8:31-39
- Sam Storms
- Nov 2, 2006
- Series: Romans
I. Epistolary
Introduction - 1:1-17
II. The
Way of Salvation - 1:18-5:21
III. The
Way of Sanctification - 6:1-8:39
A. Freedom
from Bondage to Sin - 6:1-23
B. Freedom
from Bondage to the Law - 7:1-25
C. Freedom
from Bondage to the Flesh - 8:1-30
D. A
Celebration of Security - 8:31-39
Paul is calling
on us to think, to reflect deeply on the implications of what he has just said
regarding the remarkable blessings of salvation we have in Christ. He does it
by asking four questions. But he doesn't simply ask them, he "hurls these
questions out into space, as it were, defiantly, triumphantly, challenging any
creature in heaven or earth or hell to answer them or to deny the truth that is
contained in them" (Stott, 103).
1. God is your sovereign protector, or an answer to the question: "If God is
for us, who is against us?" - v. 31
Paul's
question, "who is against us?", does not mean to suggest that we have
no adversaries. Vv. 35-36 describe all sorts of adversaries and enemies and
opposition. His point is that no adversary or enemy is of any account when God
is for us. Since God is for us, to use the words of v. 28, all things work
together for our ultimate good, even those things which our enemies intend for
our harm.
Who, exactly,
is for "for" us? It is the God who foreknew, predestined, called,
justified, and glorified us. If that
God is for us, who can possibly hope to thwart our ultimate good?
* What
"God" are we talking about? See Isa. 46:9-11; 1 Chron. 29:10-12;
Daniel 4:34-35; Pss. 23:4; 27:1; 46:1-3; 56:3-4,8-11; 115:3; 118:6-7.
Paul is
countering the fear we all face: fear
of the forces that amass against us, fear of ridicule, rejection, hostility,
disdain, even death. Paul is calling on us to make the kind of evaluation that
Hezekiah made: "Do not be afraid or
dismayed before the king of Assyria and all the horde that is with him, for there is one greater with us than with
them . . . with us is the LORD our God, to help us and to fight our battles"
(2 Chron. 32:7ff). Augustus Toplady put this truth in a hymn:
"A
sovereign protector I have,
Unseen, yet for
ever at hand;
Unchangeably
faithful to save,
Almighty to
rule and command.
He smiles, and
my comforts abound;
His grace as
the dew shall descend,
And walls of
salvation surround
The soul He
delights to defend."
2. God is your supreme provider, or an answer to the question: "How will He
not also with Him freely give us all things?" - v. 32
If Paul had
merely asked, "Will God give us all things?" we might have wondered.
We might have said: "Well, you know, I need so many things, great and
difficult things, . . . how can I be certain God will provide them?" But
note how Paul asks the question: "He
who did not spare His own Son . . . !" In other words, the
God whom we ask to give us all things is the God who has already given us his
own Son! Cf. the argument in Rom. 5:9-10. Cranfield:
"Since God
has done the unspeakably great and costly thing, we may be fully confident that
He will do what is by comparison far less" (436).
a. God has
done the greater thing - v. 32a
1) negatively: He spared not His own Son
Parents spare
their children when they refrain from inflicting the full measure of
discipline. Judges spare criminals when they reduce or suspend a sentence. But
this is not what the Father did with
Jesus. "He did not withhold or lighten one whit of the full toll of
judgment executed upon his own well-beloved and only-begotten Son" (
2) positively: He delivered him up for us
all
"Who
delivered up Jesus to die? Not Judas, for money; not Pilate, for fear; not the
Jews, for envy -- but the Father, for love!" (Octavius Winslow)
[THEREFORE . .
. ]
b. God will
do the lesser thing - v. 32b
Paul's
assertion is designed to drive home the unshakeable assurance that whatever is necessary to guarantee the
ultimate glorification of those whom God justified, called, predestined and
foreknew, God will do it. If God spared not his own Son, the most precious and
costly gift, how could he possibly fail to do all lesser things to guarantee
that we receive everything essential for
salvation?
There is a
technical name for this kind of reasoning. It is called a majori ad minus, or "from the greater to the lesser."
Piper explains its meaning:
"Suppose
two tasks are motivated by the same desire, but one is very improbable because
the cost is so high, and one is more probable because the cost is less. If I
have the desire for both tasks, and somehow manage to accomplish the costly
one, then it is virtually assured the less costly one will be accomplished.
Overcoming the greater obstacles assures you that I will overcome the lesser
ones" (Future Grace, 114).
This is the
logic Paul used in Romans 5:6-11. It is the logic Jesus used in Matthew 6:30
when he said, "If God so arrays the grass of the field, which is alive
today and tomorrow is thrown into the furnace, will He not much more do so for
you, O men of little faith?" The point of his argument is this:
" . . . it
is highly improbable that God Almighty would waste his time clothing field
flowers which last only a day. This high improbability is the 'greater thing'
in his argument from greater to lesser. On the other hand, there is a small amount of improbability that God
would neglect his Son's disciples and not clothe them. This small improbability
is the 'lesser thing' in his argument. So when God overcomes the high
improbability and clothes field flowers, he proves that he can and will
overcome the small improbability and clothe the disciples" (ibid.).
Paul's
reasoning in v. 32, therefore, is from the hard to the easy, from the greater
to the lesser. Again, listen to Piper's explanation:
"The
reason [God's sparing not his own Son is] the greater thing is that God loved
his Son infinitely. His Son did not deserve to be killed. His Son was worthy of
worship by every creature, not spitting and whipping and scorn and torture. To
hand over his beloved son (Colossians 1:13) was the incomparably great thing.
The reason for this is the immensity of God's love for his Son. This is what
made it so unlikely that God would hand him over. Yet God did it. And in doing
it he showed that he most certainly would do all other things --- all of which would
be easy by comparison --- to give all things to the people for whom he gave his
Son" (114-15).
John Flavel,
Puritan pastor from over 300 years ago, put it this way:
"How is it
imaginable that God should withhold,, after this, spirituals or temporals, from
his people? How shall he not call them effectually, justify them freely,
sanctify them thoroughly, and glorify them eternally? How shall he not clothe
them, feed them, protect and deliver them? Surely if he would not spare his own
Son one stroke, one tear, one groan, one sigh, one circumstance of misery, it
can never be imagined that ever he should, after this, deny or withhold from
his people, for whose sakes all this was suffered, any mercies, any comforts,
any privilege, spiritual or temporal, which is good for them" (Works, Banner of Truth, p. 418).
The scope of
the "all things" God guarantees includes "all those blessings --
spiritual and material -- that we require on the path toward that final
salvation" (Moo, 583). Packer elaborates:
"Paul is
telling us that there is no ultimate loss or irreparable impoverishment to be
feared; if God denies us something, it is only in order to make room for one or
other of the things He has in mind. . . . The meaning of 'He will give us all
things' can be put thus: one day we shall see that nothing -- literally nothing
-- which could have increased our eternal happiness has been denied us, and
that nothing -- literally nothing -- that could have reduced that happiness has
been left with us. What higher assurance do we want than that?" (Knowing God, 246).
3. God is your spiritual protagonist, or an answer to the question: "Who will
bring a charge against God's elect?" - vv. 33-34
Again, Paul's
point is not to deny that anyone will ever charge us or condemn us. His point
is that all such accusations are to no avail. It isn't because we are perfect
and innocent. Such charges fail because the penalty which they demand has
already been paid!
Paul knows how
easily the conscience of some Christians can become sensitive and condemning
and insecure. So he speaks
"directly
to the fear that present justification may be no more than provisional, and may
one day be lost by reason of the imperfections of one's Christian life. Paul
does not for a moment deny that Christians can fail and fall, sometimes
grievously . . . But Paul denies emphatically that any lapses now can endanger
our justified status. The reason, he says in effect, is simple: nobody is in a
position to get God's verdict reviewed!" (Packer, 248).
a. our salvation - v. 33
1) we are elect
2) we are justified
If you fear
that something in your life may some day render you unacceptable to God, ask
yourself this question: "When did God justify me?" Was it not when
you were as ungodly and sinful as you possibly could be (
b. our savior - v. 34
1) his crucifixion
How can anyone
condemn (v. 34a) you when Christ has already been condemned in your place? What
is left for you to suffer?
2) his resurrection
3) his exaltation
The "right
hand of God" is a figurative expression denoting the place and position of
sovereignty and dominion. "Since he has all authority in heaven and in
earth, no adverse circumstance or hostile power can wrench his people from his
hand or separate from his love" (Murray, 329).
4) his intercession
We have two
divine intercessors: 1) the HS in our hearts (8:26-27), and 2) the Son in
heaven. See Heb. 7:25ff.; 1 John 2:1ff.
"The
argument is that no prosecution can be of any avail if Jesus Christ is our
Advocate who pleads our cause, and if God the Judge has already justified
us" (Stott, 104).
4. God is your sustaining preserver, or an answer to the question: "Who shall
separate us from the love of Christ?" - vv. 35-39
All the items
in v. 35, except for the last, are also found in 2 Cor. 11:26-27 and 12:10.
"All these, then, Paul himself has experienced, and he has been able to
prove for himself that they are quite incapable of disrupting his relationship
with the love of Christ" (Moo, 586).
The list of
possible threats to our security unfolds in pairs:
Death / Life - Death can't sever our relationship
with Christ. In fact, it can only enhance it (Phil. 1:21-23). Nor can anything
life throws at us sever us from his affection.
Angels / Principalities - Most likely
this refers to both good and evil angels. The point is that nothing whatever in
the spiritual realm, no cosmic power, whether benevolent or malevolent, can
separate us from God.
Things present / Things to come - Neither
present circumstances nor any future events have the power to sever us from
God's love.
Powers - This is the only item in the list that
appears alone. It refers either to miraculous or supernatural phenomena,
perhaps that come from Satan, or is another reference to demons (cf. 1 Cor.
15:24; Eph. 1:21).
Height / Depth - This pair encompasses anything and
everything above and below, i.e., nothing above the heavens or beneath the
earth or anything in between can sever us from Christ. Cf. Ps. 139:7-12.
Some have found in these
terms an astrological reference to the highest and lowest “stars” that people
in the ancient world believed determined the course of events in a person’s
life. If so, Paul would be saying that, contrary to widespread belief, stars
neither determine our fate nor do they jeopardize our relationship to God. But
whereas the terms are spatial, they should be interpreted metaphorically (cf.
Eph. 3:18).
What about me? But note well that “tribulation” and
“distress” and “persecution” and “famine” and “nakedness” and “peril” and
“sword” (v. 35) are precisely the sorts of experiences that might be thought to
cause a believer to renounce his/her faith and to apostatize. But “Paul is not
only saying that Christ still loves believers when persecution arrives, . . .
He is also saying that the love of Christ is so powerful that believers will
not forsake him despite the sword, persecution, famine, and so on” (Schreiner,
466). Furthermore, anticipating the question, Paul quickly shuts the door on
any loopholes. This final negation, nor
any other created thing, is intended to cover every conceivable
possibility: no being, no thing, not even your own self (you, being a created thing), can separate you from
the love of Christ.
But what if God himself should choose to separate me
from his love? But the whole point of Paul's argument in vv. 31-34 was to prove
precisely the opposite. God has taken the most elaborate, sacrificial,
personally painful and costly steps possible to embrace us in his love. Paul's
argument is that rather than being against us, God is "for" us (v.
31), rather than taking from us, he "gives" all to us (v. 32), and
rather than condemning us, he justifies us (v. 33). Furthermore, on what
grounds or for what cause would God reject you or separate himself from you?
"Well, my sins," you would most likely say. But Paul's argument is
that Christ died for those very sins (vv. 33-34). Those sins which you fear
might separate you from God were the sins for which Christ paid the penalty.
That is why no one can bring a successful accusation against you (v. 33). What
sin can you possibly commit that might separate you from God's love for which
Christ did not already pay the penalty?
An Excursus on the Doctrine of the
Eternal Security of the Christian
Why do people
doubt or deny the doctrine of eternal security? There are several reasons:
1) Tradition: "That's what I was
raised to believe. I can't bring myself to believe that mom and dad and the
preacher and my friends were wrong." This is a far more powerful
influence, subtle and unconscious though it be, than most of us realize. To be
open to being persuaded of another view seems like we are saying, “The past was
all for nought. It meant nothing.” That is difficult for everyone to cope with.
2) Problem passages: Texts such as Hebrews
6 and 10 are indeed difficult.
3) They fear that if people are told they
can't lose their salvation, they will take advantage of this to indulge in
gross immorality. They fear it will lead people to think: "If I can't lose
my salvation, I'll do whatever I please" (cf. Rom. 6:1ff.). In other
words, the legitimate concern for
holiness leads some to an illegitimate
rejection of security.
4) They have known people who they are
convinced are Christians, who later fall away. Believing them to have truly
been born again, the only explanation is that they have lost their salvation.
5) Certain religious leaders need people
to be insecure in their salvation in order to retain control over them. Fear is
a powerful means whereby to keep people under one's religious thumb.
6) Many believe that eternal security
diminishes a person's moral responsibility. It places too much emphasis on
God's sovereignty and not enough on human free will.
7) The exhortations in Scripture to be
holy, to persevere, to endure, make sense only if the possibility exists that
one may choose not to do so.
We will examine
this point by noting what it would mean for each of the three members of the
Trinity should it be possible for a Christian to fall fully and finally from
salvation.
A. What
it would mean for God the Father
1. He
would not be worthy of glory nor of our adoring praise and worship
Jude 24-25
Here it says
God is able to keep you from
stumbling (cf. Rom. 16:25; Eph. 3:20). Left to ourselves, we would stumble so as to fall finally and
forever. But the issue at stake isn't whether you are able to persevere but whether God is able to preserve and keep you. Here we see that whereas we
might be inclined to choose a sinful course of action that would ultimately
lead to our stumbling, God is able to intervene and override our rebellious
determination and to cause us to stand blameless before him with great joy (cf.
1 Pt. 1:19).
It is because
God is able to do this that he is
worthy of "glory, majesty, dominion and authority, before all time, now
and forever." Our security is not dependent on our ability, but on God's.
Our security is not dependent on feeling secure or saved. Security is an objective fact, not a subjective
feeling.
Note finally
the connection between vv.24 and 25. How do we know God is able? We know because he is the God of glory, majesty, dominion and
authority. If God can't keep his own he is hardly worthy of such accolades. If
God can't preserve his people he is to be pitied, not praised.
Romans 5:6-11; 8:32
See the notes
on this text and the argument from the greater to the lesser. I.e., if ever
there were a time God might forever turn his back on you it was when you were
an alien, an orphan, an enemy, hostile and outside the kingdom. But if he loved
you then, how much more so now that you are an ally, a child, a
friend and a citizen of the kingdom and family of God. If God took the greatest
step necessary to save you when you were his worst enemy, will he not take
whatever lesser steps are necessary to keep you saved now that you are his
child?
2. His
purpose in redemption would fail and unravel
Romans 8:29-30; Phil. 1:6
See the notes
on Rom. 8:29-30. Again, the objects of predestination are numerically identical
with the objects of foreknowledge ("those
whom He foreknew, He predestined"). The objects of calling are
numerically identical with the objects of predestination ("those whom He predestined, He
called"), and so on. Those who
are, as it were, as good as glorified
(note the past tense) are those who,
in eternity past, were foreknown. Not one has been lost in the process.
This is another
way of saying, as Paul does, that "He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ
Jesus" (Phil. 1:6).
3. His
will would be frustrated and fail of fulfillment
John 6:38-40
The argument of
Jesus in these verses must be carefully noted:
On several
occasions in John's Gospel divine election is described in terms of God the Father
giving certain persons to God the Son (6:37, 39; 10:29; 17:1-2,6,9,24). In each
of these cases the giving of men to Christ precedes and is the cause of their
receiving eternal life. Those who are given to the Son include not only the
present company of disciples who believe in Jesus but also the elect of future
ages who will come to faith through the gospel. Jesus looks upon them as
already his (John 17:20-21; see also John 10:16; Acts 18:10), even though they
have not yet believed in his name. They are his because they were given to him
by the Father in eternity past.
What is of
special importance to us is what Jesus says about how those whom the Father has
given to him come to him and whether or not those who come can ever lose their
salvation. It will prove helpful to look at this in terms of three
impossibilities.
(1) The first impossibility. Jesus says that
it is morally and spiritually impossible for a person to come to Christ apart
from the "drawing" of that person by God the Father (6:44,65). May I
strongly emphasize the words morally and spiritually. The reason people do not
come to Christ is not because they lack a will, or a mind, or feelings, or even
lack opportunity and occasion. Their not coming to Christ is due to their moral
and spiritual refusal to do so, a
refusal in which they willingly and
freely delight. If they cannot come it is not because God will not let
them. It is because it is their nature not to want to come. In sum, their not
coming is not because of a physical defect but because of a moral refusal.
(2) The second impossibility. Jesus also
says that it is impossible for
someone whom the Father "draws" not
to come to him. He says in verse 37, "All that the Father gives Me shall
come to Me"' In other words, just as it is impossible for a person to come
to Christ apart from the Father drawing him/her, so also is it impossible for a
person not to come to Christ if the Father does draw him/her. Two crucial
elements are involved here. On the one hand, if a man is to be saved he must
come to Christ. An active, willing embrace of Jesus Christ in faith is
essential. On the other hand, this active, willing embrace of Jesus Christ is
guaranteed by virtue of the Father having given certain people to Jesus Christ.
John Murray explains it this way:
"Jesus
does not say: all that the Father giveth me are brought to me. He uses the term
that denotes motion on the part of the person - 'will come to me.' Coming to
Christ is the movement of commitment to Christ, coming that engages the
whole-souled activity of the person coming. It is not that he may come, not
that he has the opportunity to come, not that he will in all probability come,
and not simply that he is empowered to come, but that he will come. There is absolute certainty; There is a divine
necessity; the order of heaven insures the sequence" (59).
Therefore, it
is impossible that an elect person, a
"given-by-the-Father-to-the-Son" person, might fail to come to faith
in Christ. Or to put it positively, all the elect shall come to faith in
Christ. God's drawing of them is efficacious. The Father will never fail in
drawing to salvation those whom he has given to the Son.
Before we move
to the third impossibility, observe one more crucial fact. Since this drawing
of people by the Father to the Son is always efficacious, it cannot refer to
the so-called enabling grace of Arminianism. Do you recall what the Arminian
believes? He believes that God restores in all men a power or an ability
sufficient to enable them to come to Christ. Clearly this "universal
enablement" cannot be the drawing that Jesus describes, Why not? Because
millions and millions of men and women do not, in fact, come to Christ! And yet
Jesus says that all who are given by the Father are drawn by the Father and shall
come to Christ. There is no escaping the clear and unequivocal language of our
Lord Jesus Christ: no one can come unless drawn by the Father; but if one is
drawn by the Father he shall come .
(3) The third impossibility. To the previous
two impossibilities Jesus adds a third. He has already said it is impossible to
come to him unless the Father draws.
He has also said it is impossible not to
come if the Father does draw. Now he
says that when a man does come through the drawing of the Father it is
impossible for him to be cast out. Look again at verse 37: "and the one
who comes to me I will certainly not cast out." The point is that those
whom the Father gives to the Son, who therefore come to the Son, will be
received by the Son and shall never perish.
The verb translated
"cast out" in verse 37 is used several times in John (2:15; 6:37;
9:34f.; 10:4; 12:31) and always means to cast out someone or something already
in. Thus the emphasis here is not so much on receiving the one who comes
(although that is true enough in itself) but on preserving him. In other words, "6:37 argues not only that the
ones given to Jesus will inevitably come to him, but that Jesus will keep them
individually . . . once there" (D. A. Carson, 184).
Who would
suggest that Jesus Christ would refuse to accept what his Father has given him?
If the Father was pleased to make a gift of certain sinners to his most blessed
Son, you may rest assured that the Son will neither despise nor deny his
Father's gracious generosity. The certainty of ultimate and absolute salvation
for those who come to the Son is reaffirmed in verses 38-40. Their life in
Christ is eternal and irrevocable because that is the will of the Father; a
will or a purpose that the whole of Christ's person and work was designed to secure,
a will or purpose that shall ultimately be (Ps. 115:3; 135:6; Dan. 4:34-35;
Eph. 1:11; Acts 4:28). What did Jesus come to do? He came to do the Father's
will (v.38). What is the Father's will? The Father's will is that all those he
has given to the Son be fully and finally saved (v. 39). Oh, what a glorious
thought it is, that,
"My name
from the palms of His hands
Etemity will
not erase;
Impress'd on
His heart it remains,
In marks of
indelible grace."
And still again
we sing:
"Fear not,
I am with thee, O be not dismayed,
For I am thy
God, I will still give thee aid;
I'll strengthen
thee, help thee, and cause thee to stand,
Upheld by my
gracious, omnipotent hand."
"The soul
that on Jesus hath leaned for repose,
I will not, I
will not desert to his foes;
That soul,
though all hell should endeavor to shake,
I'll never, no
never, no never forsake!"
4. It
would mean that the Father has refused to answer the prayers of His Son
John 17:11,15
5. God,
supposedly all-powerful, would be exposed as impotent and helpless
John 10:28-29; Rom. 8:35-39
Jesus grounds
his confidence in the safety of his sheep in the incomparable omnipotence of
his Father. It is because there is no one greater or more powerful than God the
Father that the sheep are secure. Was Jesus mistaken in his assessment of the
Father's power and purpose?
Several
observations regarding John 10 are in order:
a) "And they shall never perish" - Lit., they shall
not, by no means ever, perish. This is an absolute, unequivocal, unassailable
negative. Would Jesus have said this if in fact many of his sheep shall perish? If so much as one true
child of God can ever perish, Jesus has deceived us.
b) "And no one shall snatch them out
of my hand" - Not the attacking wolf (v. 12), nor the thieves and robbers
(vv. 1,8), nor anyone. "No one" means "no one."
c) "My Father, who has given them to
me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's
hand" - God the Father himself stands behind God the Son in keeping the
sheep in the fold. Jesus holds us tightly. God holds us tightly. Who can steal
from God? Who has the strength or the cunning or the power to outwit and
outmuscle Almighty God?
d) In v. 28 Jesus says "no one will snatch them" whereas in v. 29
he says "no one can snatch them."
Some may attempt to snatch them. But they cannot succeed because the Son and
the Father are united in purpose and power to keep them secure.
e) "O.K., perhaps no one else can snatch me from God's hand. But
what if I myself wriggle free and
jump out of my own accord?" Is your
power of choice greater than God's? Is your
will more powerful than his? Look again at Jesus' words: "No one . . .
" = all . . . me, others, you! If eternal security is false, then Jesus is
saying: "No one can snatch them out of my Father's hand; oh, that is,
except for every one of the sheep." PT: if you mean everyone you don't say no one! Jesus doesn't say: "No one except for the person himself." In
If Jesus wanted
to teach eternal security, how could he have done it better or more explicitly
than the way he does it here? If you
wanted to assert eternal security, how could you do it better than by using the
words of Jesus in John 10?
Two objections:
(1) "They won't perish so long as they remain sheep." But: a) The
text doesn't say that. b) The assertion of the text is precisely that sheep
always do remain sheep! The point of
the text is: "Once a sheep, always a sheep." If Jesus wanted us to
believe that some of his sheep could cease being sheep and suffer eternal
death, why did he say his sheep will never suffer eternal death and no one can
snatch them from him or from his Father? Surely Jesus is not guilty of the
crassest form of double-talk. In other words, “they shall never perish” = “they
shall always stay sheep!” (2) "What if some sin or failure or weakness or
lapse of faith occurs repeatedly?" a) How repeatedly? How much sin does it
take to lose one's salvation? b) See again the argument of Rom. 5:8. c) What
does a good shepherd do with
wandering sheep? See Luke 15. He wouldn't be a good shepherd if he didn't
restore them when they wander. d) Our security is ultimately dependent on God's
character, not ours. People say: "If we change, we lose our
salvation." No. We can't lose it, not because we can't change, but because
God can't.
6. God,
supposedly righteous, would be exposed as a liar and an impostor
Hebrews 13:5-6 (cf. with 6:17-19)
7. God
would prove to be faithless
1 Cor. 1:7-9; 10:13; 1 Thess. 5:23-24
Many argue that
salvation is tenuous because of the potential for a believer to succumb to
temptation, the ultimate fruit of which may be loss of spiritual life. But
Paul's point in 1 Cor. 10:13 is that "they will be able to endure because
God will not permit the testing to exceed their power of resistance"
(Judith M. Gundry-Volf, Paul and
Perseverance: Staying in and Falling Away, [Louisville: Westminster / John
Knox Press, 1990], 72).
B. What
it would mean for God the Son
1. Christ
will have failed in the purpose for which He died
John 6:37-40; 10:14-18,27-30
2. Christ
will have failed in the purpose for which He was raised
Romans 4:24-25
3. Christ
will have failed in the purpose for which He now intercedes in the presence of
the Father
Rom. 8:31-34; 1 John 2:1-2; Heb. 7:25
4. Christ
will fail to accomplish the goal for which He is to return to this earth
John 6:40b
5. Christ
will prove to have been a liar
John 6:37; 10:27-28
C. What
it would mean for God the Holy Spirit
1. The
Holy Spirit will have failed in his work of sealing.
2 Cor. 1:21-22; Eph. 1:13-14; 4:30
The literal use
of the term "seal" was of a stamped impression in wax pointing to
ownership and protection. "As Eph. 1:13 and 4:30 make certain, the 'seal'
is the Spirit, by whom God has marked believers and claimed them for his
own" (Fee, God's Empowering Presence,
807).
2. The
Holy Spirit will have failed in his ministry as a pledge of the future
consummation of our redemption
2 Cor. 1:21-22; 5:5
God the Holy
Spirit will have broken and violated a promise, having declared that he is a
downpayment in pledge of the complete and consummate gift yet to come. But if
the complete and consummate gift does not
come, he will have reneged on his word. Gundry-Volf offers this explanation:
"The
Spirit given to believers . . . functions as a divine promise and guarantee
that the redemptive process will be completed. Final salvation is as certain to
follow the gift of the Spirit as full payment must by law succeed the deposit
for a purchase. Paul drives home the message of God's faithfulness in the work
of salvation by using the familiar language of legally binding business
transactions which alludes to the practice of the handing over of an arrabon with its ensuing financial
obligations. Believers have in the indwelling Spirit, then, a sign that God is
committed to their full redemption. This outcome is entirely dependent on God's
faithfulness, as the metaphor implies" (30).
Gordon Fee
agrees, pointing out that the term (arrabon)
was used in commercial transactions to refer to the first installment of the
total amount due. The down payment effectively guaranteed the fulfillment of
whatever contractual obligations were assumed. "The Spirit,
therefore," says Fee, "serves as God's down payment in our present
lives, the certain evidence that the future has come into the present, the sure
guarantee that the future will be realized in full measure" (807).
3. The
Spirit will have failed in his ministry as firstfruits
Romans 8:23
This metaphor
is also used of Christ's resurrection as the guarantee of ours (1 Cor.
15:20,23). Similar to the idea behind down
payment, the Holy Spirit as "the first sheaf is God's pledge to us of
the final harvest. Thus . . . the Spirit plays the essential role in our
present existence, as both evidence and guarantee that the future is now and
yet to be" (Fee, 807).
The basis for
our security in salvation is not ultimately our righteousness or obedience but God's
promise, God's power, God's purpose, and most of all God's passionate love for
us in Christ. God is committed to preserving us in faith, for if we were to
stumble so as to fully and finally fall away, God stands more to lose than we
do.
Finally, is there
anyone among you who truly thinks their salvation hangs suspended on the thin
thread of your own will-power and commitment to righteousness? I know my own
soul all too well. Were it not for God's preserving grace I would have lost my
salvation the day after I was born again.
"If ever
it should come to pass,
That sheep of Christ might fall
away,
My fickle,
feeble soul, alas!
Would fall a thousand times a
day!"
If you do not
believe in the security of your soul in Christ, tomorrow should hold little but
fear and misery and perhaps despair for you. For it may well be the day you
commit that sin that will forever sever you from the Savior's love. I can face
tomorrow and the day after and the day after that with confidence, because I
know that He "will never leave me nor forsake me" (Heb. 13:5).