This post kicks off a three-part series on the nature and the purpose of salvation, stemming from this frequently asked question concerning eternal security,

“Can I lose my salvation?”

I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been asked that question. Whether amid a theological discussion or in truest sincerity from a congregant. In my experience, this question typically comes from one of four places:

• The person who has experienced and is thus sensitive to any notion of ‘legalism’ (i.e., the belief that we must ‘earn’ or somehow maintain our salvation by personal effort).
  
• Someone who carries a heavy burden of guilt and shame over their sinful desires and failures.
  
• The insincere person who is trying to work the system, or at least sees a loophole, professing Christ while seeking to live life on their own terms.
  
• And finally, the theoretical theologian who entertains this question on a purely rational and/or speculative level in seeking to resolve the issue within their intellectual framework. 

Each type is driven by a different motive, whether to preserve and protect, or from a desire for assurance, or manipulation for selfish living, or curiosity and the pursuit of intellectual ‘rightness’. The question is a valid question no matter where one is coming from, nevertheless, a person’s starting point matters. Where they start from will invariably inform how they view the question as well as how they engage with the response.

Wherever you may be coming from, dear reader, I challenge you to consider these three posts prayerfully. I will include Scripture throughout in support of my position, so I encourage you to read these passages both within their broader context and for their cohesion with the whole of the gospel. Feel free to reach out if you’d like to kick these things around further. So, let’s jump in!

As I’ve studied soteriology (the doctrine of salvation) over the past fifteen years, I’ve come to a simple conclusion in response to the question of whether or not we can lose our salvation,

“I believe we’re asking the wrong question.”

The question we need to begin with is, what is salvation? In other words, what is the essential nature and purpose of salvation? What does salvation accomplish, how is it accomplished, and to what end or purpose does God save us?

The question about eternal assurance originates in the early 16’th century, arising out of a problem with medieval Catholic teaching on penance and the sale of indulgences. Through this practice, it was taught that one could pay down their (or a loved one’s) time in Purgatory, the place of temporal punishment of believers between Heaven and Hell.

Suffice it to say, the challenge levied by Luther that such teaching was contrary to Scripture was a necessary and profound reorientation at the time. Namely, that it is only by our faith in God’s mercy and gracious provision through the atoning death of Jesus Christ that we can be saved. However, 500 years later, Luther’s assertions have given way to a popular view that reduces salvation to a transactional event in a person’s life. That is, to the moment of a person’s confession and conversion in Christ, alone.

This view emphasizes the ‘great exchange’ of our sin for Christ’s righteousness (“righteousness” being narrowly understood as moral perfection). In other words, Jesus’ moral equity has been transferred to my account, so that when God sees me, he sees only the moral perfection of Jesus. It is here that I am assured deliverance from God’s eternal judgment (damnation to Hell) in exchange for eternal bliss (Heaven), as long as I’ve “confessed and believed” in Jesus (Romans 10:9).

This is the popular message of salvation in a nutshell. Part of the problem here is that the language of “confess and believe” is framed as a purely intellectual exercise, an event occurring at a moment in time resulting in one’s salvation on the basis of their mental-emotional-verbal affirmation of certain truths about God. The implication of this pop gospel is that if salvation is reduced to a mere agreement with certain realities about God-Humanity-Sin-Christ-Salvation– nothing more, nothing less; then how we actually live does not ultimately matter. Equally problematic is that such a view ultimately makes salvation about us rather than about God and his purposes for us and creation (i.e., the gospel).

A natural tension arises when reading Scripture that admonishes and/or warns about our need for preparation, perseverance, obedience, and faithfulness to God in the Christian life, often even appearing to be an effective part of our ultimate salvation (e.g., Matthew 24:9-14 [cf. 10:22]; John 15:6 [cf. Matthew 3:7-12]; Romans 11:22; Colossians 1:21-23; 1 Timothy 4:16; Hebrews 3:12-14; 10:19-27, 35-36; 2 Peter 2:20; James 2:14-26).

I want to suggest that our conception of salvation (if akin to the pop-gospel view noted above), is sorely lacking. At best, it’s a reductionistic view of salvation, mistaking the method and means of salvation for the reality of salvation itself. There are no doubt multiple factors (historical, socio-cultural, and theological) that have contributed to Evangelical culture’s adoption of this view, though in Part Two we will focus instead on the language of salvation in Scripture (“eternal life”; “redemption”; “transformation”; and the like) in effort to fill out what is lacking in our vision of salvation. We’ll go back to the source, so to speak, rather than operating out of 16’th-century responses to 16’th-century problems.

As noted, Luther’s call for the Catholic church to reform its doctrine was both important and vital for God’s people and mission in the world. Yet, we must acknowledge that Luther was conceptually mapping the problems and questions of his time and experience onto his understanding of Scripture. 

For example, there is good reason to question whether the ‘legalism’ of the Catholic church could be compared to the type of legalism Paul was addressing in his letter to the Galatians. Both the medieval Catholic church of Luther’s day and the Judaizers of Paul’s day were proclaiming a ‘false gospel.’ Yet, while the Catholics advanced a doctrine of earning through meritorious acts and financial recompense, the Judaizers argued, not for continuing temple sacrifices and offerings to either earn or maintain one’s salvation, but for Gentiles (non-Jews) to adopt distinctively Jewish cultural “customs” and “traditions” (circumcision; dietary laws; sabbath), as a demonstration or proof that they were a part of God’s covenant community (Galatians 1:14; 2:12, 14; 4:10; 6:12). That is, it wasn’t a question of how one gets into God’s family but a question of how one is recognized as being in God’s family. In other words, a question of what distinctively ‘marks out’ the people of God under the New Covenant.

Circumcision was the primary focus of the Judaizers’ brand of legalism, as it was the way in which God’s covenant community had historically been marked out or set apart from the surrounding nations (Genesis 17:10-11; cf. Romans 4:9b-11a). So, the “works of the law” that Paul denounces in Galatians and elsewhere are not primarily about earning or maintaining one’s salvation but are *specific* to the use of distinctively Jewish cultural practices to advance ethnic/cultural/national boundaries to mark out gospel community.

Such teaching couldn’t be more contrary to the gospel Paul proclaimed (Ephesians 2:11-22; Galatians 3:26-29). Paul argued that everything needed for Gentiles to be adopted into God’s family was accomplished through Jesus and his provision of the Spirit. That is, there is no need for Gentiles to come under the former covenant marked by circumcision (to become culturally Jewish), as true circumcision is of the heart by the Spirit (Romans 2:28-29). To argue such would be to imply that Christ’s work and impartation of the Spirit weren’t complete in establishing God’s New Covenant community (Galatians 3:3; cf. 2:20; 5:24-25). Even further, it would require complete adherence to the “works of the law” under that previous covenant, thus nullifying the work of Christ (Galatians 5:3-6; cf. 2:21).

This is important, because if we view Paul’s repudiation of the “works of the law” (Galatians 2:16; 3:2, 5, 10) or “works of the flesh” (Galatians 5:19) as a repudiation of all “works,” we not only miss the significance of Paul’s nuanced but overlapping view of such ‘works’ in their respective contexts but also cast a negative light on the validity of good works within the context of our salvation and Christian community as a demonstration to the world of the gospel of the Kingdom (Galatians 5:13-14, 22-25; 6:7-10; Ephesians 2:10; Philippians 2:12-13; Colossians 1:9-12; 2 Thessalonians 2:16-17; 2 Timothy 3:16-17; cf. Matthew 5:16; Hebrews 10:24; 1 Peter 2:12; James 2:14-26).

Nevertheless, we can still affirm Luther’s conclusion that salvation is not based on any moral or meritorious work of our own doing, lest we should believe that we’ve earned God’s provision through Jesus. A truth that Jesus, Paul, and the other New Testament writers would heartily affirm. But that isn’t the same as saying that our good works don’t play a role in our salvation. In other words, good works neither get us in nor keep us in but they certainly have a place in our experience and expression of God’s saving work (as we’ll begin to unpack in Part Two).

Paul’s conclusion in Galatians is that the Law is no longer the basis for covenantal communion with God but that Jew and Gentile alike stand in relationship with God through Jesus Christ, alone (Galatians 3:26-29). And further, it is no longer circumcision that is the mark or seal upon our belonging to the people of God, but the Spirit and his life manifest through us (Galatians 3:3; 5:5-6, 13–6:2; 7-8).

To set the table for Part Two, I want to make a distinction in language. The language of “the gospel” and “personal salvation” are often used synonymously but they are conceptually distinct. The gospel includes the invitation to personal salvation, but that invitation is not the whole of the gospel (I unpack this important distinction further here). This conversation will focus almost exclusively on the topic of personal salvation, though it is worth framing the gospel as the bigger picture of God’s redemptive and restorative work in creation.  

In short, the gospel is that God is setting the world right by re-establishing his rule and reign over creation in bringing all things into harmony with himself (Ephesians 1:10; 1 Corinthians 15:20-28). That the rightful King of the cosmos has ascended the throne, a new era has begun in Jesus, and we have been invited to join him in his mission to restore the Kingdom to its fulness “on earth as it is in heaven” as his priestly ambassadors and image bearers (Matthew 28:18-20; 2 Corinthians 5:17-6:3; cf. Isaiah 49:8-26; Isaiah 55:1-13). Whereas salvation narrowly refers to the scope of humanity’s redemption, reconciliation, and restoration within that gospel story.

FURTHER READING
Paul, the Spirit, and the People of God, by Gordon D. Fee

Galatians (The NIV Application Commentary), by Scot McKnight

Getting the Reformation Wrong: Correcting Some Misconceptions, by James R. Payton, Jr.

The Victory of the Cross: Salvation in Eastern Orthodoxy, by James R. Payton, Jr.

Divine Conspiracy: Rediscovering Our Hidden Life in God, by Dallas Willard

After You Believe: Why Christian Character Matters, by N.T. Wright

Simply Christian: Why Christianity Makes Sense, by N.T. Wright