Assurance

Does not Hebrews 6:4-6 teach that a believer can fall away and be lost?

First, we must remember that Hebrews was written to Jewish believers at a time while the temple was still standing (Heb. 10:11). Many Jews had embraced Christianity as a sect of Judaism merely, like the Pharisees and Essenes, but without perceiving that it was an exclusive religion which set aside Judaism and the Judaic sacrifices absolutely, leaving only Christ in their place. The whole body of Jewish Christians were therefore addressed as being on the ground of profession, hence the exhortations of which this passage is one. It will be remembered that in the Gospel of Matthew, which is also Jewish in its outlook from the 18th chapter on, the same exhortations frequently occur. The peculiar peril of the Jewish professor was that he might, having taken Christianity only superficially, give it up and go back to the sacrifices, which would be in effect “crucifying the Son of God afresh and putting him to an open shame.”

The case supposed in the sixth chapter is not that of a mere unbeliever, because a mere sinner may at any time believe and turn to the Lord. The case is one of a person who has stood in the full blaze of gospel light; he has been made a “‘partaker’’ of the Holy Ghost’ in His convicting power (John 16:8-10) and has therefore tasted of the word of God and of the powers of the age to come. The case is fully described by our Lord in Matthew 13:20, 21. The seed of the word has found lodgment in his emotional nature. Intellectually he is convinced. Now if such an one goes back instead of going on to believe and be born again, it is impossible to renew him again to repentance. We can never judge in any individual case, but warning is to be sounded out in the ears of professors, surely never more necessarily than in this day when so many are joining church after an emotional revival, without any real transaction with Jesus Christ about their sins. That this is not a true Christian who goes back and is lost is certain from the great passages which teach unqualifiedly that such a person cannot be lost, such as John 10:28, 29; Ephesians 4:30, ete.

As to falling from grace, that a good Christian may do, and that millions of Christians have done. They have lost the sense of the grace of God and are living under law; but falling from grace is not falling from salvation. It is losing the joy of assurance and going back under the cold shadow of the law. Also (2 Pet. 3:17), we all fall from our steadfastness. Again and again doubts as to God’s providence and fatherly care overcome us — we fall into despair and unbelief in many ways, but we do not fall into hell nor out of the hand of God, who keeps us. The truth as to this whole matter, however, let me repeat, is to be ascertained first by distinguishing the Scriptures which relate to professors from those which relate to believers, and secondly, by establishing ourselves in the great truth of assurance.

Should not Protestants preach assurance of full salvation tovall who believe in Jesus Christ — not to “‘those who have confessed their sins’’?

Yes. Salvation is not through confession of sins, but through simple faith in Jesus Christ (John 38:16, etc.). Confession by a believer restores his fellowship when that has been broken by sin (1 John 1:10).

From 1 Corinthians 9:27 would it not seem as though Paul thought there was a possibility of losing his salvation?

Paul’s apprehension was not that he might be a “castaway” in our present-day use of that word; but that he might be “disapproved” at the judgment seat of Christ, where the works of believers pass His scrutiny. This judgment occurs after the translation of the Church (1 Thess. 4:14, 17). The apostle had in mind the truth stated in 1 Corinthians 3:11-15.

How can we reconcile such passages as Romans 14:15 and 1 Corinthians 8:11, which state that a brother can be “destroyed”? and “‘perish,’”? with the teaching of the eternal security of believers?

To make the words “destroy” (Rom. 14:15) and “perish” (1 Cor. 8:11) mean the eternal destruction of a regenerate and justified believer through the eating of meat against conscience, under the example of a “stronger” brother, would be to negative the teachings of Christ and the apostles concerning the eternal security of the believer. The context seems to make clear what is in the apostle’s mind. The early Gentile churches were planted in the midst of, and gained their converts from, idolatrous heathen. Doubtless many, as they heard the new gospel, were forsaking their idols under conviction of the inefficacy of idol worship, and of the sin of idolatry, who had not as yet fully come to Christ. But they had come amongst the disciples, and were, in charity, accounted “brethren.” For such, it was of the utmost importance that their breach with the past should be complete. To see a strong and influential brother “sit at meat in the idol’s temple” might well be the first link in a new chain which should bind them again to their idols. Then they would “perish.”

Did the Old Testament saints (e. g., Saul and Solomon, who began so well) share in the eternal security of believers?

The eternal security of the believer is a New Testament doctrine and cannot be applied to Old Testament believers, who were under a covenant of works, not of grace. It is true indeed that the Old Testament believer was justified by faith (Heb. 11), but with that faith a perseverance in obedience. was also necessary, else he lived under a broken and unpropitiated law, which was inexorable in its judgment. Not so with the believer, who is saved by grace, and his disobedience does not affect his salvation, but his fellowship, peace and growth. As to Saul and Solomon, we can only leave them in the hands of a just God whom they at least began to serve.

How could one be a partaker of the Holy Ghost
without being saved (Heb. 6:4-6)?

There is an incomplete faith which stops short of receiving Christ (John 1:12) and of final committal (2 Tim. 1:12). Our Lord speaks of this in Matthew 13:20, 21. The seed falls into the emotional nature, — ‘“and anon with with joy,’ etc. After Pentecost, this incomplete experience might be, — often is, even deeper. Of this we have a description in this passage in Hebrews. There is a distinct work of the Spirit in conviction and enlightenment, — He even giving tastes of the “goodness of God” and of the powers of the coming age — healings, and the like, — but even then a soul sometimes draws back and fails to enter in, and it is impossible to ‘‘renew them again to repentance,’ etc. They have by this work of His, been “made partakers of the Holy Ghost,” etc., but failing to go all the way, are lost without hope. Not that God is not willing to give them repentance or to receive them, but they are like Esau, who after rejecting the blessing, “found no place of repentance (or, literally, “way to change his mind’), though he sought it (the blessing) carefully with tears” (see also Heb. 4:2; 10:26-29,39). That it cannot refer to a believer, see verse 9; also John 10:28, 29; 6:39; Philippians 1:6.

Does not the parable of the Talents in Matthew
25:14-30 teach that one once saved may be lost?

This is not a gospel parable, but a parable of the kingdom, which is the sphere of profession, made up of wheat and tares — good fish and bad fish, etc., etc. (Matt. 13). The unprofitable servant in Matthew 25:30 represents the tares in the kingdom. Servants are being judged. Some are sons, some are not. No possessor of eternal life ever called his Master “a hard man.”’ To no saved one, however unfaithful, could the Lord say at His appearing, “Cast ye him into outer darkness,” after having said, when they received the gift of eternal life, “they shall never perish.”

In Matthew, from chapter 13 on, the sphere of professed discipleship is in view. The profession may be sincere, or it may be merely formal. In the parable of the Virgins this profession is tested by the coming of the Lord; in the parable of the Talents, profession is tested by service. The foolish virgins and the unprofitable servant are mere professors.