JUser: :_load: Unable to load user with ID: 3547
JUser: :_load: Unable to load user with ID: 42
JUser: :_load: Unable to load user with ID: 47
Question about "Once Saved Always Saved"Written by Jacob Prasch
To: James Jacob Prasch,
I have shared a link of yours with some friends ("Christians Cults") even though you tolerate the Calvinistic heresy "once saved" promoted by people like John MacArthur and Dave Hunt. I have recently explained why a teaching by Hunt is false. We can see that you deal with Pentecostal and Charismatic and Catholic heresy. When will you deal with Baptist and Reformed heresy? Sandy Simpson refuses to touch it. Mike Oppenheimer thinks Baptists are OK. David Servant explains why Calvinism is false... Why is the "once saved" heresy still taught in seminaries? Don't these people have Bibles?
On our recorded teaching "Once Saved Always Saved" I openly attack unconditional eternal security as a contra-biblical false belief. While not pelagian (which is also heretical) or a devotee of Charles Finney, my views are essentially akin to Weselyan-Arminianism.
On our recorded teaching "The Twin Pillars of Madness" I compare Calvinism to other false belief systems.
In our recorded eschatology teachings, moreover, I continually warn against unconditional "Once Saved Always Saved" as a perversion of what Scripture teaches concerning "Eternal Security" (which is that we are eternally secure in Christ if we remain in Christ); unrepentant backsliders are no longer in Christ until and unless they repent (and therefore do not have the assurance of salvation) or else were never even truly saved to begin with.
Unlike your own apparent emphasis however, unconditional "Once Saved Always Saved" is only one of several false doctrinal components of Calvinism we opposeÃ‚Â "“ there is more wrong with Calvinism than this one error alone (although it is indeed an error) and I and our ministry openly hold Beza's TULIP from the "Remonstrance of Dort" to be heretical.
We do, however, draw a distinction between moderates like Spurgeon and John MacArthur (who do not believe backsliders are still saved but say they were never saved to begin with) and hard line Calvinists. Dave Hunt would take a similar view to these except he would be anti-Calvinist and wrote a book against it titled What Love Is This? refuting Calvinism. It is also a matter of public record that we do not approve of John Piper and have publicly attacked both his Replacementism and Calvinism.
There is an unprincipled liar called Dan Corner who falsely accuses me of holding to "Once Saved Always Saved" in spite of the fact that there are several clear teachings in the public domain clarifying this is not my view. This wicked, ignorant liar actually goes so far as to say that Charles Spurgeon did not believe the Bible to be God's Word by distorting one of Spurgeon's remarks out of context.
No, I do not agree with Spurgeon, MacArthur, or others on this pointÃ‚Â "“ but they do not believe what they are misrepresented as believing. They simply have the idea that those who fall away were never actually born again. I do not think they are right (although in some cases those falling way may indeed never have been regenerate), but they are not teaching "Once Saved Always Saved" in the sense you seem to think of it or as more extreme Calvinists do.
The term "Perseverence of the saints" is indeed totally biblical as used in Revelation 14:12, but in context it has nothing to do with the "Once Saved Always Saved" of the Calvinists who distort it. Likewise the assurance of salvation is plainly taught in Scripture in 1 Timothy 4:16 but it is not unconditional (Calvinism again distorts the Scripture out of context). I object to Calvinism's distortion of these truths; the babbling liar Dan Corner, however, in effect objects to these truths even being in Scripture.
The entire Calvinist system is distorted and "Once Saved Always Saved" is but one of its many flaws.
Calvinism is evil; it derives not from Scripture but from 16th Century humanism and it is philosophically akin to Islam because of its determinism (as in the Islmic "inja allah"). I have stated these things publicly and please feel free to quote me. But please do not assign to me things I do not believe or to other teachers things they do not believe.
I can offer no further comment on this issue. Any further remarks are recorded in the material mentioned above.
Sincerely in Christ,
Latest from Jacob Prasch
Leave a comment
Make sure you enter all the required information, indicated by an asterisk (*). HTML code is not allowed.