Never Saved in the First Place

 

The term "never saved in the first place" is a term used by those on either side of the theological divide of OSAS. The moderate Securist uses it extensively to label anyone that possessed all the true fruits of a Christian and then later turned from their faith. Those that don't profess OSAS will contend that some only accept Christ in name only and are simply going through the motions, perhaps thinking that they can make it on their own. Although both sides agree that there are those who were never saved in the first place, for the Securist to use it as a "catch all" phrase to answer all doubts leads them into contradiction. The Securist claims "never saved in the first place" to describe someone that commits the same types of acts that King David commited but claims that King David never abandoned his salvation and was always saved. So why is a person doing these same things in our time "never saved in the first place"? This is pure contradiction and application of a double standard.

On the other hand, the extreme Securist will argue that they are still saved and are just living carnally. In other words, at the point of receiving salvation, the believer became irrevocably sealed into his salvation and can not become lost even if they should backslide and fall into willful sin of any sort, including becoming an atheist or a Christ-hater. They can even begin to fight against the very Gospel which by hearing and conviction by the Holy Spirit had brought them into their salvation and still not jepordize that salvation. Yet, when someone goes against this belief of eternal security, they are labeled as not saved and enemies of Christiantity, even though the one that is now fighting against God and Jesus are considered eternally secure.

I am told that the assurance of salvation comes from knowing that once you are saved, you are always saved. Your salvation is irrevocable. But when confronted with examples of people that fall away the typical response is "never saved in the first place". Yet while the Securist is affixing a "never had salvation" sign to this person's back, the person is confessing the he is still saved. He has assurance that once he was saved, he will always be saved. So where is the assurance in that? The Securist has NO guarantee that he/she will continue in the faith any more than the person they accuse of "never being saved in the first place". The only way for the Securist to actually know that he/she is truely saved does not come until they die! There is NO gurantee whatsoever afforded by OSAS theology that confirms that the Securist will not come to the conclusion later on in life that he/she was "never saved in the first place" simply because the elect will persevere, but those that are persevering are the elect.

Perhaps the problem is attitude.

Securists believe that salvation is a one time event. At some point in their lives they saw the need for a Savior and repented of their sins (some don't even profess a need to repent), but now they have come to the belief that there needs to be no willingness to turn from sin and live for God. They see it as a legal or financial transaction. Jesus offers, they accept, they are now eternally secure in their salvation. No refunds, no returns, DONE DEAL! If this is the Gospel message they accepted we should ask if they were truely "saved in the first place". And we should also ask if that is the message being given and accepted by all those that profess to be Christian in that camp, because the validity or falseness of OSAS doctrine poses some very real consequences in the way the Gospel is preached and the way new converts are being taught. Not only that, it affects the way in which the believer interprets scripture and understands the very character of God.

Case in point: A Securist claimed to me that at the time of salvation all her sins, past, present and future, were forgiven. She maintained that since God foreknows that she is going to sin, and since those sins have already been forgiven, it doesn't matter if she commits them. That's all about ATTITUDE. Most Securists won't admit it, but in analyzing what they profess, you will find that they truely don't consider faith as being believing and obeying what Jesus said. Nor do they truely profess following Jesus. To the Securist, faith is no more than accepting a free gift, and most profess to no strings attached, meaning no conditions exist.

Perhaps the problem is not having undeniable proof of OSAS.

Many Securist use the passage of 1 John 2:19 as proof of OSAS and "never saved in the first place".

I've even seen notations made to get the point across: "They went out from us, but they really didn't belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, (once saved) they would have remained (always saved) with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us. (never saved in the first place)"

But, was John discussing a spiritual principle here? It doesn't appear so as he told of these people leaving as a group and it doesn't seem rational that people fall away or abandon faith in groups. And the reason for them to leave must have been fundamental as John refered to them as anti-christs (2:18). This appears to be more of a situation where a group fashioned doctrines that weren't true to the faith and began professessing them. It is usually the introduction of a false doctrine or heresey that causes people to leave in groups, not a lack of faith or having "never been saved in the first place". One thing we can accept is that it must have been more than a difference of opinions if these people were labeled as anti-christs. Taking these observations into consideration, it is a weak foundation to assume once saved, always saved or promote the catch all phrase of never saved in the first place as the circumstances apply to an entirely different situation. And to put the shoe on the other foot, if OSAS is the meaning of this verse then the Securist is speaking of himself as the unsaved, in a manner of speaking. This letter was written to the church which grew into the Catholic Church and as such means that the professors of OSAS (the Reformation) are the ones that left the church. So by all means the Catholics can say that all the Reformers that left the church to form the Protestant Faith were never saved in the first place by using the Securist's rationality as John would have been refering to the Catholic church as the once saved, always saved group.

Perhaps the problem is that people need true assurance. Time and again I hear Securists claim that if you don't accept OSAS that you have no assurance of salvation. But where does our assurance come from? Do we gain our assurance from the words of an OSAS preacher without investigating the teaching or do we gain it from a true loving relationship with God? Assurance gained by leaning on the teachings of OSAS is not true assurance. This is head knowledge. True assurance of salvation can only be given by the Holy Spririt through faith in Christ. OSAS assurance appears to come from convincing yourself that you are one of the elect. All you are doing is taking away attention from whether you will persevere and shifting the focus to whether or not you were saved in the first place. Where's the assurance in not being able to tell if you were even saved in the first place? Where's the assurance of being able to know that at some future point in time, you won't suddenly become aware that you weren't saved in the first place? If it happens to others, then why couldn't it happen to you?

How can we know that our salvation is real without leaning on doctrine or feelings? By knowing what a TRUE Christian is.

A TRUE Christians shows love toward his enemies.

A TRUE Christian brings forth "fruit" that is pleasing to God.

A TRUE Christian's faith results in obedience that is accompanied by repentance that is shown through godly actions. (If you are a Securist that promotes Faith without works, take special heed to this verse. This is Paul speaking and confirming that faith should be accompanied by good works.)

A TRUE Christian has and continues to learn to deny ungodliness and worldly desires while living in a godly manner of righteousness and self-control. (This is not saying that we won't fail, but that we are possessing a willingness and desire to achieve that goal.)

A TRUE Christian undergoes discipline from the Father and understands hardships incurred as a part of that discipline.

A TRUE Christian not only hears the Word, but obeys it. (If you are be-lieving it, you should be-living.) In other words, a mental understanding of God's word should be applied to our daily living out of desire.

A TRUE Christian is aquiring a "wisdom from above" that results in an expression of good works and humble love towards others.

Possessing these traits is true assurance that you possess eternal life in the here and now! This is actual positive proof that gives assurance. This is not a head knowledge assurance given by a doctrine of man, but tangible proof that you WERE SAVED IN THE FIRST PLACE!

Do these descriptions fit the mold of YOU? Paul says to examine yourself to see if your faith is genuine. Here is a good starting point for taking inventory of yourself.

The OSAS catch all of "never saved in the first place" covers nothing more than what it says, some people were never saved in the first place. It doesn't explain the reasons of why someone was never saved in the first place when used as a catch all to explain away each and every case of apostasy. The biggest problem the Securist faces is in trying to explain away the idea of apostasy when it is so plainly shown in the Bible. Unbelievers can not fall away, only believers.

Regardless of ALL the above, the one thing we can agree to agree on is of the UTMOST importance. Whether or not a person has fallen away or was "never saved in the first place", the fact remains that he/she is an unsaved person, destined for hell without the Gospel and needs a Savior.

___________________________________________________________________

Eternal Debate Page