Why John 6:37-40 Can’t Support Eternal Security

[BNR32FAN]

I just uploaded a video to YouTube explaining why John 6:37-40 can’t be interpreted to support eternal security and I’d really appreciate any comments or criticisms on my explanation both positive and negative.

 

[Clare73]

I just uploaded a video to YouTube explaining why John 6:37-40 can’t be interpreted to support eternal security and I’d really appreciate any comments or criticisms on my explanation both positive and negative.

The text states otherwise: all whom the Father has given to Jesus
will come to him,
who will lose none who have been given to him,
whom will have eternal life.

Eternal life is eternal, it is not lost.

I'm sure you'll understand if I take Jesus at his word.

 

[BNR32FAN]

The text states otherwise: all whom the Father has given to Jesus
will come to him,
who will lose none who have been given to him,
whom will have eternal life.

Eternal life is eternal, it is not lost.

I'm sure you'll understand if I take Jesus at his word.

The word eternal is describing what kind of life those who abide in Christ and endure to the end will receive. What about Paul’s statement in 2 Timothy 2:12?

 

[Clare73]

The word eternal is describing what kind of life those who abide in Christ and endure to the end will receive.

Yes, eternal life is about a quality of life as well as about a duration of life. It is God's (divine) life, which is not the same as human life.

What about Paul’s statement in 2 Timothy 2:12?

The faith of any who disown Christ is counterfeit faith, it is not saving faith.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Yes, eternal life is about a quality of life as well as about a duration of life. It is God's (divine) life, which is not the same as human life.

The faith of any who disown Christ is counterfeit faith, it is not saving faith.

Paul said “we” and “us” in that statement.

 

[Longing to kneel]

I just uploaded a video to YouTube explaining why John 6:37-40 can’t be interpreted to support eternal security and I’d really appreciate any comments or criticisms on my explanation both positive and negative.

How tormenting it must be to feel as though you have to walk on eggshells each day rather than trust in the finished work of Christ.

A person can only be born physically once and a person can only be born spiritually once.

 

[Clare73]

Paul said “we” and “us” in that statement.

Not all the "we" and "us" who profess saving faith actually possess saving faith.

 

[BNR32FAN]

How tormenting it must be to feel as though you have to walk on eggshells each day rather than trust in the finished work of Christ.

A person can only be born physically once and a person can only be born spiritually once.

Why should I be afraid when my salvation only depends on whether or not I continue to cooperate with God? Adam was spiritually alive before he became spiritually dead. And James 5:19-20 also indicates that a believer can be in danger of the death of their soul.

“My brethren, if any among you strays from the truth and one turns him back, let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins.”
‭‭James‬ ‭5‬:‭19‬-‭20‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

 

[BNR32FAN]

Not all the "we" and "us" who profess saving faith actually possess saving faith.

So you’re saying that Paul was uncertain of his salvation?

 

[BNR32FAN]

How tormenting it must be to feel as though you have to walk on eggshells each day rather than trust in the finished work of Christ.

A person can only be born physically once and a person can only be born spiritually once.

I’d be more than happy if you would be so kind as to point out where exactly that I went wrong in my explanation in that video.

 

[Clare73]

So you’re saying that Paul was uncertain of his salvation?

Are you uncertain of yours?

 

[BNR32FAN]

Are you uncertain of yours?

No but can you answer the question please?

 

[Clare73]

No but can you answer the question please?

It is the same as your answer to the same question about yourself.

 

[BNR32FAN]

It is the same as your answer to the same question about yourself.

Yes but my answer is based on my belief that I will never turn away from Christ or deny Him. That doesn’t mean that I’m not capable of turning away or denying Him. What Paul’s statement proves is that everyone including true believers are capable of turning away from Christ. That’s what 2 Timothy 2 is all about, it’s Paul explaining the importance of persevering which is precisely why he quoted Jesus from Matthew 10 because Jesus was giving the exact same message to His twelve disciples.

I explain all of this in detail in this video.

 

[Clare73]

Yes but my answer is based on my belief that I will never turn away from Christ or deny Him. That doesn’t mean that I’m not capable of turning away or denying Him.

Do you think Paul did not have the same belief?
Do you think Paul was uncertain?

What Paul’s statement proves is that everyone including true believers are capable of turning away from Christ.

Are you not a true believer?
Does that not include you?

Actually, what Paul's statement shows is that warnings are one of the ways that God keeps believers from falling away.
That means that the choice of turning away and denying him never has any appeal to them and so they never choose to do so.
Those to whom falling away has appeal and who choose to do so are not born again and do not receive these persuading graces.

That’s what 2 Timothy 2 is all about, it’s Paul explaining the importance of persevering which is precisely why he quoted Jesus from Matthew 10 because Jesus was giving the exact same message to His twelve disciples.

Because warnings is one of the ways God keeps the elect from allowing their fallen nature to turn them away.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Do you think Paul did not have the same belief?
Do you think Paul was uncertain?

Are you not a true believer?
Does that not include you?

Actually, what Paul's statement shows is that warnings are one of the ways that God keeps believers from falling away.
That means that the choice of turning away and denying him never has any appeal to them and so they never choose to do so.
Those to whom falling away has appeal and who choose to do so are not born again and do not receive these persuading graces.

Because warnings is one of the ways God keeps the elect from allowing their fallen nature to turn them away.

Ok now apply that line of reasoning to Luke 13:6-9.

“And He began telling this parable: “A man had a fig tree which had been planted in his vineyard; and he came looking for fruit on it and did not find any. And he said to the vineyard-keeper, ‘Behold, for three years I have come looking for fruit on this fig tree without finding any. Cut it down! Why does it even use up the ground?’ And he answered and said to him, ‘Let it alone, sir, for this year too, until I dig around it and put in fertilizer; and if it bears fruit next year, fine; but if not, cut it down.’ ””
‭‭Luke‬ ‭13‬:‭6‬-‭9‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

Notice that despite Christ’s efforts to save the tree the outcome is still uncertain.

 

[Clare73]

Ok now apply that line of reasoning to Luke 13:6-9.
“And He began telling this parable: “A man had a fig tree which had been planted in his vineyard; and he came looking for fruit on it and did not find any. And he said to the vineyard-keeper, ‘Behold, for three years I have come looking for fruit on this fig tree without finding any. Cut it down! Why does it even use up the ground?’ And he answered and said to him, ‘Let it alone, sir, for this year too, until I dig around it and put in fertilizer; and if it bears fruit next year, fine; but if not, cut it down.’ ””
‭‭Luke‬ ‭13‬:‭6‬-‭9‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬
Notice that despite Christ’s efforts to save the tree the outcome is still uncertain.

The outcome (salvation) is not uncertain. . .where there is no fruit, there is no salvation.

All the parable is talking about is the time frame for the fruit, without which fruit it is cut down.

 

[BNR32FAN]

The outcome (salvation) is not uncertain. . .where there is no fruit, there is no salvation.

All the parable is talking about is the time frame for the fruit, without which fruit it is cut down.

I’m surprised actually, I expected that you would have a problem with Jesus trying to save people who won’t be saved. I thought you held to the doctrine of irresistible grace.

 

[Clare73]

I’m surprised actually, I expected that you would have a problem with Jesus trying to save people who won’t be saved.

Or one that is taking longer to come in, demonstrating that all do not come in the same amount of time.

I thought you held to the doctrine of irresistible grace.

I don't find that phrase in the NT.

Nor do I find taking longer to come in to be contrary to election (Eph 1:4, Ro 8:29-30, 9:6-26, 11:5, 7, 28, 16:13, Col 3:12, 1 Th 1:4,
2 Th 2:13, Tit 1:1).

 

[BNR32FAN]

Or one that is taking longer to come in, demonstrating that all do not come in the same amount of time.

I don't find that phrase in the NT.

Nor do I find taking longer to come in to be contrary to election (Eph 1:4, Ro 8:29-30, 9:6-26, 11:5, 7, 28, 16:13, Col 3:12, 1 Th 1:4,
2 Th 2:13, Tit 1:1).

It says if it bears fruit this year fine, if not cut it down. So it’s not a matter of the tree eventually producing fruit, it’s a matter of whether or not the tree produces fruit or if it is cut down.