I want to suggest that one crucial doctrine is sometimes relegated to the “good men disagree” category that should sit closer to the heart of orthodox Christianity: perseverance of the saints. Why do I say so? Is it really heresy to reject the doctrine of perseverance, a doctrine often referred to as “eternal security”? I’m not ready to call it heresy to reject perseverance of the saints and embrace the possibility of apostasy by genuine Christians. But I think it is far more dangerous to reject this doctrine than perhaps first meets the eye.
I grew skeptical when he called it “an offer you can’t refuse.” Either this man was hiding something about the house he was trying to sell me, or his sales technique was deeply influenced by The Godfather movies. The “deal” was a dirt-cheap price on a house in one of the best part of Louisville. It didn’t make sense. Deals like this one never find me.
Soon, I learned why he had stamped a giveaway price on the house: the foundation was cracked. In a matter of time, the structure would be compromised, and the house would crumble like my son’s Lincoln Log creations. Needless to say, I said no to this house with a hidden but fatal flaw.
Christian theology is similar: if we remove any of the foundational doctrines—the Trinity, the incarnation, the authority of Scripture, the person and work of Christ, and so on—then the entire building of our faith comes tumbling down. The cardinal doctrines of Christianity stand or fall together.
I want to suggest that one crucial doctrine is sometimes relegated to the “good men disagree” category that should sit closer to the heart of orthodox Christianity: perseverance of the saints. Why do I say so? Is it really heresy to reject the doctrine of perseverance, a doctrine often referred to as “eternal security”? I’m not ready to call it heresy to reject perseverance of the saints and embrace the possibility of apostasy by genuine Christians. But I think it is far more dangerous to reject this doctrine than perhaps first meets the eye. Like the rickety house I once nearly bought, rejection of perseverance renders unstable many other critical doctrines that rely on it as a solid foundation.
If genuine believers can lose their salvation and be cast away forever, consider the collateral damage to other biblical doctrines:
Election and Predestination
If God chose his people in Christ before the foundation of the world, is it possible for those same people to then “unchoose” themselves? No matter one’s view of election, final apostasy seems to render meaningless Scripture’s teaching on God’s eternal predestining of a people. Even if one holds to election based solely on foreknowledge, final apostasy seems to make God unreliable at best.
Atonement
According to Mark 10:45, Christ gave his life as a ransom for many. Jesus bore God’s wrath we deserved so he could buy us back from the curse of the law. If a ransomed one can be finally lost, doesn’t that then mean that the ransom price paid was not enough to actually purchase its intended product—the eternal salvation of God’s people? Final apostasy also seems to undermine the substitutionary nature of the atonement, since Christ was condemned in the place of his people. This view would seem to indicate that due to an exercise of their free will some of God’s people have once again fallen under condemnation with their sins no longer covered by the sacrifice of the substitute—even though they were once covered through the blood of Christ.
