Relationships, if we want to be honest, are contingent on certain conditional terms of engagement, or interaction with another party. We certainly find our selves, in time, progressing onto intimacy or sometimes stagnancy. At some point, the relationship may even terminate. This, I believe, is indisputable. Most translations of the Bible use the word "if" between fifteen and sixteen hundred times. The word signifies a conditional statement and I'm aware of the argument that they are used in five different tenses, but they all still remain conditional. They always signify a choice. All throughout the Bible we see that God's relationship with His people is governed by a covenant or, as translated another way, a testament. The Old Testament [The Law] and the New Testament [The Age of Grace] contrast the transition into the dispensation of which we are now living. Still the "ifs" abound, or to say it another way, it still remains relational. There are still the same admonishments given by the apostles and Jesus to guard our relationship as were given by the Prophets in the old testament. Confession and repentance are still holding hands. The warnings of digressing into a reprobate state of mind remain and are preceded with that small but immensely significant word, if.
So, is "if" a choice? Do we have to "work out our salvation with fear and trembling?" [Philippians 2-12] When we are saved by grace, can we still fall into depravity? Better yet; who's saved by grace? Do we have to endure to the end, as Jesus stated? [Mathew 10:22] Do we have any obligations in our relationship? Can we choose to walk away and forfeit our salvation, or is freewill, at this point in the relationship, ultimately denied? This is where you will always hear that "they must not have really been saved." Can you fall and still be saved? One wonders at this point, as illustrated in the parable of the seeds, about those who received the word gladly, but were shallow in depth, which looks remarkably like the church today; "are they saved?" If you're honest, one might admit that you don't actually know, but God knows because He's the judge. The early church, known only as Christians and not as Methodists, Baptist, Lutheran and a host of other names, had to deal with this early on during the persecutions. Could one that denied Christ in order not to be eaten by beasts, burned at the stake, or otherwise butchered be brought back into the fold? After much examination and deliberation, they were welcomed back after REPENTANCE. So it was decisive in that you could fall but you can't quit. That lays the foundation for the basis or definition of the new covenant of grace. Is their a point of no return? [Hebrews 11:39] I would say yes, simply because of the warnings in scripture. The earliest writings of the church fathers supports this dogma, mentioning Mathew 10:22, in one incidence to support their position.
So, where does the once saved, always saved doctrine originate? I've done some research on the sinners prayer. It became a popular selling point during the reformation, especially taking off during the first and second great awakenings. Prayer is a huge game changer in the Bible and is clearly seen with the early church and on; but used as a means of putting the power of salvation into our hands, as in the 'sinners prayer' raises a red flag for me. For a Jewish person in the time of Jesus, obedience was inclusive with the word belief, or in simpler terms, doing as Jesus does. God held the key to salvation. As I previously stated, He opened the door, made salvation a possibility, and we have to choose whether to walk through it. We have to make a commitment. "If we make a commitment or covenant" with God we have an obligation to partake in the relationship. God has already done what was impossible for us to do on our own. Jesus did what we couldn't. This is a picture of what God did with Abraham. A sacrifice was done in which the animals were split in two, and as God was the only infallible party, He put Abraham to sleep and walked through the divided sacrifice to fulfill the vow. This was one of the two immutable promises as we saw in Hebrews 6:17-18. It sounds as if I'm splitting hairs at this point. Acceptance for what Jesus did for us is on the one hand, and acceptance of that accompanied with the obligation that follows, in our hand. The disagreement or the fly in the ointment, lies strictly in the obligation on our part. God does not do that part for us. "nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. "Nothing can separate us from the love of God"; I love that verse. What a lot of people imply, is that it negates our choice to walk away. Read it over again. Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature; now reread the parable of the seeds. What you'll see are the very ways we lose faith, interest,or just the old rejection of what we at one time received.
What if, "if" is!? When did "if" become non-conditional? How is the larger looming question of,"when" resolved? Was it when Gods' word looked oh so good until the realization of sacrifice you might have to make seemed too daunting and obligation reared it's ugly head? Let's sum up by saying it's pretty much as Paul stated; "I've run the race." The grace part has been fulfilled, the faith obligation continues to the end of the race. I do not walk in doubt, I walk in faith. My advice to anyone willing to accept this walk with Jesus, is to simply put on you're running shoes, and keep your eyes focused on the finish line.
