Bastion of Truth Reformed Churches in the Philippines


Return to Article Listing



An E-mail Inquiry on the Doctrine of Preservation


Dear BTRC Y-Group,


Below is a short correspondence between me and a person who identified himself as Juan Real. Notice how a person who is offended by the Gospel doctrine of the Perseverance of the Saints desperately argues by mere logic under the cloak of using Scripture. Notice also how Arminians evade the objective truth and resort to emotional argumentation.


May God grant Mr. Juan Real spiritual understanding and a genuine saving knowledge of Christ.


May this be profitable to you spiritually,


In His Service,

Bro. Alex Aquino



Juan Real (E-mail Inquirer):

Do you believe a genuine believer can renounce his faith in Jesus Christ if he is totally deceive by the teachings of the spiritual enemy? 



A. Aquino:


You have not expressed your intention in asking this question. But let me ask you, Can a person who is totally deceived by the teachings of the spiritual enemy be a genuine believer?

Alex Aquino




Juan Real:

Hi Alex,

Well correct me if I am wrong but haven't Hymenaeus and Philetus abandoned the truth. After all, nobody can wander away from it if they have not been there in the first place. 

Their teaching will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, who have wandered away from the truth. They say that the resurrection has already taken place, and they destroy the faith of some. 2 Tim 2:17-18

Let me know what you think.



A. Aquino:

I am not sure if you are sincere with your inquiry for you show cowardice and refuse to be cordial by not identifying who you exactly are.

What I think does not matter. What God Himself says is what really matters:

If Hymeneaus and Philetus really possessed the truth they would have remained in the truth. This is what 1 John 2:18-19 says, "Little children, it is a last hour, and as you heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have risen up, from which you know that it is a last hour. They went out from us, but they were not of us. For if they were of us, they would have remained with us; but they left so that it might be revealed that they all are not of us." (LITV)

I suggest that you explore further our website at from which I assume you got our email addresses.

In His Service



Juan Real:

Hi Alex,

It seem like you are resorting already to an ad hominem here. Anyway, is that your way of responding to email inquiries? So what if the email inquirer remains anonymous? Will that affect your way of responding knowing that you claim to be a Christian? Anyway, going back to your response, why jump immediately to the writing of John and not deal first the context of Paul's passage? I want to believe that you are a learned man who knows how to carefully interpret the Scripture. Aren't you? Are you familiar with "hop-scotching" on bible verses? That's what the cults normally do without understanding the context of the passage. I am not saying that your group is a cult. 

Oh, by the way, you ended your letter with this salutation "In His Service" and yet you begin with such insulting judgmental remark, "I am not sure if you are sincere with your inquiry for you show cowardice..." This is just what I notice.

Juan Real



A. Aquino:

Mr. “Juan Real,”

If it is your opinion that I have resorted arguing ad hominem here, you are entitled to it. Consider though that Jesus could have answered those deluded people who asked Him, “Rabbi, when did you get here?” with a straightforward “I got here a couple of hours ago”, or so. But He rather told them, “You are looking for me not because you saw miracles but you ate the loaves and had a fill” (John 6:25 , 26). I am personally not comfortable corresponding to someone who shows traces of dishonesty by refusing to identify himself. How can he be honest about anything at all (especially when dealing with matters of faith and the “Truth”) if he cannot even be honest about his own identity much less introduce himself more “cordially” (Please review how carelessly you constructed your first email)? Yet you’ve witnessed for yourself how I have given you a Scriptural response and have not evaded your question. Notice that even though you gave reference to Scripture you are actually appealing to pure “reason.” That’s what “cults” also do. Yes, I am well familiar with Scripture “hop-scotching” but I am also aware of the “organic unity of Scripture” and the principle that “Scripture interprets Scripture.” If you suppose that it is possible (based upon your personal interpretation of Paul) that a person may lose his “saved state,” have you at all considered how this conclusion of yours squares with other parts of Scripture which say otherwise? You convey the impression that John contradicts Paul and God’s Word, therefore, contradicts itself. Paul as you seem to understand teaches that one may lose his salvation while John does not. You are in a very dangerous position. Isn’t that itself “cultic” and “heretical”? I won’t mind at all if you accuse me of being cultic. I have been used to it. If you thus accuse me of being cultic, it only reveals that we differ fundamentally on the matter of salvation. It could be possible that we are both unsaved, or only either of us is saved, but it is impossible that we are “both” saved.

I regret that you took offense at my observation that “you show cowardice.” But if I were in your place I would have rather either humbly apologized for the anonymity or confirm that my name is indeed “Juan Real” and that it is not a pseudonym. But your dishonesty manifests in your taking offense. 

You claim to be scrupulous about the context surrounding 2 Timothy 2:17 & 18 concerning the apostasy of Hymenaeus and Philetus. You failed to expound the immediate surrounding context yourself for this correspondence’s sake. But I want to point out that you could have spared yourself of much difficulty and insult if you “really” considered the context “correctly.” You should have read on a bit further towards verse 19 where Paul says, “Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.” It appears therefore that those two heretics are NOT THE LORD’S and therefore do not eternally belong to Him in the first place for if they were truly the Lord’s they would have remained in the truth unto the end.

Facing the question again. Do you hold that a person can actually lose and regain his salvation over and over in spite of Scripture’s testimony (John 10:27-29; Romans 8:29, 30; 35-39; Philippians 1:6; Hebrews 7:25)? Does God give “eternal” life which is “temporary” life and “contingent” upon the sinner after all? Is it really possible that Hymenaeus and Philetus who were once supposedly genuinely “born-again” in whom God’s “incorruptible” seed (1 Peter 1:23 ) was sown could spiritually “die again” and God’s sown incorruptible seed is after all “corruptible seed” in them? Isn’t this blasphemous? Please consider.

Please do not be emotional the next time you respond to this email. Remember that you are concealing your real identity under a pseudonym. So any insult you incur is not insult to you personally but to your “mask.”

(Still) “In His Service” in Defense of the Gospel,



Return to Article Listing