Audio only:
In this episode, Trent shows how scandals in the Protestant world call into question their doctrine of eternal security.
Transcription:
Trent:
Recently Dallas based Trinity Baptist Church fired Pastor Steve Lawson because of what they called an inappropriate relationship with a woman. Lawson was fairly well known in Calvinist circles and served as one of the deans of John MacArthur’s the master Seminary. In today’s episode, I’m not going to dunk on a Protestant pastor for being caught up in a scandal. As a Catholic, I’m depressingly familiar with having to hear about scandal. Instead, I want to focus on how scandals like these undermine the popular Protestant doctrine of eternal security, the belief that you can’t lose your salvation. While not all Protestants hold this view, it is common among Calvinists, but even many non Calvinists accept it. The late Protestant apologist, norm Geisler called himself a moderate Calvinist, but he wrote an anti Calvinist book called Chosen but Free in an anthology on eternal security. He wrote, there is literally nothing in all creation that can separate a believer from Christ on their website.
Trinity Baptist Church says under the heading, security, we believe that all the redeemed once saved are kept by God’s power and are thus secure in Christ forever. But in their statement about the Lawson scandal, the church said, let us always be mindful of the words of one Corinthians 10, 12. Therefore, let him who thinks he stands take heed that he does not fall. What kind of fall are we talking about? Is this a metaphorical fall from grace or a literal fall from grace like the one that St. Paul talks about regarding the Judaizers In Galatians five, four, you are severed from Christ. You have fallen away from grace. You’ll see that even defenders of eternal security still act like Catholics and other Christians who believe we can forsake our salvation through gravesend. But before I talk about that, I want to point out that we aren’t entirely sure what Lawson did.
A lot of people assume he committed an act of adultery, but that might not have been the case. Two years ago, Matt Chandler temporarily stepped down as pastor of the popular village church on the grounds of having an inappropriate relationship with a woman, but it turned out it wasn’t romantic or sexual. His wife knew about it, but the church considered his actions unwise and unguarded. So we don’t want to make assumptions, but these kinds of scandals involving graves sin do happen and how people respond to them in the Protestant world really shows the unworkability of eternal security in spite of Protestants who say that this is much more reassuring than the Catholic view of salvation. You see, Protestants often caricature the Catholic view of salvation as can be seen in this animation from the documentary American Gospel as making it seem like a person needs to do a bunch of arbitrary good deeds in order to be saved and they don’t know how many they need to do.
And because of this, a Catholic can never really have assurance that they will go to heaven. Their salvation depends on what they do, and so if they do the wrong thing, they won’t be saved, which from their perspective is not just false but pitiable. However, those who say salvation cannot be lost claim to follow a simple plan of salvation that gives assurance. They say they have true assurance because salvation doesn’t depend on what they do. And by the way, if you want to see my rebuttal to American Gospel, check out the link in the description below. They even claim that if it depended on us and what we did, we’d inevitably mess it up. So it’s good that we have nothing to do with our own salvation. John MacArthur is often credited as saying, if you could lose your salvation, you would redeem Zoomer puts it this way, if my salvation depended even 0.0, 0, 0, 0, 0 0 0 1% on my works, I’d be going straight to hell.
And in a 2020 post, Steve Lawson said, if you could lose your salvation, you definitely would, but you cannot, so you will not. You are eternally secure in Christ, although the Catholic view is not that we have to do an arbitrary number of good deeds in order to be saved, you only have to do one good work to be saved. Do not die in a state of mortal sin. We are saved by grace alone. When we receive baptism, our initial salvation has nothing to do with any works. All we must do after that point is not remain in grave sin. And if we do engage in grave sin, we must seek God’s forgiveness and be restored to friendship of God. That’s it. And eternal security Protestants believe the same thing, even though they aren’t willing to admit it specifically, they follow the same three steps that Catholics follow in the church’s plan of salvation.
Number one, they take steps to avoid grave sin. Nate Picowitz, the author of Why We Are Protestant, somebody I should really sit down and chat with soon writes regarding the Lawson scandal. A pastor belongs at home every night sleeping next to his wife. It’s time to kill the conference circuit. Setting aside the issue of whether travel contributed to Lawson’s inappropriate relationships, since that’s not clear, Picowitz is really promoting the Catholic concept of the near occasion of sin. This is something that isn’t objectively sinful but has the potential to lead to sin. Also, they recognize there are two types of sin, major and minor Catholics call this mortal and venial, but it’s really the same thing Trinity Baptist Church said in its statement about Lawson. In light of this, we may be reminded that we are all sinners and Jesus Christ came into the world to save sinners and Christ remains head of his church, which is bigger than any fallen man.
But if we are all sinners, then why can’t Lawson remain a pastor, especially if he’s no longer engaged in this sin? Part of the reason is that some sins are incompatible with the Christian life. Protestants know this. They’re what Catholics call mortal sins. And so a person cannot be a pastor if they engaged in these serious grave sins or even briefly succumb to them because of the scandal they caused through their behavior without the mortal venial sin distinction, you get extremely unhealthy scrupulosity in his book. Absolutely. Sure Steve Lawson writes, conversion does not mean we can no longer sin, but that we can no longer sin and enjoy it. But this creates two problems. First, what about if you enjoy incredibly minor sins like stealing a few chocolate almonds from the grocery store, does that mean you are not saved? Or number two, as long as you feel bad about persistent grave sin, like say viewing pornography, does that mean you are saved even if you don’t change your behavior?
Now, Picowitz and others may say that just because our salvation is secure, that doesn’t mean we won’t sin. He might say we should still be prudent, and even with the best of intentions, we may still fall into sin. But according to Lawson and other eternal security advocates, the difference is that a true Christian will not remain or persist in grave sin. He or she will eventually repent. But this brings me to my next similarity. Number two, they ask God to forgive the grave sins they’ve committed and they seek to amend their behavior. When Catholics engage in mortal sin, they ask God to forgive this specific grave sin in the sacrament of confession. They know by committing this sin, something has changed in their souls through their disobedience to God. And now they must return to God to be healed. And deep down, defenders of eternal security know this happens when they sin. Consider the Jimmy Swaggart prostitution scandal. In 1986, Swaggart, a popular televangelist minister accused fellow minister Marvin Gorman of engaging in affairs and Gorman said the accusations ruined his ministry. Gorman then sued Swaggart, but the matter was settled out of court for about $2 million, the equivalent of 40,000 gifted copies of Swagger’s Saturday night in Memphis preaching tapes.
CLIP:
But when God speaks to you, I know he’ll bless you if you will, to respond and if you could send a gift of $50, we want to send you this video called Saturday Night in Memphis,
Trent:
Gorman then hired his son and son-in-law to spy on Swaggart at a motel where Swaggart met a prostitute. Gorman used the evidence to blackmail swaggart into publicly admitting he lied about Gorman’s alleged affair. But when Swaggart did not get a reinstated to being a pastor, Gorman went public with the evidence. In 1988, Swaggart made this famous public speech about the incident now called the I have Sinned speech. Here’s one news channel covering the incident.
CLIP:
Jimmy Swaggart is the top rated preacher on tv. He leads a multimillion dollar evangelical empire. Now he’s confessed to a moral mistake and he’s pulling away from the pulpit For a while,
I have sinned against you, my Lord, and I would ask that your precious would wash and cleanse every stain until it is in dece of God’s forgetfulness. Thank you. Thank you.
Trent:
But Swaggart has said on other occasions that Christ’s death atone for all our sins past, present, and future. But does he sound like setting aside the question of whether he’s acting to get sympathy? Do the words he say, do they sound like a man proclaiming that his sin was already forgiven or a man petitioning God to forgive him now to cleanse him now of his sins? And when most people who hear this, wouldn’t they intuit that we must ask God to forgive us and not just recognize that God has already forgiven us. Now, some Protestants will say that grave’s sin doesn’t mean you’ll lose your salvation, but it can affect your soul and it can affect it in a way that God will punish you for this bad behavior. This makes sense given that Hebrews 12, seven says, God is treating you as sons for what son is there whom his father does not discipline. In fact, here’s Lawson in an older clip saying how God would punish him if he were to fall into sin.
CLIP:
And I needed a healthy, holy fear of God, of what God would do to me if I fell into that sin, the discipline of the Lord, he would’ve taken me to the woodshed and it would not have been pretty. It would’ve been painful.
Trent:
Now, the idea we are saved, but we still have to suffer for our sins. Kind of sounds like purgatory, doesn’t it? But some Protestants will say that this suffering, it’s just the psychological feeling of being distant from God, even though we are still saved. It’s what they call a lack of fellowship with God. Here’s how Protestant author Charles Stanley puts it.
CLIP:
You’re not disconnected from him. The feeling is disconnecting. So what do we do? We acknowledge our sinful acts, whatever there may be that’s causing these feelings, we ask him to forgive us of our sin. We repent of that sin and by faith we accept his forgiveness.
Trent:
But is it just a feeling of being disconnected from God or is that feeling rooted in the actual reality of our souls being disconnected from God because of sin that destroys the love of God in our hearts, which makes more sense, although some people say you cannot lose your status as a child of God, so you cannot lose your salvation just as you can’t lose your status as being the biological child of your own parents, but you can be disinherited by your parents. And the Bible frequently talks about salvation as being a kind of inheritance, including one we can forsake. St. Paul gives a warning in Ephesians chapter five that applies to those within the church, not just a statement for those outside the church, he says, no immoral or impure man or one who is covetous, that is an idolater, has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God, let no one deceive you with empty words.
For it is because of these things that the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. The point of the parable of the prodigal son is that the son was spiritually dead when he was estranged from the Father, even though he was still that man’s son. That’s why his father says, my son was dead and is alive again. He was lost and is found, which applies to all Christians who repent of grave sin. This is also why in the second century, St. iis said Those who do not obey him being disinherited by him have ceased to be his sons. Wherefore they cannot receive his inheritance. And number three, eternal security Protestants worry about the salvation of unrepentant Christians. Steve Lawson’s ministry One Passion Media says that he has confessed his sin and regrets the damage he caused. So it appears that he’s repentant, but other fallen pastors don’t repent of their sin. In my previous episode on terrible Christian bestsellers, I covered how popular youth pastor Joshua Harris, author of the book, I Kissed Dating Goodbye, left the Christian Faith recently, and now some Christians say this means he was never saved in the first place.
CLIP:
In terms of Joshua Harris, I don’t believe that you can be a Christian for 20 years and all of a sudden decide, oh, I don’t want to be a Christian anymore and kick the Holy Spirit out of your body and become unsaved. I believe that people that leave the faith and say, oh, I want nothing to do with it anymore after being a part of it for years and years, I don’t think they were a Christian
Trent:
In the first place. Catholics say that if a person is in grave sin and he refuses to repent and reject that sin, then he has forsaken God and he could die apart from God for all eternity. And Calvinists and other eternal security protestants really do say the same thing, except they would say that that person rejected God, not when he committed his grave sin. But throughout his entire life, his unrepentant sin simply reveals that he was never saved in the first place, even if many other people thought he was saved because he was a popular pastor, even if he thought that he was saved, he was never saved in the first place. So notice that all Christians basically do the same thing. They receive salvation by grace alone. They strive to obey God, and they ask God to forgive grave disobedience. Eternal security advocates just complicate this process with claims about having never been saved in the first place to redescribe how things actually seem to appear.
But this robs people of their assurance. It doesn’t give it to them in his book. Absolutely. Sure Lawson writes, as a pastor for the past 20 years, I have had to answer many questions on a variety of subjects, but without a doubt, the question I’m asked the most is how can I know I’m saved? But what contributes to this uncertainty that people ask Lawson about are statements like this from pastors like Steve Lawson. He writes, assurance never comes from looking to a past event but to a present reality. Now, Catholics agree that the question of whether we are saved at this very moment or whether we are now in a state of grace and friendship with God that can only be known by doing an examination of conscience and looking at our lives right now, but we don’t do an examination of conscience to determine if we were saved in the past or if our initial salvation was genuine.
That’s why Catholics don’t have to constantly worry about this question. Am I a true Christian who has just backslid in his behavior or am I a false Christian who was never saved in the first place? Lawson writes, if you can answer yes to these nine questions, then the assurance of salvation should be yours to enjoy. Wow, only nine questions. What a deal, right? And the questions deal with things like desiring communion with Christ, confessing sin, reading scripture, compassion for fellow believers, changing desires, learning more truth, becoming Christ-like being confident in prayer and living a life that is in conflict with the world. I’m sorry, but if a Catholic said that you have to have all of these things in order to be saved, Lawson would condemn that as works-based salvation, but he gets a free pass because he just says that these are merely signs that you were already saved.
But this leads to people worrying and saying stuff like this, I gave my life to Christ when I was 13, but I’ve been a pretty mediocre Christian since then. I don’t have all nine signs that Pastor Lawson mentions. Maybe I wasn’t truly saved then maybe I need to give my life to Christ all over again. Or what about people who become ensnared in their sin and feel like their repetitious sin proves they were never really saved in the first place and so now they want nothing to do with God? That’s why I’m so grateful for the sacraments of Christ Church. I know beyond a reasonable doubt that 22 years ago my soul was forever changed when I was baptized, I became a child of God at that moment and I will never have to be baptized again, and I don’t have to appeal to some standard like Lawsons that basically says Mediocre Christians aren’t true Christians, so we’re never saved in the first place.
In addition, I can examine my conscience and reasonably know if I am in a state of mortal sin, and if I am, I can respond to God’s grace that convicts me of my sin, and then approach a minister of the church to be reconciled with God through the sacrament of confession. Just like I approached a minister of the church to be first reconciled to God through the sacrament of baptism, I can be reconciled to God through the sacrament that Christ gave. The apostles when he told them who sins you forgive are forgiven, and who sins you retain are retained. I say all this to point out that eternal security Protestants and Catholics aren’t that far apart from each other when it comes to the issue of salvation. We both agree that Christians must be obedient to God, and if we gravely disobey God, then we must repent and return to God or we’ll be lost. Catholics and other Christians just describe this process as it appears. They don’t use an overly complicated description in service of an unbiblical doctrine like eternal security. I hope this was helpful for you all, and I hope that you have a very blessed day.