ELECTION AND ETERNAL SECURITY Calvinism OSAS

Looking At Election Has Nothing To Do With Eternal Security

What does it take to disprove eternal security? Is it hard or impossible to disprove this teaching? Is one forced to logically consider the Calvinistic understanding of election to properly know about eternal security or not? The truth is: it is very easy to disprove eternal security and looking at election has nothing to do with this eternal security issue. Let me illustrate this for you.

The Car Analogy

The teaching of eternal security is like saying all Ford automobiles are blue. (That is just like saying once a person gets saved he will always remain saved.) To disprove the teaching that all Ford automobiles are blue, all it takes is just one example of a single Ford automobile which is not blue. Similarly, all it takes to disprove eternal security is a single example of any person who has ever been saved who has afterwards died spiritually (became spiritually lost again) for any amount of time and for any reason.

The Second Way To Disprove Eternal Security

Also, if a written and authorized statement could be produced from the president himself of Ford automobile manufacturing that not all Ford automobiles are blue, that is, there are also green, red, silver, black, yellow Ford automobiles, then such an expert would also disprove the conviction that all Ford automobiles are blue by his document, and without producing an actual example of a Ford automobile that is not blue.

This can be equated to the many Scriptures that declare that a righteous person can die spiritually through sin; fall from grace by believing wrong doctrine; perish for preaching a false gospel or lose his salvation by disowning Jesus. Election doesn't have any influence on any of these.

Election Analogy

Election is like saying how that Ford automobile came into existence. It has no bearing on it afterwards. And to consider if a person comes to regeneration and initial salvation by the unconditional election of Almighty God or not, has zero to do with whether that righteous person can afterwards lose his salvation through some act. It is both illogical and unscriptural to say one must consider election when studying eternal security. To discuss election when examining eternal security will only cloud and confuse the issue of eternal security, which some Calvinists want to intentionally do.

By looking at the Scriptures we have at least a dozen examples of righteous people that lost their salvation—either temporarily or permanently. (Some got their salvation back and some didn't.) We also have scores of Scriptures which show loss of salvation can happen. The examples prove it does happen. Eternal security is refuted. There is no real controversy except for those that want to unscripturally and illogically cleave to this salvation-security-in-sin teaching.

To remain saved one must stay on his spiritual guard, which eternal security teaching will destroy. This is a very serious and one-time life-test with eternal consequences. We must live holy now or spend eternity with the devil later. Please read through the New Testament for yourself and change accordingly. Your soul hangs in the balance. Don't just listen to the popular teachers on radio and TV. They are proclaiming a dangerous and false message about eternal security which will lead to the damnation of many. Don't be deceived. BTW, did you know that all 5 points of Calvinism hang or fall together and that Calvinism has a double message? GOD BLESS YOU.

The Perseverance Of The Saints

John Calvin -- Great Theologian or Heretic?

Eternal Security or Conditional Security

Evangelical Outreach Alphabetical Map