In a recent
article, we again witness Michael’s Flournoy’s descent into spiritual madness
and blasphemy:
I want you to know that nothing can separate
you from the love of God, not even your own sins. As a new believer, I sometimes questioned my
salvation after sinning. I would think:
well salvation is supposed to produce good fruit and yet here I am sinning
again, I guess I’m not a real believer after all. If these thoughts enter your mind, show them
the door. The God who died for us isn’t
about to let us go that easily. We can
pull a Jonah and flee from God, but he will leave the 99 to find His wayward
sheep. In other words, you can run but
you can’t hide.
Sin has no more power over you because are no
longer under the law, but grace (Romans 6:14).
And Jesus’ grace is more than enough to guarantee our safe arrival into
the Kingdom of Heaven. I want you to
know that God loves you. He is always
with you, even in the darkest valleys of life, and He will wipe away your every
tear when you enter His holy presence. It will be worth it all someday. (source)
It is, of
course, a blasphemous lie that no matter the sin, even heinous ones, (1) we
will always be eternally secure and (2) not even we can cut ourselves off from
the love of God.
On #1, one
has already addressed all the common texts for and against such a blasphemy
that is common in many Protestant theologies, including:
King David Refutes Reformed Soteriology (King David, one of the two examples of justification used by Paul in Romans 4, alone refutes Flournoy's nonsense)
Hebrews 6:4-9: Only Hypothetical?
Hebrews 6:4-9: Only Hypothetical?
On #2, such is based on a misreading of Rom 8:33-39:
Who will bring any
charge against those whom God has chosen? It is God who justifies. Who then is
the one who condemns? No one. Christ Jesus who died-- more than that, who was
raised to life-- is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us.
Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall trouble or hardship or
persecution or famine or nakedness or danger or sword? As it is written:
"For your sake we face death all day long; we are considered as sheep to
be slaughtered." No, in all these things we are more than conquerors
through him who loved us. 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. (NIV)
What is
often overlooked by many Protestants, and obviously Flournoy is not immune to
this common eisegesis, is that Paul is only arguing that nothing external to us can force us out of the
salvific relationship we have with God; notice that he does not teach that the individual
cannot choose to take himself out of the salvation plan of God nor does he list
heinous sins (e.g., adultery; murder) from the list in Rom 8:33-39—the reason
is simple: in his letters he clearly teaches that such sins will sever a believer from salvation
(e.g., 1 Cor 6:9-11; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5). Even Paul himself believed that he
could fall in 1 Cor 9:27:
No, I strike a blow
to my body and make it my slave so that after I have preached to others, I
myself will not be disqualified for the prize. (NIV)
The term translated as “disqualified” is αδοκιμος and means “reprobate.” As one Lutheran scholar
wrote about this term and the context it is used in:
This term implies that a test is made, and that
whatever stands the test is accepted as δόκιμος, whatever fails to stand the
test is rejected as ἀδόκιμος and is thrown out, cast away. The two adjectives
and the cognate verb and the noun are frequently used with reference to ancient
coins which were always weighed and otherwise carefully tested; the genuine and
the full-weight coins were accepted as “proven,” the others were rejected as
“disproven.” C.-K. 357.
What a calamity when a professing Christian
finds himself “rejected” in the end! How much worse when one of the Lord’s own
heralds has this experience! Paul regards his work and even the way in which he
does his work with extreme seriousness. The fact that he is an apostle is not
yet proof to him that he will be saved. He knows the test that he must face. He
applies that test to himself in this chapter and so attains both the subjective
and the objective certainty that he will indeed not be a castaway. (R. C. H.
Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Paul’s
First and Second Epistle to the Corinthians [Minneapolis:: Augsburg
Publishing House, 1963], 388)
Another relevant text from Paul himself is Gal 5:4. In his translation of Gal 5:4, Craig Keener rendered the verse thusly:
Obviously the apostle Paul did not share Flournoy's (heretical) understanding of the security of the believer.
By having rejected “Mormonism” and embracing a flavour of Protestantism, Flournoy has placed himself in the unenviable position of having embraced an anti-biblical theology, one that falls under the anathema of Gal 1;6-9. He is to be truly pitied and prayed for before it is too late (cf. Heb 6:4-6; 10:26-29).
You who seek to be righted by the law have been cut off from Christ; you’ve fallen away from God’s abundant generosity.
Some have tried to downplay this text by arguing that Paul is addressing unregenerate people in the Galatian congregation, not truly justified believers, so it is not a valid proof-text to use against various formulations of eternal security, such as the Perseverance of the Saints (the “P” of Calvinism’s TULIP). Notwithstanding, as Keener notes, Paul is actually teaching true believers can lose their salvation:
Cut off (καταργεω, katargeō) is the language of annulling something (as in 3:17) or rendering it ineffective (as in 5:11). It follows naturally from the idea of Christ no longer being of benefit to them (5:2) . . . it would seem special pleading to take Paul’s warnings of apostasy as something less than a real possibility. Paul elsewhere warns gentile believers that if they fall from faith, they too will be cut off as were Jewish people who failed to believe (Rom. 11:22; c. 8:13). Paul disciplines himself in order to avoid being disqualified (αδοκιμος, adokimos, 1 Cor. 9:27), going on to warn the Corinthians that despite their spiritual resources, they could be struck down as were many Israelites in the wilderness (10:1-11); they must stand and avoid falling (10:12). They must examine themselves to make sure that they remain in the faith and are not disqualified (αδοκιμος, 2 Cor. 13:5-6). Had persecution moved the Thessalonians to abandon faith in Christ, Paul’s labor among them would have been in vain (1 Thess. 3:5). Colossian believers would be presented blameless before God, provided they continued in the faith (Col. 1:23). Paul’s concern was their ultimate salvation; he does not address the question of some individuals falling away, yet later returning, since the conditions that facilitated their falling to begin with usually precluded their interest in returning. Gentile sources do reveal that many who had become Christians reconverted back to paganism afterward.
Already in Scripture, if the righteous turn to the way of sin, their righteousness will be forgotten (Ezek. 18:24, 27; 33:12-13, 18), but if the wicked turn to righteousness, they will live (33:14-16, 19). Jewish people lamented apostasy (1 Macc. 1:41-51), with some Jewish sects believing that even members of other Jewish sects had abandoned righteousness (e.g., 1QpHab 8.9). Some expected apostasy as one of the tragic signs of the end time (e.g., 1 En. 9:17; T. Iss. 6:1; T. Naph. 4:1; 3 En. 48A:5-6; m. Soṭah 9:15; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 5:9; Pesiq. Rab. 15:14/15; cf. 4 Ezra 5:1-2; 14:16-18) as under previous persecutions. Early Judaism divided regarding whether apostates would be forgiven if they repented. Paul probably also envisioned the prophesied end-time apostasy (Mark 13:12-13; Matt. 24:12) as already occurring in his day (cf. 2 Thess. 2:3). Subsequent centuries of Christian thought also required perseverance in the faith.
Corinthians’ sexual sin contradicted Christian faith (1 Cor. 6:9-20), but Galatians were in danger of abandoning faith in Christ no less by adding to (and thus subtracting from) the faith. Like baptism, circumcision functioned as a demarcation, a rite of passage into a given community (in this case, of ethnicity; in the case of Christian baptism, of faith). By going under the law as if their baptism was inadequate, they would essentially deny the efficacy of their baptism. Paul certainly did not teach the popular doctrine today of “once saved, always saved”; a convert does not regularly move in and out of the saved community, but a convert who deconverts is again a nonbeliever. (Craig S. Kenner, Galatians: A Commentary [Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2019], 453, 454-56)
Commenting on this text, Don Garlington, a New Testament scholar and leading advocate for the New Perspective on Paul, wrote the following which supports this thesis that this passage refutes eternal security:
Paul is worried not about circumcision as an isolated act or as a thing in itself, but rather what it will lead to: the endeavor to be justified “in the law.” The most emphatic element of the verse is placed forward into the clause: “You have been severed from Christ” (NASB). The verb translated “severed” (katargeō) frequently means to make ineffective or nullify (BDAG, 525). In the present case, it signifies the dissolution of a relationship, namely the Galatians’ former (covenant) relationship to Christ. But commentators point out that the verb can mean “cut off.” If this usage was in Paul’s mind at all, then there would be a deliberate play on circumcision: those who “cut” the flesh are “cut off” from Christ. A formal commitment to the Torah through circumcision is equivalent to ending the relationship with the Christ of Paul’s gospel . . . If those who want to be justified in the law have severed their relationship with Christ, they have, but the nature of the case, “fallen away from grace.” The verb “fall away” (ekpiptō) is used of a withering flower falling from its stem to the ground (Jas 1:11; 1 Pet 1:24) or of a ship failing to hold its course (Acts 27:26, 29). “God’s grace in Christ . . . is like the stem which supports the flower and through which the life-sustaining sustenance flows. Or like the channel which leads to safety between the rocks of disaster, a course from which they were in danger of being driven, by dangerous currents and cross winds” (Dunn, Galatians, 268-69). (Don Garlington, An Exposition of Galatians: A Reading from the New Perspective [Eugene, Oreg.: Wipf & Stock, 2007], 299-300)
Obviously the apostle Paul did not share Flournoy's (heretical) understanding of the security of the believer.
By having rejected “Mormonism” and embracing a flavour of Protestantism, Flournoy has placed himself in the unenviable position of having embraced an anti-biblical theology, one that falls under the anathema of Gal 1;6-9. He is to be truly pitied and prayed for before it is too late (cf. Heb 6:4-6; 10:26-29).
For previous posts responding to Flournoy's antics, see: