The recent discussions of eternal security/perseverence on this forum has lead me to ask a question. This is a question I had to answer myself at one time and it is a question everyone who believes in a certain type of eternal security needs to answer. You ready? Ok, here we go...... :tongue3: If you deny the points of Calvinism, the Doctrines of Grace, what basis do you "really" have for believing in eternal security? As I said, I had to answer this question for myself a few years ago. What I have discovered, through my own experience, is that many people who believe in eternal security apart from the "Doctrines of Grace" (Calvinism) fall into at least two errors... Antinomianism. This is the common no-Lordship view that is promoted by people such as Zane Hodges, Bob Wilkin, and Tony Evans. In this view, commonly refered to as "once saved, always saved", a person is saved by a one time act of faith. That one time act of faith, however, may not last. According to this view that person may, or may not, continue in their faith (ie...a true believer can commit apostasy and still enter heaven). Also, according to this view, that person may live an immoral lifestyle and still enter the Kingdom of God. This seems to be the most common trap for those who believe in eternal security apart from the Doctrines of Grace. It is, in fact, an error I myself spent some time believing. Interestingly enough, when I moved out of this error I moved towards the Doctrines of Grace. I have heard others say the same thing. The God "has to" view. This view is common among the antinomians and among eternal security advocates who, while not antinomian, don't affirm the Doctrines of Grace. This view teaches that when a person trusts Christ as Savior, God is now forced to keep that person saved no matter how they "turn out". The person may turn out to be a rank heretic, apostate, or become immoral, yet God is still obligated to bring this person to heaven. While some in this camp would never go to the antinomian extremes I just mentioned, the majority do. I think we have to ask ourselves, why do people who reject the Doctrines of Grace and believe eternal security often fall into such serious errors? I think the reason is that they have their basis for believing in eternal security wrong. These people want to believe that salvation is a deal between God and man (form of Arminianism), yet they also want to believe in eternal security (without the Doctrines of Grace). Normally those who believe that salvation is a "deal" between God and man also believe that both sides must hold up their end or the deal is off (ie...loss of salvation). However since these folks don't "want" to believe in the loss of salvation, and since they don't want to believe that salvation is totally of God (Doctrines of Grace), they have to find a way around both positions. So they create this system where God saves a person forever (promising them total security) and then, for all practical purposes, is not able to sanctify them. Why not? Because that would be God "over-riding" mans "all important" free-will. So how does God deal with these apostates in His family? According to these teachers He brings them to heaven and then punishes them. Charles Stanley, Zane Hodges, and Bob Wilkin actually teach that there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth in heaven! Amazed? Don't be, it is just the start of the troubles with this view. Apart from the Doctrines of Grace we have NO Biblical reason to believe in eternal security. Why not? Because the Bible does not teach security apart from Divine election. Eternal security, or better the perseverence of the saints, is naturally linked to the doctrine of election. If man is totally depraved, and if God in eternity past chose to save some based 100% on His will and purpose and based on nothing within the person, and if God sent His Holy Son, Jesus, to die on the cross and pay for their sins, and if God draws them to Himself, then it is the logical, and Biblical, conclusion that God would continue to work in that person's life. Believers persevere in the faith because it is God who is at work in them (Phil 1:6, 1Thess 5:23-24). Believers are kept secure in the faith because God personally elected them and, through the Gospel, drew them to Himself (Jn 6:37-39). Apart from the Doctrines of Grace there is no Biblical reason to believe in eternal security. BTW...read my signature. Antinomianism is the very error Spurgeon is responding to in the quote.