff, by one of the major Greek scholars, and why he translates it that way. And it's funny, they go around in circles with him. It turns out that these guys are really good at Greek, they just don't know anything about vineyard practices. And so they end up looking at their books, and so that's what they come up with.

But it says, the one who doesn't bear fruit, he takes away. Well, that same word is used earlier in the Gospel of John for the guy who, you know, take up your bed and walk. Does that mean you throw your bed away? No! It isn't getting rid of something, it's lifting it up. Okay?

So anyways, it's a matter of their rather academic approach on the one hand, just looking things up in their books, and two, not being familiar with the vineyard practices, which I just showed you pictures of them. That's what they did. And so here's one of the reasons why when I talk about Bible interpretation, I keep emphasizing language, history, and culture, and part of the culture And the vineyard practice is you don't go around clipping off the low branches. You're going to cut way back on your production.

You lift them up. And today we do that with a wire. In those days it was done with a stick with a Y at the top or rocks. And that was the pattern. But you don't just go chopping off the low branches. That'll cut into your production terribly. Because you want production, not destruction. You don't go punishing your vine. This is part two that we're looking at today. This is a separate handout from anything we've had in the past. Everybody have one? Would you like to get one? How about you? You got one? Okay.

So what about the passages that are used to support loss of salvation? We looked at passages in the Gospels last time, and that handout is still available if you want to catch up with that. This time we're going to move on into some of the rest of the New Testament passages. We won't cover all of them, but I think it'll give you an idea how things are taken.

The first one we address here is Philippians 2.12.

So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your salvation with fear and trembling. Now, guess what they do with that? You tell me. How do you think they take that if their teaching says you lose your salvation or could lose it? Pardon?

You work it out. But guess, they kind of change the work out to work for, right? Work for, work to keep. Instead of the working out of the salvation that you already have, it's looked upon instead by those who teach loss of salvation that it's a working for your salvation. or that it's a working to keep it. Now is that what it says? Not so much, right? Not so much. What they often forget also is the very next verse which we've quoted here.

For it is God who is at work in you both to will and to work for his good pleasure. So this is not about working for our salvation, nor our responsibility to see to it that our salvation that was begun by God is carried out, or is carried through to the end by our own work, effort, willingness, and diligence, but rather about our part in sanctification, spiritual growth and maturity. which God not only accomplished entirely apart from our efforts, but He wishes to carry that salvation to completion by His own working in and through us. Isn't that what verse 13 says?

For it is God who is at work where? In you. It's not you working for anything. It is not you working to keep your salvation. It is God who is at work in you in order to work out the salvation that you already have and are not being threatened with losing. It's not a salvation that's still out there that you may or may not get. It's not a salvation that you may or may not keep.

But it's a salvation that's already completely accomplished. Now it's simply a matter of the working out of the salvation that's already completed and accomplished, right? So real important. The last paragraph on that page, I have a fairly large insert from Chester McAuley's commentary.

I won't go through the detail on that yet. or at this point I'll leave that to you if you'd like, but the very last paragraph on page one, God provides us with all the enablement, energizing, and empowering to carry out in our present sanctification process that which was begun in the salvation that God brought about the moment when we were eternally saved by faith.

There is nothing that God has asked us to do that He has not made us capable of in our position and capable of by His empowerment and enabling and accomplishment. God has not asked us to do anything that is of ourselves. He's not asked us to work hard for our salvation. He's not asked us to work in order to keep it. He is the one who is doing the working.

We are to work out God's already accomplished and fully assured salvation, having been predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son. And by the way, if you're predestined to be conformed to the image of the Son, do you think somehow that God's predestination is going to goof up? Whoops! Right? Not so much. But we are not to work for it, nor to work to keep it. Work it out by God's working in you, but not to work for it and not to work to keep it. That's not the point. Let me ask you this question.

If you're a believer, will you be absolutely, without exception, positively conformed ultimately to the image of Christ? Yep. And how do you know that? If predestined, right? Predestination is not this troubling, disturbing thought of everything is just like a big machine and God's got everything all programmed in and your next breath is determined and the next move you make is determined and the thing that you're going to decide is determined, that's not predestination. Predestination in scripture is what you are ultimately going to be conformed to.

It's hopeful, not dreadful. Okay? Predestination is hopeful, not dreadful. And that's very important. All right. Now, we've gone over these things quickly, and this isn't a matter of having fully explained the whole passage, but at least regards to loss of salvation. Any questions or anything of that sort? Yes. Yes. Okay.

We actually taught through Philippians many, many years ago, but that was heavens. That was eons ago. When we went through it, one of the things we pointed out, we say fear and trembling, and that sounds like heaven's sakes, of course it's fear and trembling.

I'm going to lose my salvation, right? Paul himself, even though he completely lays out that our salvation is sure, And even though we're predestined to be conformed, those are words from Paul himself. But the fear, is the fear this great angst and dread? Should we lay awake at night worrying about this? Is that what he means? It can't be that. That can't quite be it. Not the guy who said be anxious for nothing, right?

What it ultimately is looking at is great reverence and respect. Great reverence and respect. And as a matter of fact, if I were to go in and translate it, I would use those words because it's easy for people to get the idea. The Greek word is phobos, that's translated fear, and it means everything from trembling and cowering in fear and shaking and biting your nails, or great awe and reverence. And I think we should look at working out our own salvation, which is assured, even realizing that, look, we're predestined to be conformed to the image of the Son. So that's like, it's going to happen.

There's nothing to worry about. But to have great regard and awe and reverence for what God has done, for what God is doing, and what God will do. I can rest, but it doesn't mean that I take what God's doing lightheartedly. It doesn't mean that I take what God has done, is doing, and will do lightly.

Does that get the idea? Yeah. It's not a, boy, I'm sitting here cowering because God might fry me. It is instead looking at all of what God has done, is doing, and will do on into eternity with a great sense of awe and respect. Yes. Yeah. This phenomenal freedom. And I think as you come in, there are passages like this, this is one of them, but there are other passages like this where it's important for us to kind of zero in and calibrate.

What kind of fear is he talking about? He's talking about not something where we're just scared out of our wits that we're going to lose it all. but rather that we have great awe and respect for all of what God has done, is doing, and will do in the future. And notice how I keep using the past, present, and future. By the way, does God have a past, present, and future?

Not really. He dwells in the eternal present. Imagine what the Jews were doing, scratching their heads when Jesus says, before Abraham was born, I am. I think you'd take that. Right? It means that before Abraham was born, Jesus says, I dwell in the eternal present.

Everything is now to me. Boy, they had a tough time soaking that up. We talk about what God has done, is doing, and will do. God's not thinking of it in that kind of time tunnel perspective, is he? To him, it's all now. Let's look at the next page, page 2.

In this one we introduce another fun one, 2 Timothy 2.12. I tell you, when you look at this at first glance, this will scare you. Oh boy. Alright. It's a good thing I've got a belt on. If we endure, we will also reign with Him. If we deny Him, He also will deny us. Are you scared yet? Okay. Let's read the full passage. Remember, what's the cardinal rule or the principal rule of interpretation? What are the three most important things? Context, context, and context, right?

Alright, 2 Timothy 2, 11-13 is, for if we died with Him, we will also live with Him. If we endure, we will also reign with Him. and the part that we see here, if we deny Him, He also will deny us. If we are faithless, He remains faithful, for He cannot deny Himself. Now, several important things to take a look at. The first bullet that we have there, that we died with Him and we also live with Him, what kind of a truth is that? Identification truth, right? We died with Him. It's not He died for us. It's we died with Him. And we will also live with Him.

We were identified with Him there on the cross. We were identified with Him when He was raised, ascended, and seated, right? So those are statements of the identification truths that we who believe have been identified with Christ in His death and resurrection and even beyond that to His ascension and seeding. What we have said already about the identification truths is that the identification truths are all one way.

They point to the permanence and irreversibility of our position in Christ with not even a threat of reversal. Does it say If we died with Him, that boy, if we don't remain faithful, we're going to undie with Him. Does it say that? Not so much, right? We will also live with Him. Does it say, unless you slip up, and then you might unlive with Him? Right?

No. That threat is not there. So that's point one when you start to look at the context. This is part of the big set of identification truths teachings, all of which point one way. You're identified with him in all these things, but never threatened or stated to lose that identification, to have it undone. God never clicks on the undo icon when it comes to identification. There isn't one.

Second bullet, and this is very important for interpreting this passage. The if in each part of this verse is an assumed to be true grammatical form. In Greek, there are different kinds of ifs. Some ifs are if and it's assumed to be true, and it's written as an if so that you'll follow the logic. And some ifs are probably or maybe. but not certain, not assumed to be true. This one is true. Now, here's why it becomes important.

It is not a possibility that he is talking about. So, for example, if we deny him, and you may or may not, he will also deny us. That's not a possibility that he's talking about. So right off the bat, this passage is not threatening, he may or may not deny you, depending on whether you may or may not deny him. That's not what the passage is saying. Let's look at it this way. We're going to put it in expanded and explained form in order to carry this idea across. Here's what it means in the fuller translation and explanation.

It is a trustworthy statement, which, by the way, Paul said only to Timothy and Titus. He didn't tell others that, but he wrote only to Timothy and Titus. It is a trustworthy statement, which Paul wrote repeatedly to both Timothy and Titus as absolutely true and exceedingly valuable in ministry.

For if we, having been identified with Him, died with Him, which is most certainly true, we will also live with Him, having been identified with Him in His resurrection, ascension, and seeding, which is also most certainly true. And if we endure, as is also certainly the case, we will also reign with Him, having been seated with Him in the heavenlies already. If we deny Him, as we will do at times, not if we deny Him like, boy, if you do it, you're going to lose it.

But guess what? It's like James says, we all stumble in many ways. That's what Paul's saying. Do we do things that deny Christ sometimes? Yeah. Yeah, we do. So Paul isn't threatening here, well you better not deny him or you're gonna fry. Right? That's not what he's threatening.

He is saying, just like James, and by the way, James is famous for calling people to live out their faith, right? Just like James, Paul is saying here, we all stumble in many ways. Ways that deny him. If we deny Him, as we will do at times, even though we have an eternal relationship with Him, He also will deny us fellowship at those moments that we deny Him.

Not that this is His desire. Get that? What is His desire? God's will is that you fellowship with Him all the time. In reality, does that happen? That we fellowship with the Lord all the time? No. No, we stumble. We fall. That's all he's saying. This is not a threatened, if this, then this, and it might be, so be careful. This is a saying, you know, if we stumble, the Lord, during those times, yeah, we're not going to have fellowship with Him, but you know what? He's faithful. This is assurance, not threat. Okay? This is assurance, not threat.

13. If we are faithless, and we will indeed be faithless at times, because the if is a certainty, not a perhaps, not walking by faith in God for moments of time, he still remains faithful always and forever, even during those times when we don't walk by faith. For he cannot deny himself, since he is eternally of the same character and true to his promises as the promise-keeper.

Got that? This is not a threatening passage at all. This is an assurance passage. Are we going to stumble? Yep. Will God be faithful even when we stumble? Yep. Isn't that great? This is a wonderful passage of assurance. It is not a threat. He is ever faithful.

Now let me ask you this, given the statement that we will in fact deny him, because this is not a you might, you might not, or you better not, this is a statement just like James, we all stumble in many ways, does that encourage us to be lax in our Christian walk? Does that encourage us to be rather careless? Yes? No? What's that? You think it does the opposite. And why does it do the opposite?

Because it shows us He's always faithful. And it gives us the feeling that we should be too. Yeah. It is a key point in here is we're motivated in our Christian walk by God's grace and mercy. Okay? Motivated by grace and mercy, not by threat of loss of salvation. Very important.

And that's one of the reasons it says here he's faithful. He will stay true to his gracious and merciful character even if we stumble. He'll stay faithful to what he says he will do and who he says he is always. Always, always, and ever. And this is why Paul would say something so radically different from even what's in the Sermon on the Mount.

Forgive one another even as God in Christ has already forgiven you. Not a threat. Boy, you'd better forgive or God's not going to forgive you and you're going to be really, really sorry. But instead, forgive one another as God in Christ has. Done deal. Already forgiven you. Is your forgiveness at issue?

Nope. Not at all. But because it's not at issue, forgive because of grace, forgive because of mercy, not in order to receive it. Right? Okay. Page 3. Now here's the really fun one. Oh boy. By the way, Pat, good to have you back. You got the handout, right? Did you get the handout? Yeah, okay. Hebrews 6, 4-6, this is the one that people have just so much fun with. Hebrews 6, 4-6. I'll read it here. It's at the top of page 3.

For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame."

Now, so this is the one pointed to by a number of folks that says, see, they do lose their salvation. How do you like that? Now, some try to say that these verses describe an unbeliever who comes close to belief, but then turns away from faith. That is, a faith that is actually believing so as to be saved.

The author did not use the word tasted to mean that a person only gets part of the way toward being saved. And that's part of what they try to point to. See, it's tasted. They didn't really, you know, take it and swallow. They just tasted it. Kind of like you're tasting something and spit it out, right?

The only problem is that same word translated tasted is the word used early in Hebrews, in Hebrews 2.9, where Christ tasted death. Did Christ come close to dying but not really die? Nuh-uh. So tasted isn't just sort of a sampling that doesn't really get you involved. So those who say that this is an unbeliever who never really gets saved but comes close, it doesn't sell.

Then there are those who try to say this passage is speaking of believers who lose their salvation, which is the reason, of course, we're bringing it up here. As always, as we seek to understand a verse or passage, It is important to understand the context. In the context of this passage, the author of Hebrews is seeking to persuade those Jews who are tempted to fall back into reliance upon the temple rituals in Jerusalem and cease growing and maturing in the Lord by the means God intends for believers. Do we get the picture here? Here this whole book of Hebrews is addressing Jews who have They become believers in Christ. They become saved. They're Christians. But they're tempted to go back and they're just relying on all the rituals.

Hey, you know, we did this for years and we'll just kind of go back to doing this what we did for years. And what's that? Yeah, yeah, because it feels good or I just feel comfortable with it, you know, going in there. Remember how we used to have, we'd take the lambs up to the priest and the priest would do the slaughter and it seemed, oh yeah, that takes good care of things. Yeah, I kind of feel assured with that and I'm comfortable with it. So they just kind of slip back in there.

You see that? So here are these Jews and they're being tempted to kind of fall back into reliance on, oh, I'll just buy the lamb and give it to the priests and he'll slaughter something for me and that'll be good for me. I'm not so sure about this Jesus thing. All my life I've always done the slaughtering the lambs and the rams and all that. And so, I think I'll just go back to that. So that's what these people were going back into. And that's why you read other parts in Hebrews and it talks about sacrifices again, and again, and again, and again.

Jesus is a different kind of a high priest and not like the ones who have to go sacrificing again, and again, and again, and again. You see what he's trying to do to get them to think of that? Now, let's take a look. We've got some points here to make.

So the prior verses, we have point one in the middle of page three there, the prior verses urge the believers to address repentance from dead works, the temple rituals. And for example, earlier in this passage, therefore leaving the elementary teaching about the Christ, let us press on to maturity. Again, here's the problem, is pressing on to maturity instead of staying stuck and laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God. What's dead works? If you're a Jew who's been relying on the temple sacrifices and just buying the lamb and paying off the priests and all that. If you're a Jew, what's dead works?

Just exactly that. Repentance from dead works. He's telling them, don't go relying on just buying the lamb. You paid your money and you give it to the priest and you pay him his money and he does the sacrifice and I'm happy now. That's good. That's all I want. I bought my religion and that's all I want. And he's saying it's elementary that you get past that. that you repent of it, that you realize there's got to be something more than just paying your money for the lamb and paying your money to the priest and having him slaughter the lamb and burn it on the offering altar there, and then you're done. There's something more going on than all that. And he says repentance from that whole mindset I'll just buy the lamb and I'll just pay the priest. And then we're good. And yeah, it feels good. I like it. That's all I want.

So he's saying, look, getting past that is elementary to your spiritual growth. Why on earth would you want to fall back into that? Don't you realize what Jesus did? Don't you realize what all those sacrifices were pointing to? They pointed to what Jesus did. And when Jesus did it, what did He finish off with?

It is finished. Done. Perfect tense. Completed past action. Ongoing results into the future, implying permanence. Right? So now, Point two, the falling away in verse six is a falling alongside related to the word trespass in Galatians 6.1 where if somebody falls alongside the path, is caught in a trespass, that you restore such a one. So falling away here doesn't automatically mean that the person is lost eternally. Now that's a valuable insight. These people who would fall away are not falling away to be eternally lost. They're falling alongside the path and not getting up. Still believers, but stuck in the ditch. Stuck in the ditch. See the distinction there?

Once having seen that reliance upon the temple rituals his reliance upon dead works, and that one should instead have faith in God and His work through Christ, the Hebrew believer who becomes so dull of hearing that he is thinking of going back to the dead works and the temple rituals instead of faith in God's work through Christ, has come to a place where he is likely never to grow in the Lord again.

Do you mean to tell me that after you've come to a place of recognizing that Christ died for your sins, that you're actually going to go so low spiritually that you'll be happy with just paying for the lamb and paying the priest for the lamb to be killed? That you'll be happy with that? Never realizing what that was all pointing to. Do you really want to fall back into that? See, that's what he's telling them. Do you really want to fall back into these rituals and relying on that? And what's all this stuff at the end of the verse there about crucifying to themselves the Son of God and putting Him to open shame?

Does Christ need to be sacrificed again like the rams and the lambs? No. It's finished. It's done. And that's why he writes crucifying to themselves, because it's not happening. They're going to think of it as something that has to keep happening again. Are they going to come back to that place of, oh, I recognize again that Christ is sufficient? No. So that's why he puts this up as an impossibility.

You guys can't go there. How can you possibly see that Christ's death is sufficient, and then fall back on this temple ritual, are you going to go back and see that Christ's death is sufficient again? As if Christ had to die again? How could you possibly go there? It's impossible.

So these people are getting stuck in a really serious spiritual rut. And that's why he's trying to wake them up. And that's why he uses such shocking language. You have tasted and then fallen alongside. You've had your eyes opened. And now you close them. Be careful, he's telling them.

He says you're asking for an impossibility. Christ isn't going to die again. He's certainly not like the rams and the lambs. They have to be sacrificed again and again. You're asking for the impossible. Point three at the bottom. Failure to see that Christ's work is a once and for all work and going back to the repetitive temple rituals again would imply that Christ's work would have to be redone. Oh, Christ will have to be sacrificed for me. He'll have to die again for me. This can never be, it's impossible, since Christ has once for all, that's that word hapax that we've brought up there previously from Romans and Hebrews, several passages there. been sacrificed on the cross and we will never again, cannot ever again, and He will, never again and cannot ever again be sacrificed a second time. Okay, let's look at page four there.

Point four and the final point here is those who point to Hebrews 6, 4-6 as evidence that salvation can be lost need to be faced with the conclusion that if this is the case, Then Hebrews 6.6 says that it is impossible for the person who has lost their salvation to ever be saved again.

It means that if you're once saved, if that's what this verse means, if that's what this verse means that you can lose your salvation, once you lose it, you're toast. You see that? I have seen and heard of circumstances where someone who believes that this passage means you can lose your salvation, when they get faced with this, they shudder. Because if you look at it, if that's what it means, it's impossible.

You're toast. You get one chance to be saved, but if you ever lose it, you'll never get resaved. You're burnt toast. That's it. See? So they need to understand if that's what they're going to push for, what that means. And it ought to be frightening. And then fear and trembling starts to mean something. Right? That you're asking about. It means something downright serious. Yes? Pardon? Yes.

One of the things that we pointed out a little bit earlier, let's see if I can find my clicker here. The Methodist was the first branch after, say, the major groups before that were the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Churches, that you could lose your salvation. The Methodist Church and churches that are derived from them are some of the main groups that believe you can lose your salvation. Well, that's the problem is that they believe you could be resaved.

And so they haven't looked at what this says, that if you believe this is saying that you can lose your salvation, if that's what this means, then they haven't reckoned with the fact that it means you can lose it once and then you're toast. No chance for being resaved. I am not aware of any, although there may well be But the point is, most of the ones who talk about losing your salvation don't look at this passage the way it ought to be looked at. If that's what it says, you lose it once and you're toast.

The Roman Catholic Church, for example, teaches that you can lose your salvation. That's a mortal sin. Remember, they have venial sins, which mean you're going to spend more time in purgatory. And then there are mortal sins that make you lose your salvation. And of those mortal sins, you can still be re-saved according to their teaching. So they would not say that you lose it once and then you're done.

Yeah, but see, you know, churches that will that will have altar calls, and they put notches in their Bibles. Say if somebody comes up to the altar call, then they put that in there. Now, some people, they've already been saved, and so then they come up and they have rededications. And then there's re-re-re-re-rededications, you know? And so they have all these again and again and again kind of things. It begins to, you know, you kind of wonder, what's going on here? The Lord is looking for us to walk with Him. That is His will that we walk with Him.

And rededications, as if that's some big significant thing, it calls into question, well, wasn't I dedicated first? Yeah, and I think the reality is what James, and here's James who, boy, he's emphatic about the believer living out the Christian life.

He says, we all stumble in many ways. He didn't say you all stumble. He says we. So he includes himself. And notice that passage we looked at in 2 Timothy. If we deny Him, And it's not an if-maybe. It's an if-and-we-will. And Paul says, we. Right? We. Includes himself in it.

The reality is believers, even those we look at and say, well, that is a real saint. I'm not sure what an unreal saint is, but anyway, that's a real saint. And the reality is those guys, Paul, James, use we. When it comes to addressing the fact, yeah, yeah, we stumble. 1 John. Matter of fact, I think that's our next passage. Yes. Okay. 1 John 3.

This is a passage I'm not going to read through it all, because in part we don't have time. But this is a passage that various verses are often looked at as, see, you can lose it. John, like James, is pressing for people to live out their faith. And what is not understood quite often as people read through this is John is talking about believers not getting caught up in continually practicing sin, getting in a rut of chronic sin, right? That's what he is addressing in this passage. If we look on page 5, a few points to make about 1 John chapter 3. This is the top of page 5.

The Apostle John, like Jesus' half-brother James, was a Jew who does not spend very much time explaining position and condition, as Paul did. The right action that you assumed would be obvious from who you are. And of course, you already know who you are, right? Well, James and John assume that. Paul, of course, explains it, not assuming it. And of course, you already know who you are, right?

So practicing chronic sin is not consistent with who you are. That's the assumption behind what John writes and behind what James writes. Neither John nor James assumed that the believer will live the sinless life. 1 John, if we say that we have no sin, as a matter of fact, that's right down below. We'll get there.

Then, second bullet, but rather than seeing John as calling for moral consistency based on who you obviously are, those who like to point to John's letter as evidence that salvation can be lost prefer not to focus on some of the other verses John wrote with his own hand. When we looked at John 10, 27 through 30, My sheep hear my voice and I know them and they follow me and I give eternal life to them and they will never perish, which as we explained the Greek structure there, and they will never perish so as to go to hell of their own doing.

Never is the strongest way you can possibly say in the Greek, not a chance. There is not the slightest chance, it is not even remotely possible that they will perish of their own doing. You can't oops so as to lose your salvation. Can you oops and fall out of fellowship? Yep. We can make lots of oopses, but you cannot, Jesus says, there is not the slightest chance, it is not even remotely possible that you can lose your salvation.

John wrote it. and no one will snatch them out of My hand. 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 either. I and the Father are one." Here is John 1, 8-10, If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. And then he says in verse 10, if we say that we have not sinned, very similar to verse 8, notice verse 8 says we're deceiving ourselves. Verse 10 says we make him, God, a liar and his word is not in us.

Very similar statement there. Let me read the conclusion. The various passages that are commonly given as evidence that a believer's salvation can be lost actually point to loss of reward, loss of fellowship, and a consistent living out and working out of the salvation that was with all certainty accomplished once and for all by Christ. For Christ to die for us once more is beyond impossible. Believers must come to recognize that we are saved and declared righteous by grace, and we stay saved by grace, and that we are to be motivated by grace to live righteously as well, for which we can be forever grateful. Forever grateful.

We're going to move on to other topics in what I'm calling the salvation series in this Q&A. So anyway, next week we'll move on to other ones including things like what happens to infants that die. Let's pray because we ran out of time. I hear that buzzing in my ear, right? Okay.

Lord, we do thank you and we are forever grateful for your most amazing grace, grace that will take forever to reveal and demonstrate itself before us. We will be in eternal awe at your awesome and amazing grace. We thank you for it. Thank you for the assurance and the certainty that we have in you. In Jesus' name, Amen.