Preservation of the Saints

Welcome back to a episode of the laborers podcast where tonight we're going to talk about some Calvin's doctrine called is it perseverance of the saint or is it preservation of the same? Obviously, we'll get into some of that and we'll get some of the input from the laborers who hold to this particular doctrine and As soon as I find the input the intro we'll get started.

Thank you for coming along and watching. Welcome to the laborers podcast.

Which is a part of the truth in love Network. Join us as together. We strive to grow up together in all things into Christ. Subscribe and follow the truth in love Network on Facebook YouTube rumble Spotify and iTunes.

Now, let's join our laborers for tonight's broadcast.

How's everybody doing tonight. Doing well. Happy to be here.

So.

Reform Berean. Is this your first podcast with Thursday night with the laborers podcast?

It is. I did a Yes. Yes, but I did a previous live cast with Rob on the truth in love Network. That's right. That's right.

Welcome Elias Gonzalez, would you like to say anything as an introduction. Tell anybody anything you want to say? I didn't I didn't warn you I was gonna ask that that's my bad.

Yeah.

Reform Berean. Called the reform Breanne. Check that out and You know, I'm a reformed Baptist and so, you know Laborers, I love love laborers podcast. I always loved it. And so You know joined it and it's just a blessing to be a part of it, you know, glad to have you.

Glad to have you aboard. And of course, we got bread of the word podcast with Tyler Noy and then on on route to locations barely known. Because of the non-disclosure agreement that I signed earlier in the month.

I'm not allowed to dictate exactly.

Where Rob is going? How are you doing tonight Rob. On the road? We need to change your name to that.

It's not to Rob on the road. Road dog Rob.

Hang in there Rob. Yeah. Yeah. Excuse me. I don't know if I can figure that out on my phone. You gotta breathe Rob.

We're just rolling with the punches tonight.

Preservation of the Saints and the Meaning of Perseverance

Tonight's gonna be a little bit different because I've hijacked the show. Most of you know, I'm not a Calvinist though. I'm.

Sympathetic.

To the doctrine and I think that it's an important option that we are to Investigate so that's what we're going to do tonight. I've sent the guys some questions and for full disclosure. I Didn't send them questions that I have all together So much as I sought out people from my camp and some of the questions that they repeatedly ask that they feel like people aren't answering and I've fielded some of these questions some of them.

I've actually defended The reform doctrine because I believe it's a good answer to some of these questions. However, I Would like for y 'all to give it from y 'all's point of view. Is that fair?

Because I think this will I think this will come up and continue to come up a little bit later. Just the ability to Correct. Maybe some misunderstandings. So The preservation of the Saints was labeled a Calvinist doctor.

It's also.

Hey Rob, hang on. You cut out so let's go back and start over. You said you want to clear up some things and say that stream. Fouled again, so we didn't leave nothing. There you there. I'm gonna be back.

Yeah, I got you back. Go ahead.

I was just gonna say that before I was a Calvinist Growing up Baptist. I held to a form of that doctrine. So it's it's not necessarily solely.

Understand. So what you're saying is the the topic of And you and I want to make sure I'm not. I'm not gonna tell y 'all short online. It says Perseverance of the same but I've been told that that's changed in recent years to Preservation of the same.

Which one is it? I Would say both both. Okay, that's one for both brother Tyler.

See traditionally, it's it's usually been perseverance of the Saints or perseverance of the elect. Me personally, I Prefer the the term preservation. We can get into that a little bit later if you like.

I bet you Robin.

Yeah, I don't think it's officially changed. I think I think the P into look still stands for Perseverance of the Saints just you know Going after that particular verse, but I think the transition or That conversation has come up just because like Tyler said there's a lot of folks who Like the language better like the word better just because you can also when you speak of Perseverance It can it can lean toward thinking as if man is Doing something to preserve himself.

I think and so that's why some folks are leaning more toward preservation Where it's an act of God. He's preserving this. I have a quote from.

Maybe this can clear it up. So the book I'm gonna be quoting from is R. C. Sproul's book called what is reformed theology? And he breaks down the history of reformed theology in this book. But also towards the end he breaks down every of the every five points of the tulip.

Well, I mean, let me just if you guys allow me to absolutely be the quote maybe this gonna Help understand better. The P of tulip stands for perseverance the doctrine of the first appearance of the Saints like other terms represented by the across the tulip.

Perseverance is somewhat misleading. It suggests that the continuity of the faith in obedience is accomplished by the believer alone. Indeed a believer does persevere in faith in godliness, but this is due to the gracious work of God in his behalf.

More accurate than perseverance is preservation. We persevere because we are preserved by God.

Okay. So with that being said, let's go a little bit into our first question. And who wants to take that first question?

So what does perseverance of the Saints mean. Or in my case I would say preservation. Simply put what. What we mean by that that concept whether it's perseverance or preservation is this idea that a person standing before God is final when we're talking about salvation that there's not a Concept of backsliding or losing it but that God keeps his people.

Now probably point to John chapter 10. Picking up in verse 27. My sheep hear my voice I know them and they follow me and I give unto them eternal life and they shall never perish Neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

All right, if somebody else wants to pick up and give their answer to the question I'm going to remain As neutral as possible those people that follow My channel more than maybe some other Reform stuff.

I want you to want you to pay attention to some of these answers and One of the things that I would encourage you if you're if you're like me, you're not a Calvinist. You would listen to the motivation behind the doctrine and don't get lost In your own personal Convictions just just yet.

Listen with an open mind and open heart and make sure and just listen to the intent behind the doctrine. That's the one thing I can appreciate is the intent behind the doctrine. And I'll explain that in just a second.

For the Rob I want to want to add anything to Tyler's definition.

Big John, I just want to say that as someone who disagrees. I want to say that that was you have there. I mean toward what Tyler was saying. You couldn't say it much better than that and the definition.

That are six folks. That's pretty much on point.

Once they've always saved from the other.

I think that's a fair fair statements I've heard. It's a likened to once. They've always say we might add some different nuance to flushing that out a little bit.

I'm sorry by all means if there's something you think that if there's a definitive distinction between First version of the Sanctum will say though our preservation of the Saints won't say it always in terms of way, I've always heard it fine, you know, now's your chance to I.

Would I would say like I do agree with how dr. James White puts it when dr. James White doesn't like that terminology once they've always saved if he does prefer the Language we're using right now perseverance or preservation of the same.

Because with with the language of one saves always save. It's always comes with Annotation or an understanding that you're saved and now you can now a person who's in Christ can do whatever they want and with their Life, they're always gonna be saved.

We're persevering to the Saints. The doctor we're talking about today Does not say that doesn't say all you're saved and a person can just live how they want and you know It's not that that's so. That's that's what I would say that I don't like using that terminology.

What they've always say because it comes with that kind of connotation or assumption where the person can do whatever they want.

The language transition from Once they've always saved eternal security. We moved away from that and use for that language for exactly the reason that a lot of stuff about that it I Think the intent was to go ahead and stop that that false Misunderstanding that that argument against the doctrine before it even starts.

So, you know a lot of people would come after the doctrine because of Race abusers or so you're saying that you can do whatever you want to whenever you after you're saved and still keep your salvation.

Well, no. And so that's why we use the stronger language the stronger wording I think just Just a conversation or that argument before it even starts.

Now I would add that with the question about one saved only saved. That is a valid question. I would I want to validate that but that is that's not out of the ordinary. And that's not just poking us in the eye.

But when we talk about grace and being kept by grace You do. I think that's a fair question to ask. I think Paul was Anticipating questions like it when he wrote Romans we get Romans chapter 6 and he's and he starts off with shall We send more that grace.

Mouth may abound. And if we are Forgiven eternally, wouldn't we just send up a storm? And I think that's that's a valid question to ask. I think that's a question that Christians have been wrestling through for a long time.

Whether we call it Calvinism or Arminianism or we just Strip off all the isms and we can pick a decade. We can pick a generation and we can find people wrestling with these ideas wrestling with who Christ is.

What he did and how that works in our lives.

And we'll take a small pause for the cause. Everybody prepare your ears. There's a there's a conference coming up and this promo is a little bit loud. But I want to share.

Quick.

Commercial for this upcoming Laborers conference, which will be free of charge at Reformata Baptist Church in Knoxville, Tennessee. And it'll be the weekend of April the 26th to 28th. Let's see that.

You are thoroughly and thoroughly warned.

Well, how much is that conference big John. Zero dollars and zero cents? It's free.

That you that you register online. That's just we have an idea how many people are coming. We say seating is limited. But obviously I think that there will be as much of an attempt made to see everyone as humanly possible.

I know that if you get there and there isn't one you sure can have my seat.

I don't mind standing and giving it to you. We will go to standing room only if we need to. That's a fact.

And in April in Tennessee, you're probably pretty we can do it outside. You don't threaten me with a good time.

Okay, I think If you if you do want to help cover some of the cost of the conference Visit Matt breeding. He is graciously helping us cover some of that calls by Offering some great deals. One of them was a rafting trip, I think one is to a museum and Pigeon Forge a Christian retreat camping area In the area of Knoxville, they graciously Have given us a certificate for I think like two nights and three days a stay in one of their cabins.

I think it's a two-person cabin. I think that's still available. So Find Matt breeding and If you're going to be in the Knoxville Pigeon Forge area and take advantage of those offers and help with the cost of conference.

Absolutely, absolutely. And thank you for that brother Rob.

So.

Pointed to John in terms of scriptural definition for your for your take on this on this doctrine.

David, Saul, and the Old Testament Background of Preservation

Now.

Question number two. Using this this doctrine Explain the differences we see in an Old Testament reference of King Saul and King David. Because I think that an argument can be made that that both men were used of God both men were called and anointed for the same office and Both men sin.

So and I feel like I'm teeing it up for you at the same time. On the other hand, I just kind of want to I want to hear from y 'all's point of view. Can you apply?

I'm not sure that you can. The spirit get that language and that concept. And that would be.

You broke up there for a little bit brother Tyler. You think you could fill in.

So where Rob was Taking us was that we don't have some of the New Testament language in the Old Testament that we would expect. So like when it says in 1st Samuel chapter 16 that the spirit of the of the Lord came powerfully upon David.

We can't necessarily take that as being what we see in Romans 5. He has poured the Holy Spirit into our hearts as a picture of regeneration or something like that. And so it gets sticky with trying to sift through this because we have the spirit coming upon Solace's but then it leaves him and then we're told that God sends an evil spirit to torment him.

And so the issue with I think with the dichotomy of Saul and David is can we Necessarily identify Saul is being saved and then he lost that I'm not sure that we have enough information on that to say that he was Within that.

We feel like we have enough information though to say that David will soundly say don't. I would say so yes. So then salvation and Old Testament is not necessarily a problem with the doctrine is it? No, I don't think.

I think it is.

I was honestly leaning on the Saul side With approaching the question, but in the case of David, yes, David did sin. David Said many times and he actually does pray in Psalm 51 take not thy Holy Spirit from me.

Which I don't believe is in Conflict with this idea of preservation.

For the last you want to you want to jump in there and well.

References and like that.

I.

Would agree where I think it's more. We can definitely say David was saved, but I would say no Saul. Where. Now like because I know I know it says that he was tormented by a spirit. It's definitely not as clear whether he was saved or not.

But I don't think that would that would I get like like a child said it doesn't affect the doctrine of the same like Hebrew says even in the Time it's always been Saved by grace alone faith alone in Christ alone, even in the Old Testament, right?

They were looking forward to in that time but now we're looking backwards and Christ sacrifice. I Would say to be honest, I would say I Don't know about I Wouldn't know. I think it's not as clear as like as you see with David.

So I suppose my kickback to you Would be that David sure seemed to think that there was something special about Saul And so much as that. He wouldn't even lift his hand against. And I Don't know that I don't know that that means anything from a You know salvific point of view, but it sure seemed to mean something to David, right?

That and I would honestly agree with you on that that it may not have been a Salvific because he does refer to Saul the Lord's anointed.

Exactly, I.

Don't think that's necessarily salvific. But I do think we see a level of respect that David carries because God has kept him in the office that he's in. It says in Proverbs that the heart of the king is in it is in the Lord's hands He turns it whichever way he pleases.

And I think when we see Saul, I mean David's Apprehension to striking Saul to acting against Saul that that is probably more a picture of Submission than a salvific looking for Admission if that makes sense.

Like say I'm not trying to uh, I'm not trying to throw roadblocks out so much as some of the some of the questions online That I read Would have said that Saul Saul would have been Saved and then backslid because of his sinful decisions and that his refusal to repent would have further He would have further kicked him down this road of backsliding and where David I cried out to God for forgiveness and God forgive him after he's seen and I.

Would definitely say Saul was anointed to be king right? He was anointed in that sense of kingship in so in and you even see that where Before Saul became king when the people of Israel were asking for a king.

Sammy obviously Was kind of fighting them with that saying they shouldn't be you know, we have God as our king and. So Samuel was actually teaching the people what kingship meant and what what what does it King mean?

You know to rule over people and so I would definitely say Saul was definitely anointed as king in that sense like like even like in Middle medieval times how kings were or even Knights were anointed to be Knights.

Okay, so I think what David saw. Especially when he said, you know, that's not Lloyd's anointed he knew that. Ultimately God anointed him to be king right through through the Prophet Samuel, right? So that's how I see it.

And main it could be me David knew maybe he was anointed in that salvific sense. But I think it was definitely in a more kingship sentence. I'd like it so I.

Feel like I lost volume for some reason, but I Hear y 'all fine. So anyway, everything's fine we'll move on to the next question because I Thought we'd move quicker than we are. So apologies. Explain from your point of view Why the the scripture reference I would that you sin not but if you do sin you have an advocate with father Jesus Christ righteous.

Explain why this isn't a license to sin and if Salvation cannot be lost and And if you want to take on it indeed if you want to take that whole Section of John and break it down from your worldview. Then obviously I'm you're welcome to do so.

Which which part of first John is that?

So that would be. You see what I'm doing here to those at home. The happy Calvin's. Give me a give me a Bible and I found it first. John 2 verse 1.

It says my little children these things write I am to you that you sin not and if any man sin. We have an advocate with the Father Jesus Christ the righteous and he is the propitiation for our sins and not for ours only But also for the whole world.

And hereby we do know that we know him if we keep his commandments. He that saith I know him and keepeth not his commandments is a liar and the truth is not in him. But who so keepeth his word in him verily is the love of God perfected.

Hereby know we that we are in him. And I realized midway through that passage that I had grabbed my King James again. You're good. You're good, I personally love reading out of the King James some not everybody else does but I like reading the Psalms out of King James.

Some reason or other I remember the King James when I'm reading scripture. It. Remember it better than I do. Good figure, right? I don't know.

Same way big John. And so what was the question for that?

So if well, it was kind of an open-ended question if you want to take and explain from the Reformed Doctrine why this scripture reads the way it does if salvation is something that is once attained unable to lose.

So the way it's worded in the question is Nobody's insinuating that this is a license to sin, right? I don't think anybody would insinuate that this scripture would give anybody a license to sin. But if salvation is something that cannot be lost Explain the necessity of writing it this way I suppose is one question or one way of reading the question.

You can read it any way you want to. Do you have a copy of the questions for the Gonzales?

No, is it in the chat? It should be. We got to get you set up on the.

I.

Had a link to Google Drive and I mean, I don't know if I lost it or what. So, uh, I Didn't I mean if I had to link it somewhere in there?

So here's exactly what the question reads. Explain why I would that you sin not but if you do sin. You have an advocate with the fault near the scripture that brother Tyler was reading. Explain how this isn't a license to sin.

If salvation cannot be lost the importance of saying that why isn't a license to sin.

Well one thing I love about you know from theology because the question does bring it up. Whereas we do allow Scripture to speak for itself, especially If you keep on going with the verse like Tyler read By this we know we have come come to know him that is speaking in us in verse 3 by this We know that we have come to know him that is speaking in a salvific sense knowing him and so If we are saved and we can't we can't lose that salvation.

And this is how we know we are saved if we keep his commandments. The one who says I have come to know him It does not keep his commandments is a liar. Truth is not in him. Whoever keeps his word in him in him the love of God.

So there you go right there. It's saying if you are saved and you will do his commandments. So it says if if you are someone saying oh, I know him but doesn't keep his commandments and living how he wants to.

And he's a liar.

So just kind of I was yeah, I don't say play the devil's advocate because obviously I hate that terminology, but.

To.

Make you defend that point of view when you say you don't live like you want to.

To.

Me what I'm what I'm hearing is kind of a circular logic. For instance we would say from Say we in the more plural sense that reformed theology would say that if you are saved And your fruit will bear out that you're saved.

And if your fruit ever indicates anything other than salvation Then you never were saved. Because it would make it impossible because it was impossible to lose salvation. Therefore it would be evidence that you were never saved.

And we say that this is evident because we don't live the way that we want to. But but the idea that I think I understand about salvation is that our intentions are supposed to be made new in Christ. So that the things that we do Are both pleasing to God and are things that we want to do.

And when I'm saying how we don't live how we want to it. That's according to the flesh because we do have new desires. We do have new wants in the Lord and this is what Paul gets at when it's when he's talking about the flesh and the Spirit are in war within us, right?

So I'm talking when I mean We don't live like we even Paul says I do the things that I don't want to do when he's talking about sin and all. That's what I'm that's what. That's what I'm saying like. When we're saved, we're not we're not living in ways of according of our flesh wanting to right and just keep eating the flesh.

Oh, you know forever and net never even. What's the word never listening to our spirit, you know? Because because if you are saved and you have the Holy Spirit in you you will follow the commandments of the Lord.

Right. And so that's what I kind of mean when I'm saying we don't live as we want. According to the flesh according to our own flesh.

Okay, that's fair. I mean, I'm just trying to throw that out there. If somebody says it sounds like circular reasoning. How would you defend the logic that it is not circular reason if anybody I would?

Supplement 2nd Peter chapter 1 to that picking up in verse 3. According as his divine power hath given unto us all things pertaining unto life and godliness. Through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue.

Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises. That by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. Simply put that we become partakers in a different nature.

That when we keep the commandments, that's not something we have within ourselves. To be a quote-unquote good Christian, that's not something I can do. That's not that goes against my very nature and so to keep the commands as John says Is a testimony that I've been changed.

Is a testimony that God has put something in me. That wasn't there before. That God has begun a work in me that he will continue until the day of Christ Jesus.

So.

Brother Rob, do you have anything you want to add?

Again.

Okay, I think what the Elias and Tyler the information that they just gave us the question why it's not a circular reason reasoning and. You know, that's why I love them. I love John because John helps a dummy like me help understand the context goes.

He kind of gives it to you, you know. And John says I write these things so that you may believe and then at first John he says I write these things. So you believe so that you may know? That you have eternal life.

And so he's writing to Christians to you know as a test to show up to give confidence to their salvation.

So.

We we have a view of what the work of the Holy Spirit is. What the Holy Spirit does in a man's life. He makes us a new creation We we are we were once dead and now we've been made alive. Gives us a new heart with new desires to get the heart of stone gives our flesh and so therefore.

The reason you can say why is this first not a license to sin is because a regenerate person The cause of the Holy Spirit would not think that way or would not use it in that way.

For the record, I'm not saying I disagree with any of that questions largely from the Internet.

Right.

In fact, I think I give y 'all a link to where some of these questions came from.

And there were. Yes, there's a link to an article on question 5.

Okay, and that might be where the website was that most of these questions came from and what I did do some of the questions Were worded In a way that I don't think there was a right way to answer them.

So I did modify them because the the website is very Very hateful towards towards Calvinist, right and Obviously, we don't we don't adhere to that kind of behavior on the laborers podcast if we if we're in Christ and I believe that y 'all are each and each one of you are in Christ and You're my brothers and I'm not I'm not here to try to do anything but help right?

So those kinds of Divisive questions. I think it was necessary to alter the way that they were worded. So you'll see that's why they're changed. The fourth question Kind of harkens back to the first question.

Right if we remember those who just tuning in What does perseverance of the Saint mean point to a scripture reference that backs that decision? Now question number four says in light of question one Can lordship salvation be used to describe?

Perseverance of the Saint and I use the term lordship salvation because I read a book by Johnny Mac one time I think I got it. You know, I give it to somebody else I didn't need nobody in my Pentecostal Church saying I had a Book called the gospel of Jesus Christ by John MacArthur on my shelf.

So I give it away for somebody to see. And I still got one of the study Bibles. But he he made a humongous deal out of this lordship salvation concept, which seems if I can be honest with you Kind of a ridiculous thing you need to say.

I Don't understand how Christ can be Lord of everything and not Lord in you, right? I don't understand how that can be Even a point of discussion, but apparently it is a point of discussion. So I want to get your point of view on that.

From.

From this Calvinistic doctrine knowing that John MacArthur is obviously Calvinist.

Well, see that's an interesting concept because I've come across the material from my my own personal history in in The church bashing this idea of lordship salvation because I'm coming from a very Pragmatic background.

I Was brought up in churches where there was no talk about obedience repentance things like that. That the gospel was basically believe in God and be nice. And so any talk about about the law the Ten Commandments.

Any of that was legalism.

Really.

Right. We were not very friendly with the Old Testament and not quite the Andy Stanley extreme, but we we stuck to the New Testament where Jesus was and the commandments of God were not exactly a.

Point of high stress. So then what does the Great Commission look like?

Really big churches okay, and.

So then Acts chapter 2, you know repent and believe that. Anyway, we're not getting into that. We're not getting hold of the conversation. Yeah, take take it away.

I'm.

Trying to read the question from the drive and I can't find. I think I'm having trouble opening up the question. Question number four. Yeah, oh I think I saw it on POTS. As I said, mm-hmm. Yeah POTS.

I.

Think the the tension with this thing we call lordship salvation is I think Jesse and she kind of knocks. I put it quite well when I had him on Bread of the Word earlier this year about the idea of God is Christ's Savior and Christ is Lord.

That we have a tendency to lean either one way or the other. But he's a great Savior. But we don't always Give enough attention to the other or we focus all on Lord all on obedience and not enough on grace.

Okay, and so with lordship salvation, that's often how it's been interpreted. Is that you're supposed to? Be a good Christian and God will love you for it. And it kind of devolved into legalism a little bit.

And so I understand the apprehension to the terminology. Um, it's not language. I personally like to use because of its affiliation but the question of Of the law is we don't necessarily hold that we are saved by the law, but that we will bear fruit.

That those who are in Christ will engage in fruit bearing and that that is a product of the faith that he has put in us. Then we have granted faith. We've been granted repentance and that what we are doing now is being conformed to the image and likeness of Christ and that's not because I'm that great of a person not because I'm that smart or that that's virtuous, but because Christ is in me.

Christ is Changing me. Yeah.

Speak on that now now I can read a question. I posted them in the group chat. Okay, good. Good. And so yeah, same thing like Tyler. I wouldn't know I would necessarily wouldn't necessarily use that term words of salvation.

Because I think It can it has led into legalism and obviously I don't know if you're familiar with this John where. There's an opposite view of that called free grace. I'm not be familiar with that. I'm not.

Oh, well, yeah, so. Some say or trip salvation was in response to free grace and some people say all free grace was a response to worship salvation.

Well.

Lores of salvation like Tyler said it can to the extreme of it. It can tend to get legalism and it can it's it's very heavily on watching. But it's called a fruit watching where you're you're constantly watching for fruit and it can that's where that's when the legalism can get in because then now you're starting to Wanting to do work because the one can be scared.