The Bible seems to present the idea that disciples of Jesus Christ can be unsaved. Whether these are cases of those who were never truly saved or who lost their salvation is a theological dispute for other posts (I favor the former), but that these cases exist cannot be easily denied. Jesus taught in His parable of the sower/soils (Luke chapter 8; cf. Mt. 13 & Mk. 4) that:

A sower went out to sow his seed. And as he sowed, some fell by the wayside; and it was trampled down, and the birds of the air devoured it. Some fell on rock; and as soon as it sprang up, it withered away because it lacked moisture. And some fell among thorns, and the thorns sprang up with it and choked it. But others fell on good ground, sprang up, and yielded a crop a hundredfold.

After giving the reason for His speaking in parables, Jesus explains the parable to His disciples:

The seed is the word of God. Those by the wayside are the ones who hear; then the devil comes and takes away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved. But the ones on the rock are those who, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, who believe for a while and in time of temptation fall away. Now the ones that fell among thorns are those who, when they have heard, go out and are choked with cares, riches, and pleasures of life, and bring no fruit to maturity. But the ones that fell on the good ground are those who, having heard the word with a noble and good heart, keep it and bear fruit with patience.

From this we can see that it is possible that a person can both hear, receive, and believe God’s word yet fall away. (Notice that these are contrasted with those who hear but do not believe unto salvation in the first place.) Jesus teaches a similar thing to his disciples during the Upper Room Discourse in John 15:

I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing. If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned.

This statement is all the more impactful when we realize that the Upper Room Discourse was delivered just after Judas, who was a disciple of Jesus (Jn. 6:71-72 cf. Mt. 10:4) had just left to betray Him (Jn. 13:18-30). Note that the disciples were perplexed – they had no idea Judas was the one. Nor was this the first disciple to leave Jesus - in John 6:53-66 many of Jesus’ disciples left Him after he gave them His difficult teaching concerning the consumption of His body.

Now, the key word in the above passage is “abide” (Gk. “meno”) which John uses to contrast true believers with antichrists in his 1^st and 2^nd letters:

Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us. (1 Jn. 2:18-19 [Note: the word “continued” in 1 John is the same as “abide.”])

Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son. (2 Jn. 1:9)

So we see from Jesus’ own teachings and experiences that disciples can leave the fold. This means that we should expect there to be people who profess belief in the Church today who are not true believers. This seems to me to be the concern of the writer of Hebrews (whose warning passages continue to fuel debate over the issue), who may be issuing pastoral warnings to the believing Jews at large - knowing that his knowledge of their actual salvation state is not sufficient to address them all as permanently saved individuals.

This should give us all pause if we tend to breathe a final sigh of relief when someone finally “says the prayer.” Evangelicals from Reformed Calvinist to Calvary Chapel backgrounds hold that believers cannot lose their salvation, and I agree, but we must not take this to mean that anyone who has even the smallest spark of belief is to be forever considered safe from falling away (the popular view of Philippians 1:6 notwithstanding). We simply do not know which disciples are not true believers unless (until?) they fall away. Fortunately, we are not held responsible for such knowledge. We are to take people’s words and actions into account and treat them accordingly (e.g., Mt. 18:15-17; 1 Cor. 5:1-5 & 11-12; 2 Thess. 3:14).

It is not uncommon for Christians to have occasional doubts about their faith. To help I think it is a good idea to first discover the root cause. I believe that human persons are physical/spiritual beings that have at least three aspects to their spiritual natures: emotion, intellect, and will. Doubt can creep in from any of these facets, or a combination of them. How doubt is dealt with will be determined by which kind of doubt one is facing.

Willful Doubt is caused by sinful disbelief (Rom. 1:18-19). This is not merely a lack of belief but a choice to rebel against the truth. This kind of doubt manifests as a tenacious unwillingness to accept the truth regardless of evidence. This person is always looking for reasons to disbelieve rather than seeking the truth. This should never be the case with Christians of course. The only way this kind of doubt is overcome is through the work of God in the person’s life.

Intellectual Doubt is honest unbelief based on one’s understanding (or misunderstanding) of facts. The heart cannot believe what the head thinks is false. This kind of doubt simply requires evidence to be extinguished. If sufficient evidence is provided to overturn one’s doubt it should dissipate (if not, it was probably willful doubt masquerading as intellectual doubt). Intellectual doubt is often used as a smokescreen for willful or emotional doubt, but it can also be the result of a combination of these with honest factual issues. For example, a person struggling with the problem of evil might have purely intellectual issues with the existence of an all-powerful good God in a world with s much evil. In this case, quoting Romans 8:28 will probably not be sufficient. There are emotional and intellectual issues here as well.

Emotional Doubt is more of a feeling that something is false even if one has no good reasons to think so. This kind of doubt characterizes the believer who desires (or “wills”) to believe and has no factual problem with what they want to believe, but for some reason they just don’t “feel” like it is true. It is important here to realize that feelings are simply not indicators of truth. Emotions are reactions to physical stimuli or thoughts - they are effects, not causes - and they change too often to be reliable indicators of anything other than the subjects personal state of mind or body. Emotional doubt needs to be seen for what it is and denied. Phil. 4:6-9 asserts that this kind of doubt may be dealt with through praying, thanksgiving, occupying ourselves with non-anxious thoughts - those things which are true to reality, honorable, righteous, pure, loving, of good repute, and things which are excellent in virtue and deserve praise. This is not mere daydreaming - it is an effort to develop a habit of dwelling deeply on such things. As C. S. Lewis once said, there are times when it would be very convenient for Christianity to be false. It is at these times, when the will is weak, that we most need facts to fall back upon.

Finally, we need to realize that because humans are physical/spiritual beings that each aspect affects the other. We can have feelings and thoughts that are actually caused by our bodies. Backsliding into sin is the quickest way to allow doubt to creep in. Sin can cause us to doubt our salvation or relation to God. This can result in depression or further rebellion. Instead we ought to trust the fact that “if we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (1 John 1:9), because “he who covers his sins will not prosper, but whoever confesses and forsakes them will have mercy” (Proverbs 28:13). Our physical states can also cause feelings - lack of sleep, hunger, etc. can actually make us feel things that are not connected to objective reality. Mental abilities can be short circuited by physical illness. While we do not necessarily want to go running to a doctor that sees all health issues in terms of the physical only, if our thought life becomes seriously aberrant or obsessive it might be time to see a specialist.

For an excellent treatment of the issue of doubt see Gary Habermas, Dealing With Doubt (Chicago: Moody Press, 1990). The entire book can be accessed free of charge here.

In the wake of “all the religious scandals” of late I thought I’d point out some even more depressing news from the Atheist front. Since any act committed by someone with religious affiliation is used by atheists to argue against religion it seems to me they won’t mind if the same logic is applied to them.

Vienna has the lowest percentage of religious conviction of any Austrian province, therefore anything bad that happens in Vienna can clearly be attributed to atheism (don’t think too hard, just keep reading). And what has Vienna been in the news for recently??? CNN reports that:

• An Austrian man (from Vienna!) has recently confessed to killing his parents, wife, and 7-year-old daughter with an ax. Vienna police said, “He is completely matter-of-fact … almost without emotion.”
• Josef Fritzl, 73, confessed last month to holding his daughter captive in a cellar below the family home (Just outside Vienna!) for 24 years, repeatedly raping her and fathering seven children with her.
• Just two years ago in Strasshof (another Vienna suburb!) a young girl escaped from the basement of a house after being held there for eight years and being repeatedly abused by her captor, Wolfgang Priklopil, who killed himself by throwing himself under a train.

Hmmmm - need I say more?

100th Post!!!

The Calvinism-Arminianism debate is often framed in terms of man’s autonomy. By autonomy is roughly meant “what natural man can do without God’s extra help.” For example, Calvinists believe that man can make no positive contribution to salvation until after God regenerates him. After that, man has the ability to believe. The Arminian sees a problem here. If regeneration alone results in belief, and only through belief can man be saved, then God is simply choosing to save some and not others. This seems to remove mankind from responsibility before God. But to the Calvinist it seems that if man can generate his own belief that this makes faith a work. Aagghh! There are other issues, but I think that a distinction might be made to alleviate some of the tension concerning belief-as-work.

First, I think we can all admit that regardless of which side we think is correct, the debate would not exist if the Bible did not seem to lay responsibility for man’s salvation on both man and on God. Second, we all agree that without God’s grace man could not be saved, and that works do not save. But if belief is thought of as a work then we must ask how a sinner could ever perform such a thing in the first place (Heb. 11:6) and how it would not nullify grace (Eph. 2:8-10). On the other hand, if belief is the result of God’s efficient causality then the blame for unbelief would seem to fall on God (Mt. 23:37). Scripture on both sides can be batted back and forth for both of these seemingly irreconcilable positions.

But I think there may be a better way to think about it. The Bible clearly presents natural man as God’s active, not passive, enemy (Rom. 5:10; 11:28). We are born battling God due to our selfish and sinful desires and we would not naturally switch to God’s side (Rom. 5:6). But couldn’t we choose to surrender? It is not required for one to positively affirm his enemy to give up the fight. Ceasing to strive against God’s grace is not, itself, striving (viz. law of non-contradiction). In fact, one might say surrender is the cessation of works! But choosing to cease is still an active choice on man’s part (e.g., ceasing to stand results in falling, but falling is not ‘by works’). This interplay of “actively making a passive choice” seems to be illustrated in the life of Jesus who, according to God’s predetermined plan (Acts 2:22), freely chose to lay down His life (Jn. 10:18), which resulted in Him being acted upon by men (Acts 2:23), who were held responsible for their choice (Acts 2:38).

This seems to (1) retain man’s responsibility for sin and unbelief while at the same time (2) affirm God’s efficient and active role in salvation, yet (3) relieve God from blame for leaving some to damnation if He must, and could, regenerate them to make belief possible but simply chooses not to do so in some cases.

My book from Moody Publishers has been given an official title and, as far as I know, cover art! It will be titled The Message Behind the Movie: How To Engage With a Film Without Disengaging Your Faith, and should be released early next year (Spring quarter 2009) if everything goes well.

The book is based on my seminar of the same title which covers the basics of film interpretation and evaluation with additional chapters on applying these messages to spiritually-significant topics such as Philosophy, Theology, Religion, and Ethics.

And as Frank Turek likes to say, “All proceeds from this book will go to feed hungry children . . . mine!”

If you have a group interested in the seminar please visit: www.dougbeaumont.org/seminars.