Author Archives: closingstages

Where Conviction is Absent, Mischief is Hegemonic

Posted on by
Reply

“Shall the throne of iniquity, which devises evil by law, have fellowship with you?“  Psalms 94:20

ConvictionConviction is defined as the state or appearance of being convinced. It is a fixed or firmly held belief held as proven. That would mean the mind is made up, truth has been discovered, and boundaries are then set in place which should never be breached. When we consider the United States of America, looking to its humble beginnings, the Constitution was developed by a group of extraordinary men with the conviction that all men were created equal and had the right to live as free men apart from the tyranny of others. Over the last 400 years laws have been put in place to safe guard that conviction.

So too, the foundation of the Church was established by another group of extraordinary men who we call the Apostles. These men also lived with a conviction, one which has governed the body of Christ for some 2000 years. This conviction was that a child was born of a virgin who was none other than Immanuel (God with us). This child grew up and was both Son of God and Son of Man, and for three years went about preaching the good news of the Kingdom of God and doing many miracles. This God Man suffered under Pontius Pilot, was Crucified and on the third day rose again, ascended to the right hand of God the Father until His promised return.

In recent years, and spanning several decades we have witnessed the abandonment of both convictions listed above. What has replaced these convictions is mischief, which is now the dominating influence over the political and religious communities who have joined in recent days as a cooperative spirit to stir society and the general public to a general consensus that humanity is approaching an evolutionary breakthrough. At the forefront of this Gnostic humanistic movement in the last decade is tolerance. Both the political and religious camps are pushing tolerance. Tolerance in and of itself is not a bad thing, however, when ethical, Biblical, and Constitutional issues are shoved to the side and swept under the rug for the sake of tolerance, I take issue with it. Developing tolerance without a moral, Biblical, and Constitutional foundation amounts to no less than mischief.

MischiefMischief can be defined as conduct or activity that playfully causes petty annoyance. But it can also be described as vexatious harm or trouble, an injury or evil caused by a person or other agent or cause. Today we are watching how Evangelicalism is driven off message by diverting attention from the gospel to ineffective political attempts to legislate morality. In the mean time, the legislative bodies of Congress and the Senate have diverted attention from the Constitution of the United States by legislating immorality such as abortion, civil unions, same sex marriage, etc. Sadly, in the last three years we have seen how our Government and their so called war on terror has now placed the American people and the American way of life in jeopardy by ending the war abroad and turning it inward. Now, with the NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act), the American people can be charged and detained indefinitely without the right to an attorney or trial. Truth is, whether its Political or Evangelical, the Right or the Left, our leaders are now running a mock and have been given over to mischievousness.

Western Culture as a result has given way to practical atheism and moral relativism. Our present culture has developed the view that anyone with Biblical conviction are just clinging to bronze age beliefs as if somehow practicing such a faith based on ancient myths has any relevance to the political climate of our age. This view also holds that theists’ inability to grasp the natural world is evidenced (although not exclusively) by the constant bickering between them. One individual recently informed me of this as he stated…”I’m not attempting to critique the three great Abrahamic religions at the moment, I’m talking specifically about the seemingly insignificant, tiny denominations that are so concerned with interpretation of negligible differences in irrelevant Scripture and the application of such scriptures that they’ll actually argue about it.” This individual went on to say that a relatively small sect of modern Christianity; a division of protestantism – evangelicalism has in its midst a legion of believers so fanatical that they’ll actually find fault in fellow believers doctrine based on a compilation of texts and books that have proven to be so erroneous and contradictory that it’s a wonder how in the world the religious right can get anything done at all.

In all fairness, isn’t this true of both the Republican and Democratic parties who through the Dialectic process are forming Post-Modern Culture in tolerant and relevant thought? The individual mentioned in the above paragraph is the result of modern evangelicalism as it is now evidenced that the Christian influence which has shaped Western Culture that spread worldwide in the 19th century are now producing atheism and relativist thought as a consequence. Although the Religious Right wave the Bible and the Christian flag and have become a political block there is no Biblical foundation beneath them. They applauded President Bush for restricting stem cell research which came from aborted babies yet did nothing to stop the abortions. Abortion is always the Republican’s running platform yet they themselves say it’s a matter of the individual states to decide. The same is true now of civil unions and same sex marriage. Politics cannot dictate morality! If we have no Biblical foundation, we have no foundation at all!

“No one calls for justice, nor does any plead for truth. They trust in empty words and speak lies; they conceive evil and being forth iniquity.“  Isaiah 59:4

Dr. Benjamin Rush stated: “Without religion, I believe that learning does real mischief to the morals and principles of mankind.”1 Though the word “religion” is a generic term, today I would replace it with the word “Scripture.” For two reasons: First, many believe we are in an age that is privileged with discovery, science, and readily available data that’s on-demand for anyone who takes the time to actually study the truth. And Secondly, those who cling to this belief also view the bible, regardless of what version you choose to be a perversion. They believe “Scripture to be a slowly but ever-evolving hodgepodge of writings, poems, laws, myths, and firsthand accounts sewn together with subtle, almost indiscernible disregard to the versions that came before it. None of which, (according to their thinking) are exhaustive, but are largely historically inaccurate, and all of them are so severely self contradictory that it requires a truly delusional individual to ignore the cognitive dissonance the books narratives present…if you consider them narratives at all.” And they call us extremist! Yet the view presented here has the most extreme hatred of God, truth, morality, and Scripture I have ever seen! Again, this individual I am quoting from is the fruit of Modern Evangelicalism.

No, many within the Evangelical camps view God to be as vindictive, capricious, and blood thirsty as ever, and view Scripture (In particular Revelation) a revival of the Old testament. If you believe the Bible and are against homosexuality (In their opinion), you are part of the homophobic culture of bigotry, intolerance, and mysticism of the Bible. Hmmmm, Gnostic thinking at its best, esoteric spirituality runs rapid today doesn’t it? I mean, Scripture is now viewed as arcane, yet humanistic thought, knowledge and science are tangible. Can you see how society has been given over to mischief? After all, the view held today is that…”there’s no feasible reason why two people of the same sex shouldn’t enjoy the same rights as two people of opposite sex. 20 years from now this will be compared to the civil rights movement of the 60′s, women’s suffrage and the nineteenth amendment, and perhaps even the abolishment of slavery… and rightfully so. These cultural break through’s were human triumphs that were brought about by individuals who fought for the underprivileged and often abused; they had the courage and conviction to fight for what was right. And guess who fought them every step of the way every single time? the religious right.” (Emphasis Mine)

Movement away from Biblical conviction has and does give way to lawlessness and immorality. And Scripture says so…”Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron” 1 Timothy 4:1-2. But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power” 2 Timothy 3:1-5. This then, describes our Culture does it not? Within and without the religious systems.

1. Rush, Benjamin. James Henry Morgan, 2 (Carlisle, PA: Dickinson College, 1933), p. 11.

Redding not exempt from crime? What the…

Posted on by
4

Redding

Some of the most physically dangerous cities for American women based on FBI-reported crime rates are found in Michigan, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Illinois, Alaska, and California. These statistics are based on violent crimes per 100,000 people per capital. From Memphis Tennessee, Anchorage Alaska, to Saginaw Michigan, crime is filling these cities as fast as homes are foreclosed. Oddly enough, vacant homes are now filled with drug dealers, addicts, prostitutes, gang members, and copper thieves. Foreclosed homes is as much an epidemic in this country as crime is. They’re becoming a magnet for criminal activity. In the middle of the mix is, Redding California. With a population of 93,000 Redding is recorded as having 797 violent crimes and 66 rapes. I know, by now you’re probably saying, so what’s the big deal with that? Well I’ll tell ya.

Redding California is known for none other than Bethel Church with Bill Johnson (apostle) and Chris Vallotton (Prophet). Wrapped around the ministries of these two individuals is dominion theology and Cultural Transformation. Bethel Church believes that a supernatural God can and does intrude upon natural realities, at least that’s the language they use to describe their church and ministry. In Bethels view, every believer is a supernatural minister whom signs & wonders should follow. With that is their theme verse; “Thy kingdom come…on earth as it is in heaven,” Matthew 6:10. At bethel they claim an open heaven, spiritual latter’s into heaven, open portals, Angelic visitations, glory clouds, etc.

Bill Johnson has spread out to virtually every state, and most, if not all of our cities including both the urban and rural areas. So, in America you can say Bill Johnson is practically everywhere. He now has a high profile ministry which is touching the entire nation. Yet, even in his home town no evidence is given which shows there is a change, no transformation. I’m sorry, but the statistics speak for themselves. Crime hasn’t dropped, it’s continually rises. There is still more Churches closing than there are new church plants. Our prisons are still overflowing and our hospitals are still full to capacity.

So much for Bill Johnson’s “Cultural Transformation”! Geez, how long does it take to transform a city, seems they have been talking this stuff for decades now. In my home town here in NW Ohio, a small town of nearly 16,000 Bill Johnson is present in several Churches. One in particular, Harvest Life Fellowship is heavily involved in Bill Johnson’s “Cultural Transformation” credo. No changes going on here! I see their membership out and about doing their everyday business like anyone else, shopping, eating, etc. And like any other city you still hear police and ambulance sirens daily. As paradoxical as this may sound, we have two hospitals here, both doing very well. And with tongue in cheek, many of the members of this Johnsonite Church work at one of the hospitals. You would think that with all the signs and wonders following them they would heal themselves out of a job.

But such is the case with extra-Biblical Churches and Ministries! Allot of talk, not much action, and the world keeps spinning, chaos and confusion still plagues the minds of men with visions of grandeur as most of our Church leadership only see through rose colored glasses a pinked sky.

1.  Forbes.com

If I Were The Devil

Posted on by
1

If I were the Prince of Darkness I would want to engulf the whole earth in darkness.

I’d have a third of its real estate and four-fifths of its population, but I would not be happy until I had seized the ripest apple on the tree.

So I should set about however necessary, to take over the United States.

I’d subvert the churches first, I would begin with a campaign of whispers.

With the wisdom of a serpent, I would whisper to you as I whispered to Eve, “Do as you please.”

To the young I would whisper “The Bible is a myth.” I would convince them that “man created God,” instead of the other way around. I would confide that “what is bad is good and what is good is square.”

And the old I would teach to pray — to say after me — “Our father which art in Washington.”

Then I’d get organized.

I’d educate authors in how to make lurid literature exciting so that anything else would appear dull, uninteresting.

I’d threaten TV with dirtier movies, and vice-versa.

I’d peddle narcotics to whom I could, I’d sell alcohol to ladies and gentlemen of distinction, I’d tranquilize the rest with pills.

If I were the Devil I’d soon have families at war with themselves, churches at war with themselves and Nations at war with themselves until each in its turn was consumed. And with promises of higher ratings I’d have memorizing media fanning the flames.

If I were the Devil, I would encourage schools to refine young intellects, but neglect to discipline emotions; let those run wild until before you knew it you’d have to have drug sniffing dogs and metal detectors at every school house door.

Within a decade I’d have prisons overflowing, I’d have Judges promoting pornography, so I could evict God from the Courthouse, then from the schoolhouse, and then from the houses of Congress.

And in His own Churches I’d substitute philology for religion, and deify science, I would lure priest and pastors into miss using boys and girls and church money.

If I were the Devil I would make the symbol of Easter an egg.

And the symbol of Christmas a bottle.

If I were the Devil I’d take from those who have and give to those who wanted until I had killed the incentive of the ambitious. Then my police state would force everybody back to work.

And what would you bet, I could get whole states to promote gambling as the way to get rich.

I would caution against extremes and hard work and patriotism and moral conduct.

I could convince the young that marriage is old fashion, that swinging is more fun, that what you see on TV is the way to be. And thus I could undress you in public and I could lure you into bed with diseases for which there is no cure.

In other words, If I were the Devil I just keep on doing what I’m doing.

Paul Harvey, ABC Radio, Monday – March 8, 1993

Paul Harvey

Conditional vs. Unconditional Salvation: What was the Question?

Posted on by
10

debate 1There has been an attack upon those of us who believe in OSAS (Once Saved Always Saved) on Facebook by those who believe OSTL (Once Saved Then Lost). I am OSAS…….ONCE SAVED ALWAYS SAVED…. and I certainly don’t want to mislead anyone that aren’t OSAS into thinking that I believe someone can lose their salvation.

Often the verbal language is extremely hurtful, even cruel in many respects as those who are OSAS in belief are called deceived, heretics, and told the OSAS crowed will lead many straight to hell. 99% of those who are OSTL have been vicious and condescending, and act as though the OSAS people are already lost and going to hell just because they believe it. One individual recently went as far as to say that those who believe in OSAS should have a “spiritual lobotomy.” Now if we are to take this literally, one can safely conclude that all those who believe in OSAS posses an intractable mental disorder, meaning we are not easily controlled, not docile, and that we are obstinate in our view of Eternal Security.

The simplicity of salvation is plain and easily understood in scripture. Likewise, the doctrine of Eternal Security is also easily understood in scripture. It should be equally as easy to understand if one can lose salvation…..and at what point. When challenged, you get a myriad of “proof-texting” isolated verses thrown at you which are neither contextual or conclusive in themselves. If in fact a true blue born again believer can lose salvation, at what point do they? How much sin does one have to commit before they are cast out? Can you be saved again? And, how many times can you be saved again? Is it really an issue of sin? Or, is it simply a matter of abiding or overcoming? No matter how you slice it, every example presented from OSTL always ends up being a Salvation by “works” rather than “grace,” ALWAYS! Yet Paul scolded the Galatians by saying:

O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you that you should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed among you as crucified? This only I want to learn from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh? -Gal. 3:1-3

If it’s a matter of “falling away,” or “abiding,” what of the Prodigal Son who left his Father to live a lascivious lifestyle and wasted his inheritance on riotous living? Was he not still a son when he returned to his father? Or is this an example of losing one’s salvation only to be re-born again? The Prodigal did confess he sinned against heaven and in his Father’s sight. And if it is so that he was “born again” again, how does this fit into Hebrews 6 where it is said “For it is impossible…if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put him to an open shame?” (vs.4,6) And what of the lost sheep whose owner sought it out and returning once he found it rejoicing having found his sheep which was lost (Luke 15:4-7). Was the sheep lost eternally? Or did it simply loose it’s way? If it was lost eternally, was it then reborn again? It seems that before this sheep was lost it was indeed a sheep, remained a sheep while lost, and when returned was still, a sheep, was it not? What of the man in the Corinthian Church who was sexually immoral having laid with his Fathers wife? If you look closely, Paul instructed the Corinthians to “deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus” – 1 Cor. 5:1-5 (Emphasis Mine). In this case, there is no thought of the man’s eternal damnation, he is disciplined by the Lord in this life because of the sin he has committed, but he is saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

When presenting these questions to the OSTL more often than not you get a schizophrenic response, or you just get ignored altogether. While eternal security can be identified as a formable doctrine in Scripture, OSTL exist as a patchwork theology lacking any real biblical exegesis and is hermeneutically bankrupt. One such example is the idea that “Salvation is a gift, and like any gift, it can be returned.” This may be a nice philosophy but lacks in biblical content. In fact, not one example exist in Scripture. False teachings seek to rob people of what is worthwhile, but offer nothing substantial in its place. A denial of eternal security is, in its essence, a belief that we must maintain our own salvation by our own good works and efforts. This is completely antithetical to salvation by grace; “For by Grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast” – Eph. 2:8-9 (Emphasis Mine).

Not of works and that not of yourselves is pretty straight forward! The moment you add works of any kind or in any amount as a means of gaining or keeping eternal life, salvation is no longer by grace (Rom. 11:6). We can contribute nothing towards salvation! “God justifies the believing man, not for the worthiness of his belief, but for the worthiness of Him in whom he believes” [Hooker].1 So why do some of the most enthusiastic supporters of truth get so tripped up over eternal security? The loss of one’s salvation cannot be explained nor supported by Scripture, still various scriptures are explained with theories and conjecture which become a patchwork quilt of far-fetched interpretation that require an unbelievable amount of energy to propose, must less defend (Last sentence is borrowed from a friend, edited by myself).

So to the question of giving back the “Gift of Salvation,” I think the chances of a Christian giving back his new nature in Christ in return for his old self, that self which was condemned to hell for eternity, would be like a heart transplant recipient giving back his new heart for his old diseased heart. If it were possible, why would we? Believers are born again (regenerated) when they believe (John 3:3; Titus 3:5). For a Christian to lose his salvation, he would have to be un-regenerated. The Bible gives no evidence that the new birth can be taken away. The Holy Spirit “Indwells” the believer (John 14:17; Rom. 8:9), for a believer to become unsaved he would have to be “un-indwelt” and detached from the body of Christ. No evidence is given in Scripture supporting such an act. John 3:15 states that whoever believes in Jesus Christ will “have eternal life.” If you believe in Christ today and have eternal life, but lose it tomorrow, then it was never “eternal” at all.2

So from this point on, and to the end of this article, I’m going to insert an article from “got Questions?org titled: “What is conditional security?” My reason is simply because it explains the difference between these two camps far clearer than I myself can. Although, it will ruffle the fathers of those who are OSTL. Before I do, let me clarify myself, I am in no way either a Calvinist or an Arminian, I believe in “Eternal Security” because it is a formable Biblical Doctrine upon which I agree on. With that in mind, I submit the article:

“Conditional security” is a theological term used in reference to the salvation of believers in Jesus Christ. It describes the enduring quality of the Christian’s salvation. In other words, a Christian’s salvation is “conditionally secure.” This begs the question: upon what condition is the believer’s salvation secure? Proponents of conditional security assert that the salvation is conditional upon remaining faithful until the very end. To use an analogy the Bible uses, the athlete must finish the race in order to receive the prize. To support this view, those who adhere to the doctrine of conditional security would point to such biblical passages as the following:

“And many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved.” (Matthew 24:11-13)

“So therefore, brothers, we have an obligation—but it is not to the sinful nature, to live according to it. For if you live according to the sinful nature, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live, because those who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God.” (Romans 8:12-14)

“Now, brothers, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.” (1 Corinthians 15:1-2)

“Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life. Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up.” (Galatians 6:7-9)

These passages, and many others that could be cited, point to the conditional quality of the believer’s salvation. In each of these passages, the biblical author (under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit) uses conditional language (e.g., if you endure, then you will be saved) to highlight the nature of the believer’s security in Christ. In order to ensure the security of our salvation, the believer must: 1) Endure to the end; 2) live by the Spirit; 3) hold fast to the preached word; and 4) sow to the Spirit. It’s not as if the gift of salvation is lacking in any way, but the individual believer must earnestly strive to remain faithful. In the words of Paul, “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling” (Philippians 2:12).

Given the weight of the biblical evidence, it would seem that the view of conditional security is unassailable. How could anyone argue with the notion that the believer must remain faithful until the end to secure his salvation? Yet, there is another side to this debate. This is the age-old theological debate between Arminians (those who hold to conditional security) and Calvinists (those who hold to what it called “eternal” security or Perseverance of the Saints). Where the Arminian can trot out dozens of biblical passages that point to the believer’s conditional security, the Calvinist can point to an equally large array of biblical passages to support the view of eternal security, such as the following:

“For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect—if that were possible.” (Matthew 24:24)

“For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.” (Romans 8:38-39)

“I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand.” (John 10:28-29)

“And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory.” (Ephesians 1:13-14)

Just as with conditional security, many more passages could be listed that detail the eternal security of the true follower of Christ. For each of the above passages, one thing stands out—the eternal security of the believer has nothing at all to do with the individual effort of the believer, but on the preserving grace of God, whereas the passages that support conditional security seem to focus on the believer’s ability to remain faithful.

debatesWhat are we to make of all this? Does the Bible teach both conditional and eternal security? Does God speak with a “forked tongue”? The answer to both questions is “no.” Yet, we must be able to reconcile the passages that speak of the believer remaining faithful with the passages that speak of God preserving the believer to the end. The key to this riddle is in looking at what theologians have called the Doctrines of Grace (DoG). The DoG have been alternately called the Five Points of Calvinism (a misnomer as Calvin never articulated just “five points”) or TULIP (an acronym based on the aforementioned five points). Here, in brief, are the DoG:

Total Depravity: Due to original sin, man is born thoroughly corrupt and is unable to do anything pleasing to God, nor does he seek after God.

Unconditional Election: Because of man’s depravity, God must step in to secure the salvation of the believer. God does this by electing him unconditionally (i.e., man contributes nothing) to salvation.

Limited Atonement: In order to receive those God has elected unto salvation, atonement must be made to satisfy God’s righteous judgment on their sin. God does this through the sacrifice of His Son, Jesus Christ.

Irresistible Grace: God applies the merits of this salvation in “real time” by drawing His elect irresistibly to Him by the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit. This is accomplished through the means of preaching the gospel.

Perseverance of the Saints: The salvation God has wrought for believers is seen through to the end as God preserves and sanctifies His elect until the end.

In order to evaluate whether or not the believer’s salvation is conditionally or eternally secure, one must first deal with the preceding five points of the DoG. Perseverance of the saints is not a stand-alone doctrine, but logically rests upon the other four points. The linchpin of the DoG is the first point, total depravity, which, if true, the other four points must necessarily follow. Space does not permit a thorough defense of the doctrine of total depravity, but suffice it to say that the Bible unequivocally teaches that man is, on his own, totally incapable of coming to God for his salvation (Matthew 19:25-26; John 6:44; Romans 3:10-18; and many more).

Critics of Calvinism and the DoG will assert that if we teach and hold to these doctrines, holiness and piety will go out the window. In other words, if salvation is eternally secure, what restrains a believer from sinning at will? Claiming faith in Christ becomes the ultimate “get out of hell” card. The Apostle Paul asked the same question in Romans 6:1. Paul’s response was that sin is not compatible with the new life in Christ (Romans 6:2-4). Far from advocating a license to sin, the DoG actually do more to promote Christian piety than the doctrine of conditional security. The Puritans, known for, among other things, their piety and strict devotion to holy living, were predominantly Calvinists. In the DoG, piety is seen as the grateful response of the believer for God’s amazing grace in salvation (Romans 12:1-2). These doctrines, if held and believed rightly, make the works we do a response of true love to our gracious God who loved us enough to save us from our sin and misery. The Heidelberg Catechism (one of the earliest confessional documents of the Protestant Reformation and a teaching tool for children and new believers) is broken into three sections: The Misery of Man (our sinful state); Of Man’s Deliverance (God’s gracious act of salvation through Jesus Christ); and Of Thankfulness (our response to God’s grace, which also outlines our duty as Christians).

So if we accept the premise that the DoG are true (i.e., biblical), then how do we reconcile that with all of those passages that purportedly speak to conditional security? The short answer is that we (believers) persevere (remain faithful until the end) because God preserves us. To put it another way, if we do nothing to obtain or earn salvation (salvation being a free gift of God’s grace), then how can we lose salvation? Conditional security is acceptable only to those who also believe that they somehow contributed to their salvation in the first place (which Arminian theology logically implies). But this flies in the face of such passages as Ephesians 2:8-9: “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast,” which clearly assert that we contribute absolutely nothing to our salvation; even the faith necessary to receive the gift of grace, is itself a gift of God.

On the other hand, Arminianism gives man a reason to boast in the end. If by my cooperation with the Spirit of God I remain faithful to the end, I can boast (a little) about how I was able to stay the course and finish the race. However, there will be no boasting in heaven except to boast in the Lord (1 Corinthians 1:31). The doctrine of conditional security is not biblical; the Bible is quite clear that we persevere because God preserves us.3

1. Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown Commentary

2. got Questions?org

3. got Questions?org; What is conditional security?