Can a person lose his salvation? Part 2

When we try to describe who someone is, there are certain qualities that are transitory and some that are permanent. I could describe a person as a teller at a bank. That's a transitory quality because he may not always be a teller. Next week, he could be working at a department store.

It's not always easy to decide if a quality is transitory or permanent. Take apples, for example; there are some varieties that are green, like Granny Smith. In that case, being green is a permanent characteristic of the apple. However, we sometimes use the word “green” to describe fruit that isn't ripe. So the phrase, “That apple is green,” is ambiguous. It could mean the apple isn't yet ripe – a transitory quality that could change as the fruit ripens or it could mean the apple is a Granny Smith – a permanent quality that will not change.

If we say that someone is saved, we must determine if that is a transitory or permanent condition. We can do this by examining passages in the Bible that describe the nature of salvation. We'll start by considering 2 Cor 5:17:

Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

In light of this verse, it's hard to imagine how salvation could be transitory or temporary. When we become saved, our old self ceases to exist. How then can we go back to being that person? This verse describes salvation as a fundamental change to who we are. It gives the strong impression that salvation is a permanent condition rather than temporary. Of course, we should never take a single verse as a proof text on matters of doctrine. Instead, we should always interpret any passage in the context of the entire Bible. Consider also the following verses:

Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. (John 5:24)

Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. (1 Peter 1:23)

Salvation is clearly being described as a change to our essential nature. We have passed from death to life. We are born again of incorruptible seed. These verses, and many others like them, see to affirm that the most obvious understanding of 2 Cor is indeed the correct one. Being saved means a fundamental change in our very nature. Jesus Himself described salvation as being “born again.” Read His conversation with Nicodemus regarding the subject:

There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews: The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him. Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born? 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. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. (John 3:1-6)

Nicodemus scoffed at the idea a person could be born a second time. He was right in a sense because a second physical birth is impossible but Jesus wasn't talking about a second physical birth but a new birth – a birth from the Spirit. What would it mean to be born a second time of the flesh? You're already born so it would mean nothing new or different. Furthermore, how could a person ever become “unborn” of the flesh or “lose” his birth of the flesh? It doesn't make sense. When Jesus compared our spiritual birth to our physical birth, I believe He intended many of these parallels. If we could lose our salvation, what does that say about our spiritual rebirth? Do we become “unborn again”? It doesn't make any sense.

Are we agreed that salvation is a description of who we are? Next we will consider some passages that describe the permanency of our salvation:

My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. (John 10:27-28)

Think about that verse for a moment. Jesus gives us eternal life and says His sheep will never perish. If you received eternal life, then lost it and perished, you have made Jesus a liar. There are many more verses along these lines.

And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst. (John 6:35)

As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies for your sake; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, for God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable. (Romans 11:28-29) You might want to look up the definition of “irrevocable.”

Take special note of the words the Bible uses: eternal life, you will never hunger, God's gift is irrevocable. How can have eternal life and then not have it? It's like saying I used to be immortal but now I'm going to die. The use of these kinds of words suggests permanency of our salvation.

I believe people who think we can lose our salvation have the understanding that salvation is like a status, a condition that can change. It's as though being saved is like being a bank teller – you're a teller until you quit or until the bank fires you. I think this is an incorrect view that is contrary to Scripture.

Read the entire series:

Part 1
Part 3
Part 4
Conclusion

Hell: Hades, Sheol, Paradise, and Gehenna

To my last post concerning the “gates of hell,” a frequent visitor, Steven J, asked some interesting questions. While I was forming a reply to his comments, I realized that a lot of people might have similar questions so I thought I'd add a few more details and make it a post. As I began writing it, though, I realized the subject is a little more broad that I originally considered and wasn't sure I could keep it to a reasonable post length. It seemed that anything I wanted to omit seemed necessary to the whole post. I finally decided to scrap the whole thing and write an abbreviated version from scratch.

I say all that to say this: My views about hell probably reflect those held by the slight majority but opinions still abound. Consider this a disclaimer - the Bible gives us much detail about the lives of the characters it mentions and also give us instructions on how to conduct ourselves now. It gives surprisingly few details about hell and even fewer about heaven. The popular ideas of a “fire and brimstone” hell are not entirely wrong but they're not entirely right either. What I include here is correct to my best understanding of the Bible but I remain open to correction if I am convincingly persuaded by Scripture.

By the way, for the purpose of this post, we will stick primarily to the New Testament.

The English word “hell” invokes images of fire, brimstone, flames, and eternal torment. Many people are surprised, though, when I tell them the Bible does not use the word “hell” at all. The Bible was originally written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. There are different words that have all been rendered as “hell” in the English translations. For a few of those words, the fiery judgment is the correct understanding but not in every instance.

In the New Testament, the word most often translated as “hell” is the Greek word ᾅδης (hadēs). In general, Hades refers to the abode of the dead. It includes all the dead, regardless of their faith while on earth. However, within Hades, souls are segregated into two groups – believers and non-believers – to await the resurrection. Hades is the functional equivalent of the Old Testament, Hebrew word שׁאל (sh^e'ôl). Sheol literally means “grave” or “pit.” Oh, and if you haven't noticed already, for the sakes of ease of typing and reading, I am referring to these here as Hades and Sheol.

In John 5:28-29, Jesus makes it clear that the “grave” (μνημεῖον (mnēmeion) is the Greek word in this passage) holds both the believing and unbelieving:

Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation. (KJV)

Those who die while believing are taken to a place of rest in Hades. This has also been called “the Bosom of Abraham” (Luke 16:22) or“Paradise' (Luke 23:43, 2 Corinthians 12:4). Those who died while outside of the faith are taken to a place of torment. It is also referred to as Gehenna (Matthew 5:22), Tartarus (2 Peter 2:4), or the abyss (Revelation 9:1).

Sometimes, this realm of the damned is also referred to as Hades (Luke 16:23) or Sheol which leads to a little confusion. Let me see if I can offer an analogy that could clear up the confusion. I live in Louisville, Kentucky (KY). Louisville is the city and it is in the state of KY. While I am in Louisville, I am simultaneously in KY. So, I could say, “I live in Louisville” and just as correctly say, “I live in KY.” Likewise, a damned soul in the place of torment (like Gehenna) can simultaneously said to be in Hades.

We see a good contrast between the place of rest and the place of torment in Luke 16:19-31 – the account of the rich man and Lazarus. The Bible says that when Lazarus died, he was carried by angels to the Bosom of Abraham. The rich man died and “was buried.” Then, in “hell” (Hades), he lifted his eyes and saw Abraham with Lazarus “in his bosom.” It is frightening to read as the rich man says he is being tormented in flames. Abraham reminds him that he received good things in life while Lazarus suffered evil things. Now the rich man is “tormented” while Lazarus is “comforted” (KJV). In the passage, Abraham also describes there is a gulf or chasm that divides the two areas. While Abraham and the rich man are obviously able to see each other and even converse, neither can cross to the other side.

When Jesus died, He descended to “Paradise” as is attested in His comment to the thief on the cross, “Today you will be with me in paradise.” When Jesus ascended, He took with Him all the saints who now dwell in the presence of the Father (Ephesians 4:8-10). Most people agree that Paradise no longer receives spirits. Now, when a believer dies, he is immediately present with the Lord (2 Corinthians 5:8).

Revelation tells us that there will be a final judgment of the lost. Revelation 20:13 says that “death and hell (Hades)” will give up the dead that are in them to stand before the white throne where their works are judged. At the end of the judgment, Hades, along with all those whose names are not in the Book of Life are cast into the Lake of Fire. This is the “second death” and is their final destiny for all eternity.

In many cases, a discussion of hell raises the criticism that God is cruel and unjust (the “argument of outrage”). Such a discussion will have to be for another post. Suffice it to say here and now that hell (the place of the damned) is a very real place and judgment awaits all who reject Jesus. However, salvation is available to all. Now is the time to decide.

Loving God with our Minds: A Series in Logic. Conclusion

It's time to wrap up this series on logic. There are many more things that could be said but we've gone on long enough and I've covered the most common logical fallacies Christian apologists are likely to encounter. I'll conclude this series with a couple of more points.

First, I want to be clear about one thing. A logical fallacy is not automatic proof that a person is wrong. I came across an amusing example a while back that demonstrates how bad logic could occasionally lead to a correct answer. Look at the following:

64/16 > 64/16 > 4/1 > 4

In this mathematical expression, the person canceled out the sixes so 64/16 became 4/1 which equals 4. Ironically, 64/16 really does equal 4 but you obviously can't cancel out the sixes that way. The same approach would not work with most other fractions. It becomes frustrating, then, to explain to the person how he is wrong even though his answer is correct.

Along those same lines, while you are defending the faith against critics, sometimes they will present correct facts couched in bad arguments. If a person sprinkles in some logical fallacies in the midst of some valid arguments, we still need to address the valid points he's raised. If we do nothing but point out his errors in logic, then we are, in a way, using a red herring. You might stymie the critic into silence but you won't persuade him unless you eventually can answer legitimate concerns he has. Pointing out logical fallacies helps rid the debate of irrelevant static and allows you to have a substantive discussion.

Finally, as I said in the start of my series, Christians need to be careful with the arguments we use. One of the visitors to my blog, Steven J, left a comment detailing how he has sometimes heard Christians using logical fallacies. Sadly, he's correct. I've heard them too. It's unfortunate because we don't need to resort to such tactics. Remember, we are the ones on the solid rock. Our thinking should rest on the One who is the Author of logic.

Our job is laid out very clearly in 2 Corinthians 10:5 KJV:

Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;

Further Reading

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

Part 6

Part 7

Genesis 3:22-24, The Tree of Life

And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life. (Genesis 3:22, 24 KJV)

At first hearing, most people equate the casting of Adam and Eve from the Garden with God's pronouncement of the Curse upon them – that is, they believe God cursed Adam and Eve, then cast them from the Garden as part of the same Judgment. Because the passages appear together, it's a reasonable understanding. However, I believe it is an incorrect understanding.

I think the key to understanding this verse lies in Paul's confession found in Romans 7:18-19

“For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the willing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not. For the good that I want, I do not do, but I practice the very evil that I do not want.”

Paul ends Romans 7 with this lament (v. 24), “Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death?”

I can certainly empathize with Paul. There are things I know I should do and yet I don't do them. There are also things I know I shouldn't do and yet I do them. I hate it. Our flesh is literally at war with our spirit and thus it will always be as long as we dwell in our fleshly bodies. There are times I long to be rid of the flesh and leave the strife of this world behind.

When Paul asked who would free him from his body of death, he was asking rhetorically. We have a Savior who has promised just that. He is the One who makes all things new (2 Corithians 5:17). One day, our fleshly bodies will die but we have eternal life with Him in a place free from the Curse. That is God's desire for us and that was His desire for Adam.

God would have known that Adam would feel the same way that Paul felt. The Bible says that Adam knew right and wrong and so he would face the same battles as Paul. Adam would know those things he should do yet would not do them. Adam would know those things he should not do and he would do them. God did not want that for Adam. If Adam ate from the Tree of Life he would live forever in his body of death. God had a better plan!

2 Corinthians 9:7: Cheerful or Hilarious?

In another post (here), I mentioned the exegetical fallacy of “reverse etymology.” This is where people force the modern meaning of a word onto its original meaning. In that other post, I talked about how some critics attack the Bible because the Hebrew word עוֹף (oph) seems to contradict their understanding of the modern word “bird” (Leviticus 11:13,19). However, the fallacy of reverse etymology isn't practiced only by critics. It is more often used by well meaning Christians – even pastors. One example of this fallacy I've heard from well meaning Christians concerns 2 Corinthians 9:7:

Each one must do just as he has purposed in his heart, not grudgingly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.

The word translated here as “cheerful” is the Greek word ἱλαρός (hilaros) – used here in the neuter, ἱλαρὸν. You might recognize the word. It is from ἱλαρός that we derive our English word “hilarious” and it is on that fact that I've heard many well intended pastors pounce. They say, for example, that tithing shouldn't just be joyous, it should be “hilarious.” The problem with this view is that English word hilarious, though it may be derived from the Greek, still carries a different meaning to the modern hearer than it did for the original audience.

Strong (word # 2430) defines the word simply as “joyous, cheerful, not grudging.” HELPS Word Studies expounds on this a little: “properly, propitious; disposed because satisfied – describing someone who is cheerfully ready to act because already approving ("already persuaded"). hilarós ("won over, already inclined") is only used in 2 Cor 9:7 where it describes spontaneously non-reluctant giving.”

Tithing is a form of worship. Everything we have is given to us by God (John 1:16). When we tithe, we give back a portion of what God has given to us. We should want to do this. It should be done with a glad heart and not begrudgingly. This is what 2 Corinthians 9:7 is telling us and this is what is meant by the word ἱλαρὸν. That is how the original hearers would have understood it.

Something different is meant by the word hilarious. Hilarious describes something that is extremely funny. Those pastors I've heard use this point try to suggest we should be happy to the point of laughter. It's as though we should be rolling on the floor laughing when the offering plate goes around. Do you really think that is what Paul meant? Tithing is joyous but it's not a joke.

I believe there is great value in studying the original meaning of words. Word Studies are fantastic tools that can give us new insights into familiar passages. However, we need to be careful as we consider these words. Remember that when the Bible was being written, English didn't exist. It's a powerful temptation to project our understanding of a word onto its original meaning. We need to resist that temptation. Do not consider what the word means now; instead, ask yourself what the word meant then.

Granville Sharp's Rule and Christologically Significant Verses

If any “rule” can exist in Koine Greek, the Granville Sharp Rule must qualify as the most contested yet most proven. Granville Sharp was the 18th century son of the Archbishop of York. He is best known for his work as an abolitionist but has left us a great legacy in his theological writings. Sharp had no formal education but, while working as a young apprentice to a London linen-draper, he taught himself Greek.

In his studies, Sharp discovered an important Greek idiom – the rule which now bears his name. He noticed that whenever an article+noun+“kai”+noun construction occurred, both nouns always referred to the same person. This construction is commonly called the “TSKS construction.” A key point to this rule is that only the first noun has the article (“the”) and the second noun is anarthrous. Additional points include that the nouns must be singular, personal, and not proper names.

The rule sounds more complicated than it really is. Here is an example in English so that you can see how the construction works: 2 Peter 2:20, “the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (τοῦ Κυρίου καὶ σωτῆρος ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ). This short clause has the article (“the”), noun (“Lord”), kai (“and”), and noun (“Savior”). Therefore, according to Sharp's rule, both of these nouns refer to the same person. In this context, they obviously both refer to Jesus.

Here are a few more instances:

Matthew 12:22, τον τυφλον και κωφον (the blind and dumb)

2 Corinthians 1:3, ὁ Θεὸς και πατηρ (the God and Father)

Ephesians 6:21, ὁ ἀγαπητὸς ἀδελφὸς και πιστος διάκονος (the beloved brother and faithful minister)

Hebrews 3:1, τον αποστολον και αρχιερεα (the Apostle and High Priest)

Revelation 16:15, ὁ γρηγορῶν καὶ τηρῶν (the one watching and keeping)

The context of these examples clearly demonstrates that both nouns in each verse are references to the same person. Setting aside textual variations, the TSKS construction occurs some 80 times in the NT and most scholars agree there are no exceptions to Sharp's rule.

Sharp's rule takes on considerable, theological significance when applied to two verses: Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1. Here are the verses in the Greek:

Titus 2:13, τοῦ μεγάλου Θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ (the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ).

2 Peter 1:1, τοῦ Θεοῦ ἡμῶν καὶ σωτῆρος ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ (our God and Savior Jesus Christ).

In both of these verses, “God” has the article and “Savior” is anarthrous so, according to Sharp's rule, they are references to the same Person. In these contexts, that Person is Jesus. Therefore, this explicitly means that Jesus is both God and Savior.

Those who deny the divinity of Christ refuse to see what should be obvious. The usual objection raised is to question the intent of the original authors: was this “rule” in the minds of the writers as they penned the New Testament? Considering the frequency where the TSKS construction appears and the large number of unambiguous examples that exist in the NT, I would say the writers understood well and precisely meant to say that Jesus is God and Savior. Indeed, where such a large number of unambiguous examples exist, to insist that these two passages are exceptions is nothing more than special pleading.

The Best New Year Resolution

Start the New Year with Christ as your Savior!

Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. (2 Corinthians 5:17)

Happy Thanksgiving

As we reflect on the blessings God pours out on us, we sometimes tend to focus only on those good things God gives us. We thank God for our families, our health, our homes, our jobs, etc. What would happen if we no longer had these things? Would we no longer be thankful to God?

I’m reminded of those words God whispered to Paul: “My grace is sufficient for thee” (2 Corinthians 12:9). The things of this world are fleeting: our health, our families, our jobs, and even our lives. I find joy in these things for a while but they aren’t what I’m most thankful for. I thank God for His grace.

Yes, I thank God for all the blessings He has given me but even without them all, His grace is sufficient.

Have a happy Thanksgiving.

The Five Solas Part 1: Sola Scriptura

Over the next several days I will be publishing a series of posts on the Five Solas. The Five Solas are five Latin phrases (or slogans) that emerged during the Protestant Reformation and summarize the Reformers' basic beliefs and emphasis in contradistinction to the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church of the day. "Sola" means "alone". These five points represent a remarkably precise and enduring summary of the Christian faith.

While most Christians will agree with these points in principle, I’ve noticed that many aren’t able to argue for the accuracy of them using Scripture. For example, the first Sola we will explore is Sola Scriptura or “Scripture Alone.” Most Christians will agree that the Bible is our only source of authority and other sacred writings (such as the Book of Mormon), Church traditions, or men’s opinions are all subservient to the Bible. Yet how many Christians are able to defend this view of Scripture using only Scripture? It would be the height of hypocrisy to insist the Bible is the final source of authority if the Bible itself does not make that claim!

The most obvious passage dealing with the idea of Sola Scriptura could be nothing else than 2 Timothy 3:15-17:

And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

We see from this passage the following things:

>That the Scriptures are given by God.
>That the Scriptures are inerrant (how else could all Scripture be profitable?)
>That Scripture alone is able to make us “wise unto salvation”
>That with just the Scriptures we may be perfect and “thoroughly furnished unto all good works”

That single passage stands on its own merit and little more needs to be discussed. However, some groups may claim to agree with the above passage but at the same time will say that they have some other revelation in addition to the Scripture. If that is true, then it isn’t Scripture alone – it’s Scripture plus some other revelation.

Some groups, for example, claim that they hold either traditions or teachings that must be read, followed, or understood before a follower can correctly understand the Bible. For example, the Jehovah’s Witnesses are renowned for their “Bible study” groups. They print Bible study material such as the Watch Tower magazine which they claim is necessary to correctly understand the Scriptures. The organization actually discourages members from reading the Bible independently of the supporting material which they provide.

For people who believe that such instruction is necessary to correctly understand the Bible, I direct you to 2 Peter 1:20:

Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

There is no secret understanding of Scripture. The Bible says what it means – plainly. There ordinary understanding of a passage is the correct one and no other material is necessary to discover some other meaning. If someone claims that a passage means something other than what an ordinary reading reveals, great care should be taken to not let such a person deceive you (2 Corinthians 11:3-5).

Another claim held by some groups is to have additional Scriptures. The Mormons, for example, claim to have a companion to the Bible, The Book of Mormon. To them I would say that the cannon of Scripture is closed. Nothing more can be added or taken from the Scriptures. Consider Revelation 22:18-19:

For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

The Scriptures alone are our revelation from God. No other man or book can have revelation which contradicts the Scripture. The Bible alone is sufficient and everything the God wanted to know about Him is contained therein.

Further reading:

The Five Solas Part 2: Sola Fide

The Five Solas Part 3: Sola Gratia

The Five Solas Part 4: Solus Christus

The Five Solas Part 5: Soli Deo Gloria

Some More Comments About Sola Scriptura

There’s Dying and Then There’s Dying

“And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:” (Hebrews 9:27)

When God created Adam, it was His will that men would live forever. Of course, we know what happened: Adam disobeyed God and died as a result of his sin. It was by this act of disobedience that death entered into the world (Romans 5:12). As a result, we also die because we are descended from Adam.

Now, there are critics of the Bible who argue that our dying for Adam’s sin is unjust and even contradicts God’s command in Deuteronomy 24:16, “The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.”

So, are we punished for Adam’s sin? Not exactly. We die physically because we have inherited our body of flesh from Adam. It is this fleshly body that dies. We also inherit his propensity to sin (sometimes called “the sin nature”). But we are not condemned because of his sin; there is another judgment coming where the lost will be judged for their own sins.

“And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.” (Revelation 20:11-15) [bold added for emphasis]

So when a lost person stands before God on that day, he is clearly not judged by Adam’s sin but his own. The “books” which will be opened, I believe, are the books of the Bible. And God will judge each man’s works according to the things written in the books. I can almost imagine it now – God will read the commandment, “You shall not lie,” and then show the person every time he told a lie. Then He’ll read the commandment, “You shall not steal,” and show the person every time he stole. On and on God will go through the books showing the sinner every time he violated His word. When He is finished, the lost person will have no defense; he is guilty on all counts.

Then there is another book opened, The Book of Life (Philippians 4:3, Revelation 3:5, Revelation 21:27, et al). These are those people who trusted Christ as their Savior. They will not suffer the second death (Revelation 2:11) but have already passed from death unto life (John 5:24). When we stand before God in judgment, we don’t have to show Him our good works (because we have none). We only have to have our names in the Book of Life. But the person who rejected Christ and relied on his own good works is condemned.

Unless Christ returns in our lifetime, our physical death is inevitable. When we leave this body, Christians will be present with the Lord (2 Corinthians 5:8). Those who reject Christ, however, have a worse death waiting for them – the death of their soul.

“And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.” (Matthew 10:28)

Can Anyone Lose His Salvation?

An often asked question is, after a person becomes saved, can he ever lose his salvation? I knew a lady once who thought the term, “once saved always saved” was a quote from the Bible. Unfortunately, it’s not. However, I think the Bible is clear on the issue and we’ll look at a few verses to support it.

First, consider what salvation is; It’s a free gift (Romans 6:23, Ephesians 2:8). So if we cannot work to earn our salvation by our works, it’s difficult to believe we must keep it by good works.

Next, consider these Biblical descriptions of being saved:

>“We know that we have passed from death unto life,…” (1 John 3:14)
>“Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.” (2 Corinthians 5:17)
>“Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.” (Romans 6:3-4)
>“Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.” (John 5:24)

These verses and many others clearly demonstrate that being saved in not simply a description of a current status. It’s not like, say, working at a job – you’re there now but in the future you may not be. Being saved is a permanent change of who we are – new creatures no longer dead but passed unto life.

Also, there’s the simple term of “eternal life” (Matthew 25:46, John 3:15-16, Romans 6:23, Titus 1:2, et al). The Bible seems clear that believing faith brings ETERNAL life. Not life that lasts as long as you’re good. How can something end if it's eternal? If you had eternal life and lost it, then, by definition, you did not have eternal life.

Finally, we have the testimony of Jesus Himself. When He was speaking with the Samaritan woman at the well, He made this interesting comment:

“Jesus answered and said unto her, Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again: But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.” (John 4:13-14)

So the “water” Jesus gives us becomes “everlasting life.” He then says we will never thirst again. But if we have eternal life, then lose it, wouldn’t that mean we would thirst again? Wouldn’t that make Jesus a liar?

There is yet another passage even more explicit. Jesus said:

“And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.” (John 6:39-40)

Wow! Jesus is saying that He will lose NOTHING the Father has given Him and will raise the one who believes in Him on the last day. So, if someone did once believe in Jesus, then later “fell away” and was not raised on the last day, wouldn’t that mean that Jesus lost him? Again I’ll ask, wouldn’t that make Jesus a liar?

I’m not sure how Jesus could have been much clearer. I think John summed it up well, “These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.” (1 John 5:13)