|
|
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:
Sir:
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?
Cordially,
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 bastionoftruth.org from which I assume you got our email
addresses.
In His Service
Alex
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,
Alex
Return to
Article Listing
HOME |