Philosophical Theology

Like a robust Christian worldview, a Reformed system of doctrine should be consistent, coherent and explanatory. What this means is: (a) the components of a sound theology may have mystery but not contradiction; (b) although theological constituent parts should be assessed discretely, they must be evaluated in light of the whole so that each ingredient does not undermine other elements of the one system they comprise; (c) such a unit of theology should provide a grid through which other texts of Scripture can be interpreted, reconciled, and practically applied. If there is paradox, it is in this. The Scriptures, from which our theology is derived, are to be interpreted through a theology we derive from the very same. That is to say, we inch our way to a reliable theological system while applying it as we go, even as we refine and improve upon it. Lastly, the Reformed tradition has uniquely produced reliable interpretative grids in her confessions and catechisms, if not also in the Systematic Theologies that complement them. In God’s kind providence, we needn’t re-invent the wheel!

A robust theology will include an ecclesiology and a soteriology (and much more). Whereas a Reformed doctrine of the church includes a visible-invisible distinction, a Reformed doctrine of salvation affirms a doctrine of perseverance of the saints. Muddled thinking about the former will result in grave misunderstanding of the latter. Apropos, Federal Vision (FV) theology typifies such confusion and equivocation with its lack of (a) covenant consistency, (b) intra-doctrinal coherence and (c) useful elucidation. Yet sadly, when it comes to theological antidotes to FV, the cures can be less than satisfying.

Because FV has been thoroughly debunked by the church (see PCA report), my interests lie elsewhere. Yet in order to grasp the inadequate responses to FV with respect to how warning passages comport with (even complement) the Reformed doctrine of perseverance, it would be helpful to grasp that the authors of Scripture were constrained to treat those within the visible church as if they were all united to Christ, (while appreciating some do not share in the salvific benefits of the Savior). Accordingly, the hermeneutical principle being advocated is the letters are principally intended for believers because they are written to believers. This common sense view avoids exegetical gymnastics by allowing the letters to be directed to their stated audience called: saints, beloved, chosen, predestined, household of God, etc.

Things begin to fall into place once we recognize that the letters are written to those in the church who are actually in Christ, and that false professions within the church’s pale cannot change that overarching principle. Given the reality of false professions in the church, the message to the saints was not diluted. It is crucial to grasp from the outset that the authors of Scripture were not responsible to accommodate unregenerate hypocrites in the church according to their unbelief but instead the authors treated them according to their ecclesiastical standing in the visible assembly. In other words, any member of the visible church is to be treated according to his or her baptism (then, when of age, profession), and not according to the indiscernible state of their soul. If unbelievers choose to deceive themselves and others about their Christianity, that’s on them. It cannot change Scripture’s intended target audience!

Mr. Postman, look and see…if there’s a letter in your bag for me:

The visible church is where the body of true believers assemble. Consequently, believers share the same physical mailing address as unbelievers in the church. Yet if Scripture’s principal audience are believers for whom Christ died, then from a Reformed perspective all members of the visible church cannot but be outwardly regarded as irreversibly redeemed and heaven-bound. This approach alleviates private judgments while making the indicatives and promises of Scripture acutely relevant to true believers. However, when apostasy occurs, the Scriptures do not teach that salvation is lost, or that the promise of salvation has somehow failed. Instead, when apostasy occurs another apostolic teaching takes precedence. When apostasy occurs, existential union with Christ is not severed but rather, latent unbelief finally comes to light. 

They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us.

1 John 2:19

The theological paradigm of treating all members within the church as irrevocably heaven-bound is readily established not only by the labels for church members such as “chosen” and “predestined” but, also, by the apostolic message of the surety of perseverance. 

To the church of God that is in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints together with all those who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, both their Lord and ours… [God] will sustain you to the end, guiltless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. God is faithful, by whom you were called into the fellowship of his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.

1 Corinthians 1:2,8-9

This expressed confidence of the certainty of perseverance is to be communicated to all the church’s members without distinction, even upon the heels of the most severe warning passages in Scripture.

But, beloved, we are persuaded of better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak.

Hebrews 6:9

But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who have faith and preserve their souls.

Hebrews 10:39

The “beloved” whom the author of Hebrews was persuaded would not “shrink back” and be “destroyed” are none other than the “holy brothers” who were said elsewhere to have shared in the “heavenly calling”.

Therefore, holy brothers, you who share in a heavenly calling, consider Jesus, the apostle and high priest of our confession,

Hebrews 3:1

In other words, the author of Hebrews addressed all struggling members as true believers (as opposed to potential unbelievers). We can be assured of this because the warnings of apostasy are accompanied with an expressed confidence of perseverance. But again, if and when apostasy was consummated, those deemed faithless would have been identified and declared according to what had always been the case, that they were never truly of us. (1 John 2:19) As we might expect, Scripture covers all the bases! Just because there are hypocrites in the church does not mean the apostolate would have shirked its responsibilities by diluting the message intended to warn true believers to make their calling and election sure. (2 Peter 1:10) Additionally, on the surety of God’s word we can know that although only true believers will overcome without fail, the promise of pardon and perseverance is to be outwardly extended and ministerially confirmed to all who are numbered in the church.

And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.

Acts 2:47

Why unbelievers are not in view:

In apostasy, at least one of two things occur. One either (a) overtly denies or will not affirm saving doctrine or else (b) the church member’s manner of life openly manifests the unbelieving heart that was once imperceptible. In contradistinction to apostasy, persevering faith entails staying the existing course and not turning back.

But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who have faith and preserve their souls.

Hebrews 10:39

Because the warnings are accompanied by an exhortation to persevere in the faith that one presently has, believers must be the intended audience. In other words, the exhortation to persevere and not turn back cannot apply to unbelievers, for the unbeliever’s current path is the wide road to destruction! Indeed, the unregenerate in the church are to do an about-face from their current path of faithlessness. Consequently, the charge to persevere presupposes justifying faith!

An illustration from common life might be useful. To one who chooses to rent a house, what use is it to offer warnings against not paying the mortgage? Renters are not in danger of losing their own houses in foreclosure because they are not in covenant with the lender. (Only actual homeowners are candidates for foreclosure.) Analogously, the Covenant of Grace is established only with Christ as the Second Adam and the elect in him. (WLC 31) Accordingly, only the parties of the covenant are subject to its promissory terms and conditions, and only upon exercising faith can one be in danger of losing his salvation (even though he never would).

Two extremes to avoid:

Whereas Federal Vision wrongly teaches that the non-elect can fall away (or apostatize) from more than their visible standing in the church, others have taught that the warning passages are only for unbelievers. FV overstates the covenant relation of the non-elect to Christ, whereas the other view dismisses the profound relevance and effectual means of warnings issued to true believers.

FV would have the apostate non-elect church member losing something significantly additional to what an unbaptized pagan who perishes loses. (What that additional loss is remains unclear.) FV’s error is due to faulty ecclesiology, soteriology, sacramentology, and trying to build intricate doctrine upon horticultural metaphors in Scripture. But again, my present interest is not to address the already refuted and aberrant views of FV but instead, my concern chiefly lies in addressing what I find to be a prevalent, yet inadequate, view held by many who deserve to be taken more seriously.

One prominent pastor from the PCA has written this about warning passages:

The intended audience is the visible church. That is why they make sense. To see them as applying to the elect either brings about the error of the Federal Vision theology or makes them useless…
In regards to the elect: They cannot fall away; they are sealed-right? How then can this call be to them?

Fred Greco

I find that quote to be an accurate representation of many influences in the Reformed tradition. Unfortunately, it misapplies the doctrine of the visible church due to a failure to recognize how warnings happily comply with the surety of perseverance.

So, how can warnings of final judgement be relevant to believers given the Reformed doctrine of perseverance, which teaches that a converted person will not fall away? After all, why warn a converted “child of promise” of the “destruction” that accompanies “shrinking back”? That is the question, is it not?

Before delving more deeply into the question, a few more fundamental principles might be useful.

If one does not persevere in faith, he will surely perish. That much is true whether a true believer could fall away or not! That a believer must persevere in order not to perish should not be a matter of contention. Consider:

1. If a believer ultimately rejects Christ, he will fall away and perish (warning) 

2. A believer will not fall away and perish (eternal security)

3. A believer will not ultimately reject Christ (modus tollens from 1 and 2)

Yet for some reason, not a few in the Reformed tradition are only comfortable affirming 2 and 3. Many think that the implicit warning found in 1 is “useless” for believers. Useless, mind you! (Another prominent Reformed pastor and professor seems to think that to apply warnings to true believers is to place them under a covenant of works.*)

To say that warnings are not relevant to believers seems about as sensible to me as saying that the “free offer of the gospel” is not relevant to elect unbelievers. Yet if we deem it necessary for the elect to respond in repentance and faith to the gospel lest they perish, then why find it strange that after conversion the elect need not persevere in faith and repentance or else suffer the same covenant sanction? Do the means of attaining unto future glory only apply to the elect up until the time of conversion? Again, if a believer ultimately rejects Christ, will he not perish?**

Unpacking the conundrum in light of counterfactuals, exegesis and modality:

Although it is false that anyone in the church would lose his salvation, it is only contingently false. In other words, it is not necessary (or in the nature of things) that some saved men could not possibly apostatize.*** Rather, men persevere because God fulfills his revealed promise to save to the uttermost. 

Two verses immediately below corroborate the scriptural precedent by presupposing that falling away is a distinct possibility if not for God’s promise to lose none in Christ, which is the impetus for Christ’s effectual intercession, which in turn leads to the surety of our perseverance:

I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail.

Luke 22:32

Jesus’ prayer for Peter is anything but superfluous. Jesus prayed for Peter in order that Peter’s faith would not fail. Consequently, Jesus’ words not only presuppose that Peter’s faith could have failed – they also suggest that apart from Jesus’ effectual prayer, Peter’s faith would have failed. That Peter’s faith would not fail is a contingent truth. What this means is, God knows Peter would persevere according to his free knowledge of his decree, and he made it certain by freely determining the efficacy of Christ’s prayer for Peter. 

Consider another passage from the epistle of warnings:

Christ is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them.

Hebrews 7:25

That which keeps the believer in the grace of God includes the intercession of Christ and the believer drawing near to God through the one Mediator, Christ Jesus. So, although believers could fall away apart from the means of divine intercession, believers won’t fall away due to God’s gracious decree that secures the conditional-means of perseverance. 

A couple more examples before moving on:

But I discipline my body and keep it under control, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified.

1 Corinthians 9:27

Paul buffeted his body so not to become a castaway. Had he not, the apostle would not merely have realized loss of reward but heaven itself! (To be disqualified is on par with reprobation.) Consequently, the promise to the saints of persevering grace is not without the effectually wrought means of subduing the flesh in faith.

Lastly, in Acts 27 we read that Paul was divinely guaranteed that none of the lives of those who sailed with him would be lost. Yet the divinely determined means to the preservation of those lives was the warning of loss of life if any abandoned the ship! In the face of the promise that no life would be lost, the warning of loss of life was both genuine and true. But not only that, the warning of loss of life was effective in ensuring no loss of life! The analogy to perseverance is striking. If we find warnings useless when it comes to salvation yet useful with respect to other decreed ends, then we are being arbitrary, inconsistent and engaging in a form of special pleading.

Scripture is replete with examples of decreed means to the eschatological fulfillment of what God’s promises contemplate. Indeed, if God has chosen you for salvation, it is not without your repentance, faith, prayer and even your sanctification, which is never without obedience and personal holiness, without which nobody will see the Lord. (Hebrews 12:14)

Consistent, coherent and explanatory:

The points below are taught in Scripture and cohere with each other without contradiction. Lastly, a sound theology can explain the usefulness of warnings as they relate to perseverance.

1. The epistles are written to believers.

2. Believers are exhorted to repent or perish.

3. Scripture teaches that believers will not perish.

4. Warnings to repent rather than perish will not ultimately be rejected by believers. (If warnings are not heeded, God is free take his children home out of season without ultimate rejection or apostasy obtaining.)

5. Those who depart from the faith were never truly saved.

6. General warnings of a future judgement can be an effective means for both believers and unbelievers to re-evaluate their faith and fear hell in light of an incongruous lifestyle to saving faith. However, Scripture’s personalized warnings against not persevering in saving faith, coupled with the assurance given to the saints that they will “not shrink back” and that “better things accompany salvation”, can only apply to believers. Again, the charge to persevere in saving faith presupposes having saving faith.

Practical applications:

Without the fruit of sanctification, one’s assurance will be diminished. That is a good thing! After all, just imagine if infallible assurance were indiscriminately gifted to those holding on to pet sins.

Indeed, it seems quite fitting that there would be a symbiotic relationship between sanctification and full assurance of faith, otherwise we might foolishly cherish our sins more than the light of God’s countenance. Accordingly, for struggling believers in particular, infallible assurance of salvation can seem elusive. Thankfully, infallible assurance is not of the essence of faith and that some have to wait long to attain it! (WCF 18.3) Having our assurance shaken should create in us a desire to draw near to God and be restored to the joy of our salvation through the gifts of repentance, faith and absolution. Yet once we return and are, again, justifiably resting in God’s love, it would be foolish not to be all the more careful and diligent to walk in the light and keep short accounts with God.

In closing:

A true believer who wallows in sin, yet grasps the doctrine of perseverance, should take seriously the warning passages. After all, anyone who lolls around in sin will have a difficult time knowing he is a true believer. And although a believer needn’t concern himself with losing his salvation, he might do well to evaluate the fruit and evidence of his salvation. After all, one’s doctrine of perseverance can be theologically pristine without a realistic fear that to continue in unrepentant sin will lead to eternal destruction. Sober theological reflection by a believer who is playing fast and loose with the Lord, when grounded in the warning passages and the gospel of deliverance, can be the very means of spiritual victory, even a leap in personal holiness. Indeed, the Scripture’s warnings are written to believers, which is what makes them so useful for believers!

* A believer who heeds the warnings of God does not necessarily strive for salvation by self-effort or automatically place himself under a covenant of works. After all, Spirit wrought obedience is a non-causal, non-meritorious necessary condition for final adoption. It is “plain vanilla“ Reformed theology that good works done in faith, which God appoints for all those he makes holy in salvation, is freely and effectually bestowed, even sometimes through the issuance of covenant warnings that are heeded. That God’s promises to the elect are walled in by covenant blessings and curses, which correspond to faithful obedience and willful sin respectively, is not contrary to the law or the gospel. But unfortunately, spiritual self-evaluation has fallen out of favor with some due to a distorted view of law and gospel. Looking outwardly to Christ is necessary for assurance, but it doesn’t preclude the biblical basis for self-examination.

** It would be a case of special pleading, arbitrariness and equivocation to suggest that the warnings to believers pertain to stumbling and loss of rewards and non-elect members are being warned of eternal punishment. 

*** “In other words, it is not necessary (or in the nature of things) that some saved men could not possibly apostatize.” In other words, there is no metaphysical or strictly logical principle that makes it impossible that one could become unregenerate if left to himself. However, we cannot infer the reverse, that one without regeneration could acquire the grace of regeneration if left to himself. Regeneration requires the monergistic work of the Holy Spirit, yet Scripture indicates that a believer could fall away if not for the Covenant of Grace. 

**** It’s as though it’s thought that warnings have value only if they go unheeded. Moreover, given that the purposes of God are multifaceted, warnings can have a less obvious and secondary purpose that actually pertain to the non-elect in the church: non-elect members will show forth the eschatological confirmation of willful unbelief, which will vindicate God’s forbearance in the great and terrible day of the Lord. (I am grateful to Dr. James Anderson for these two insights.)