Perseverance of the Saints Part 10: Examining Wilderness Typology in Hebrews

Some Calvinists have argued that the frequent references to the wandering Israelites in the desert suggest that the writer of Hebrews is not addressing apostasy from true faith.  It is assumed that the wandering generation who failed to enter the Promised Land never had a saving faith relationship with the Lord.  Since the writer of Hebrews uses the wandering generation as an example or object lesson for the situation being addressed among his readers, it is argued that this indicates that he does not consider those he warns of apostasy to be truly regenerated believers.  In other words, if we have good reason to doubt that the wilderness generation of Israelites who failed to enter the Promised Land was saved, then we have reason to doubt that those the writer of Hebrews warns, while holding up those Israelites as an example, were really saved either.  I believe this approach fails for the following reasons:

Whose Hearts Were in Danger of Being Hardened?

The writer of Hebrews sees apostasy as the end result of a hardened heart.  This is especially emphasized in Hebrews chapter 3 which is also the primary chapter that makes frequent references to the wilderness generation of Israelites.  Who then is being warned not to harden their hearts and to heed the voice of God in chapter 3?  In the first verse of Hebrews 3 the inspired writer makes clear that his warning is directed to “holy brethren, partakers of a heavenly calling” who have confessed Christ.  We have already determined that the writer of Hebrews sees holiness in terms of the soul cleansing benefits of the atonement, and we have no reason to believe that he considers their confession of Christ to be anything less than genuine.  Therefore, we have very good reason for concluding that the writer of Hebrews sees the very ones that he has determined to warn, while using the illustration of the wilderness Israelites, as truly saved.  There is no indication that he shifts his attention away from these “holy brethren” to some potential converts, who have not yet embraced the gospel, in the admonitions that directly follow.  In verse 12 he ties the warning directly to these same “brethren”:

Take care, brethren, that there not be in any one of you an evil, unbelieving heart that falls away from the living God.  But encourage one another day after day, as long as it is still called ‘Today,’ so that none of you will be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. (verses 12, 13)

What sense would it make to say to unbelievers, “Take care…that there not be in any one of you an evil unbelieving heart that falls away from the living God?”  Why shouldn’t unbelievers have an evil and unbelieving heart?  Does it make sense to warn unbelievers against falling away from God?  This is not a call to conversion but a warning to those who are already converted.  We can plainly see this in the fact that the writer of Hebrews then calls on them to “encourage one another day after day…so that none of you will be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.”  Are unbelievers to encourage each other?  Are they to encourage each other in unbelief or in a faith that they do not yet possess?  Verse 16 then returns to the example of the wilderness generation, “For who provoked Him when they heard?  Indeed, did not all those who came out of Egypt led by Moses?”  It would be wise for us to consider carefully why the writer of Hebrews makes such a statement.  I believe it is an important clue for how we should understand the intended parallel between the wilderness generation and those being addressed in this letter which leads us to the second problem with the Calvinist appeal to this OT parallel:

The Parallel of Deliverance and Redemption

We need to notice two things that the writer of Hebrews wants us to focus on in verse 16 (above).  First, we see that these Israelites “came out of Egypt.”  How does this relate to his present audience?  It seems quite clear throughout the epistle that the writer of Hebrews sees his audience as those who, like the Israelites in the desert, have “come out of Egypt.”  They have experienced a very real deliverance.  The Israelites experienced deliverance from the bondage of Egypt and the intended audience of Hebrews have experienced deliverance from the bondage of sin (and perhaps Jewish ritual as well if we hold to the view that it is primarily Jews that are being addressed).  The other important feature of this passage is that these Israelites were “led by Moses.”  Just as the Israelites of the Exodus followed Moses out of the bondage of Egypt, so have these present believers escaped the bondage of sin and law by becoming followers of Jesus Christ, Who has been proclaimed Moses’ superior in every way (3:1-6).

The writer of Hebrews never questions the initial deliverance of his audience; rather, he plainly assumes it throughout his epistle.   His main concern is that they continue to follow and obey Christ so they will not fail to enter that eternal rest which belongs only to those who endure to the end in saving faith (3:6, 14).  The lesson that needs to be learned is that the Israelites initial deliverance did not guarantee them the rest of the promised land, and the initial deliverance of these believers does not guarantee them the eternal rest of the Messianic Kingdom.  If these believers cease to heed the voice of God and begin to give way to sin and disobedience then they are in danger of missing the goal of their faith.  This is as far as the parallel was intended to be understood.  We see further confirmation of this in Chapter 11 where the heroes of faith are held up as examples for these believers to emulate:

All these died in faith, without receiving the promises but having seen them and having welcomed them from a distance, and having confessed that they were strangers and exiles on earth.  For those who say such things make it clear that they are seeking a country of their own.  And indeed if they had been thinking of that country from which they went out, they would have had opportunity to return.  But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one.  Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God; for He has prepared a city for them. (Hebrews 11:13-16)

These were commended for dying in the faith without yet fully receiving the promise and for not returning to the country that they left behind (which seems to mean only that they did not fall back into unbelief but held to the promises of God by faith).  By faith they continued towards the goal and refused to return in their hearts to that “country” from which they had been led.  We see again that the issue is not whether or not they had experienced initial faith but whether or not they continued in their faith journey towards the ultimate goal of their faith.  This was the case of the wandering generation of Israelites as well.  They had left Egypt in faith but later returned to Egypt in their hearts.  It was these same delivered Israelites who later provoked God’s anger in the wilderness through disobedience and unbelief and were therefore denied access into the Promised Land (3:17-19).  There is a greater promise for the believers that the writer of Hebrews is addressing to attain, but they too will fall short of receiving that promise if, after being delivered, they return again to Egypt (Judaism?) in their hearts.  Like the wandering Israelites they are in a state “between” initial deliverance and final rest (which in their case is the reception of an eternal rest rather than the temporal possession of a promised land).  For this reason they are being encouraged to continue in their faith and lay hold of the promise because they have not yet arrived and may, like the Israelites of old, tragically fall short of the promised rest that awaits them (4:1).  As believers in Jesus Christ they are in the process of entering that rest, but that process can fail to reach fruition if faith is not ultimately maintained (4:2-11).  Grant R. Osborne gives us a concise summary of how the wilderness typology is being used by the writer of Hebrews:

Wilderness typology was quite prevalent in the early church as illustrative of both judgment and reward.  Both 1 Cor. 10:1-13 and Jude 5 make it a warning against the dangers of sin.  The obvious inference in all three passages is that one dare not trust his original “deliverance” from sin and lapse into apathy, but must persevere in his walk with Christ.  Ps. 95:7b-11, used by the writer as the basis for his splendid midrash here, was sung by Jews as part of their Sabbath worship in the temple.  The readers probably understood it in this fashion, especially since verses 1-7a of the psalm consist of a call to worship.  The obvious inference is that one must listen to God- “Today if you hear His voice” (vv. 7, 15)- and that listening includes obedience. (Grace Unlimited, ed. Clark H. Pinnock)

Exactly.  Apathy towards sin, immaturity, and disobedience are all closely connected and will eventually lead to outright unbelief and rejection (2:1-4; 3:17-19; 4:6, 11; 6:1-8; 10:26; 121-2, 15-17, 25).  Hebrews 5:11 states that his readers have “become dull of hearing” and verse 12 rebukes them for their lack of maturity which leads to the dreadful warning in Hebrews 6:4-8 concerning those who have “fallen away.”  Hence the repeated imperative: “Today if you hear His voice, do not harden your hearts.” (3:7, 8, 13, 15; 4:7)  This is the same thing being expressed by the metaphor of the field (6:7, 8).  The land that is being described does not begin in a hardened state but begins in a softened and broken state which can absorb the rain and yield good fruit, and is therefore speaking of those who are already believers (vs. 7).  However, if the land becomes hardened (due to apathy towards sin and continual disobedience), then that field can no longer soak in sufficient rain for producing useful vegetation (vs. 8).  Instead it can only produce weeds and thistles.  The hardened land represents those believers who have hardened their hearts to God’s voice to the point of “falling away” from the living God.  The thorns and thistles are the evidence of apostasy and evokes the curse of God.  There is grave danger for the believer in becoming apathetic towards sin for it can lead to the most dreadful of all spiritual consequences.  This is one of the main themes of the entire epistle.

The Wandering Israelites had Experienced True Faith

We need to also point out that there is strong Biblical evidence that the Israelites who had been delivered from Egypt had indeed entered into covenant relationship with God through faith (even though the illustration would still pose no difficulty for the Arminian view if it could be shown that the entire generation had never experienced saving faith).  It would be quite the stretch to think that the Israelites putting blood on their doorposts in obedience to Moses’ command was anything less than an act of faith (Exodus 12:28, cf. Hebrews 11:28).  They trusted that God was about to deliver them and that He would provide for them since they did not make provisions for their exodus from Egypt (Ex. 12:39).  Should we really believe that the Israelites observed the Passover in unbelief (especially since unbelief is correlated with disobedience in Hebrews 3:18 and 19)?  They were obedient and they trusted God and God redeemed them as a result (notice especially that in Hebrews 11:29 we are told that, “By faith the people passed through the Red Sea as on dry land…”).

So we see that the Israelites began their journey in faith; but is there any reason to believe that they exercised faith again after their initial deliverance?  After God destroyed the Egyptians in the Red Sea we read:

When Israel saw the great power which the Lord had used against the Egyptians, the people feared the Lord, and they believed in the Lord and in His servant Moses. (Exodus 14:31)

And in the song of Moses and Israel we read, “The Lord is my strength and my song, and He has become my salvation; this is my God and I will praise Him; my father’s God and I will exalt Him.” (Ex. 15:2)

We also find that the people affirmed their commitment to the Lord and His covenant in Ex. 19:7-9; 24:3, 7-8.  What then do we make of Hebrews 3:10 and 11?

Therefore I was angry with this generation, and said, ‘They always go astray in their heart, and they did not know my ways’; as I swore in my wrath, ‘They shall not enter my rest.’

It would seem that the Lord is speaking of a general pattern of rebellion that hardened the hearts of the Israelites to the point of outright unbelief. They refused to believe that God could give them the land of Canaan because there were giants in the land (Num. 13:26-14:10).  They were therefore denied access into that land.  This does not mean that these Israelites never exercised genuine faith in God.  Rather it illustrates the importance of resisting the deceitfulness of sin and continually heeding the voice of God.  If we continue to spurn his voice we will harden our hearts and make it harder for us to trust and obey God to the point of unbelief and apostasy.  That is what the writer of Hebrews is warning his readers about.  We need to be careful not to draw too much from the example of the wandering generation since even though they were denied access into the Promised Land and died in the wilderness (Num. 14:30-35); they were still forgiven by God for their sin (Num. 14:20).  Failure to enter the Promised Land did not necessarily constitute loss of salvation (since both Moses and Aaron were denied access), while failure to enter God’s eternal rest certainly does.

Conclusion:  The use of OT parallel between the wilderness generation of Israelites and the intended audience of the epistle to the Hebrews poses no threat to the Arminian interpretation.  In fact, the Arminian position is supported by the specific way that the writer of Hebrews uses the example of the wandering generation.  The intended audience of the epistle had been redeemed from sin just as the Israelites of the exodus had been redeemed from Egypt.  They, like the wilderness generation, are considered God’s chosen covenant people who have heard and responded to God’s voice but must continue to hear and respond to God’s voice in order to reach the ultimate goal of their faith: eternal rest in God’s Kingdom.

Go to Part 11

Go to Part 1

11 thoughts on “Perseverance of the Saints Part 10: Examining Wilderness Typology in Hebrews

  1. Thanks so much for taking the time to write these articles out. It’s hard to see your fruit on the ‘net, but I assure you some of us are reading and taking notes.

    Now a comment on your conclusion.

    “…They, like the wilderness generation, are considered God’s chosen covenant people who have heard and responded to God’s voice but must continue to hear and respond to God’s voice in order to reach the ultimate goal of their faith: eternal rest in God’s Kingdom.”

    We also see God comparing His relationship to His people in the form of another covenant – marriage. Hosea beautifully and painfully describes the emotions God goes through as His people “play the harlot” on Him. This comparison is also followed in the New Testament, where Paul was concerned about keeping that “marriage” between God and His church pure.
    “For I am jealous over you with a godly jealousy: for I espoused you to one husband, that I might present you as a pure virgin to Christ. But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve in his craftiness, your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity and the purity that is toward Christ.”

    Comparing the fall of man in Genesis with the fall of a church today is certainly a clear way to demonstrate that only those who perservere in faith and obedience will be with God.

  2. Steven,

    Thanks for the encouragement and the excellent comments. The marriage parallel is very important in Scripture and does have relevance to the topic of apostasy as you have pointed out. I intend to explore the marriage imagery a little when I post on assurance.

    God Bless,

  3. So, in Ephesians 1.13-14, believers are “marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance:” Would this be considered contingent on continuance in faith? Would this correlate with the “if you continue in the faith” passages throughout the NT?

    You comments (exegesis) of the Hebrews passages were really good. And I agree with you. The Eph. 1.13-14 passage, however, has stuck in my mind as a definite guarantee, not based on a person’s faith; however, if we are to consider the warning passages, then the Eph. passage must be contingent on that person’s faith.

    What do you guys think?


  4. Billy,

    I don’t see any difficulty with the sealing of the Holy Spirit for the reasons you mentioned. The Holy Spirit is received by faith (Gal. 3:2, 14) and can only seal us as we remain in Christ through faith. We are, in fact, sealed in Christ, by the Holy Spirit, as a direct result of faith (Eph. 1:13). He is the guarantee of an inheritance for believers and not unbelievers.

    There may be a parallel with circumcision which was also a “seal” for those under the old covenant (Rom. 4:11). We know that that seal was broken and guaranteed nothing when those who were circumcised broke the covenant and were cut off from the people of God (Rom. 2:25). The seal was conditioned on continued faith and obedience (2:26-29). The Holy Spirit marks us as children of the new covenant through faith in Christ, but if we abandon the faith then the Spirit of God no longer remains in us and we are no longer sealed in Christ (partakers of the covenant blessings that are found in Him alone- Eph. 1:3, 7, 10,11).

    The sealing of the Holy Spirit, therefore, applies only as long as we do not “grieve” (Eph. 4:30), and finally “insult” (Heb. 10:29) the “Spirit of Grace” through continued disobedience. Only those that continue in obedient faith remain sealed (Acts 5:32, Jn. 14:15-17; Rom. 8:5, 6, 9).

    There is no Biblical reason to see the sealing of the Holy Spirit as unconditional or irrevocable, while there are plenty of reasons to see it as conditioned on continued faith. Indeed, warnings against apostasy alone imply the conditionality of the seal.

    God Bless,

  5. Here’s something I wonder if anyone has ever pondered. Is the fear of either being in danger of apostasy or having already done it, causing apostasy? I see these posts, some of which I have contributed to in which people are beside themselves with fear and terror, wondering if they are apostates. I am forced to wonder if that constant fear is actually CAUSING some to reject Jesus? My brother was a member of a Free Will Baptist church for about 8 years. He went to FWBBC and left just shy of his 4 years. He began having doubts and fears, and apostasy was something he worried about. He was then approached by some Mormon friends, and they extended him some “hope” by telling him that Joseph Smith says that there are levels of heaven, but only hell for the extremely wicked. he began listening to them, and later he denied the truth of the Bible and became a Mormon. Is it possible that we as Arminians place too much emphasis on the possibility of apostasy, and not enough on trusting in jesus?

  6. Matt,

    Some might also say that an overemphasis on God’s grace can lead to license which can easily lead to eventual apostasy. Would we conclude from that that some emphasize grace too much? I don’t think so. The problem is that God’s grace has not been properly taught, not that it has been overemphasized. We can always draw wrong conclusions from Biblical teachings and make mistakes as a result. That is not the fault of the Biblical teaching, but our own in not living according to all the Bible says on a given subject.

    Let me ask you this. Did the writer of Hebrews emphasize apostasy too much?

  7. Is it possible that we as Arminians place too much emphasis on the possibility of apostasy, and not enough on trusting in jesus?

    One can only rightly emphasize the possibility of apostasy by likewise emphasizing the need to continue to trust in Christ in order to avoid apostasy. That is the point of the warnings, to encourage us to keep trusting and depending on God rather than drifting away in unbelief.

    God Bless,

  8. The warnings in the Bible equal about 5 verses. The teachings about God’s love and grace equal about 70% of the entirety of the NT, so yes, I think some do overemphasize the teaching of apostasy. It’s as if every Christian stands at the door of eternal damnation, and it’s up to us to constantly warn them to stay clear of it, when in fact the apostate is someone who has lived a full Christian life, has experienced ALL that God has to offer; His power, His love, His Spirit, and they have willingly and willfully walked away from Him. Someone who is at that point needs to be warned, yes, but not every Christian who is struggling with sin needs to be told “better be careful, you might sin too much and lose your salvation!” Too much emphasis on that takes away from the emphasis on the things that keep us grounded in Jesus, i.e. trust in Jesus, prayer, love for God and man, and obedience to His commandments. This is why I believe we have so many spiritually crippled people who sit around biting their nails, wondering if they have gone too far. This is why I believe the cults are so successful, because we cater too much to fear and doubt, and they cater to ego and give an alternative which alleviates the fear that we seem to thrive on sometimes. Fear can be a powerful motivator, and fear that goes unchecked, or that has no clear purpose can cause rebellion. I used to live in fear of apostasy, and it got so bad that I would turn to sins that comforted me to take the fear away. I should have turned to Jesus during that time, but there seemed to be so much negativity coming from the pulpit, and not enough reinforcement of the basics, things that keep us grounded. It’s like I spent 100% of my mental and spiritual energy trying to figure out if I was an apostate, when what I should have been doing was trusting in Jesus, praying, reading His word and obeying Him. The preaching I was hearing seemed to just emphasize the warning that we might be apostate, without providing the necessary tools to discover if we were, or providing the counterpoint that an apostate is rejecting Jesus, so if you are not rejecting Jesus, you are not apostate. I think my brother picked up on this fearful, hopeless type of preaching, and felt he had nowhere to turn.

  9. Matt,

    I take serious issue with your first sentence in that the warnings in the Bible equal about 5 verses and I would challenge your percentages as well. How often do you think we should speak of the need to continue to trust in Christ and how often do you think we should warn against falling away? Do you have a certain equation you think should be put in place and followed by the church? If you are just saying that we should strive for balance, then I have no problem with that, but the Bible is full of encouragements to keep trusting, continue in the faith, persevere in the faith, continue in God’s kindness and love, etc. Just look at the OT. It is filled with warnings and admonishments. I have no problem with saying that we should emphasize God’s love and grace, but I do have a problem with saying we should not emphasize God’s command for us to love Him back and guard against those things that can lead us away.

    It seems obvious that you have an emotional element to your question and that is OK; but do you really think it fair to pin your brother’s decision on an overemphasis on apostasy in the church? You do realize that Mormons believe in apostasy as well, right? Not only that, but they are much more works and effort oriented then any true Arminian.

    I should have turned to Jesus during that time, but there seemed to be so much negativity coming from the pulpit, and not enough reinforcement of the basics, things that keep us grounded. It’s like I spent 100% of my mental and spiritual energy trying to figure out if I was an apostate, when what I should have been doing was trusting in Jesus, praying, reading His word and obeying Him. The preaching I was hearing seemed to just emphasize the warning that we might be apostate, without providing the necessary tools to discover if we were, or providing the counterpoint that an apostate is rejecting Jesus, so if you are not rejecting Jesus, you are not apostate.

    Your comments here seem to reinforce my point that it is not necessarily a matter of over emphasis, but a matter of teaching these doctrines properly. If they had been taught to you properly, you wouldn’t have wasted so much energy trying to figure out if you were an apostate.

    God bless,

  10. I go to a church nwo that does not teach that apostasy can occur at all, and none of the people there seem to either be worried about it, or in danger of it. I live in a community that is 97% Mormon, and this General Baptist church is the only one preaching the gospel. They seem to view it in this way; You get saved, and if that is genuine, you will love God and want to keep His commandments. if it is not genuine, you will drift and go on your way unchanged. To them, apostasy is only possible in the sense of eventually rejecting the Holy Spirit to the point that He no longer convicts, and it can’t happen to a truly reborn child of God. While I disagree with them on this issue, I see that it seems to work for them, i.e. they remain strong and grounded in God’s word, and they never see works or prayer and Bible reading as something we must do to be or remain saved, and they seem to do everything out of a heart of love and appreciation of Jesus. The point is that while I do believe their approach is flawed, I don’t see anyone losing their grip on their faith, or rejecting Jesus and they accomplish this totally without any preaching from the pulpit about being in danger of losing salvation when they sin or backslide. Why is it then that the people on the other side of the coin all too often seem to continually tell people how in danger they are? Why does there have to be so much fire and brimstone and fear inducing preaching? The book of first John states that he who fears has not been made perfect in love, yet FWB churches and others under the bubble of Armininaism seem to concentrate so much on the possibility that we may be sinning too much, and nowhere near enough on positive reinforcement of love for God, and staying close to Him. If we are afraid of God, then we will never truly be able to trust in Him fully, and we may live, as I did and I know others here have in the past, shivering in their boots wondering if they sinned too much, or were not a good enough Christian, etc. The Mormons teach that apostasy is when someone leaves the church, not when someone rejects Jesus as savior. Many apostate Mormons believe in Jesus and even pray, they just aren’t earning their way to God. They also consider all of us non Mormons to be apostates, in the sense that our churches, in their opinion used to be Mormon, but fell away from that many years ago. Mormons do not teach that if you sin too much, you will go to eternal fire, and for the most part, they do not believe in eternal fire at all. I think the approach to the subject of apostasy in the average Arminian pulpit is far too fear fueled, and not in balance with the other parts of the Bible that speak of God’s patience and love and His Spirit that lives within us and testifies to us on a moment to moment basis. It bothers me, because that was the environment in which my several years long struggle with deep, paralyzing fear came about. Why should someone who has no more condemnation fear it on a regular basis? It makes no sense to me…

  11. Matt,

    I think we are just going to have to agree to disagree. You are basing your points on a very limited sampling of experience (yours) and trying to universalize it (and I am sure you would admit that you do not necessarily know the private lives of your church friends- I assume you have been fooled many times as I have). Your experience has been far different than mine. I have been in both Arminian and non-Arminian churches. I would never characterize the Arminian churches I have been in as you have. They weren’t all about hell fire and warnings and fear. They did preach on those things, but in the proper context. They also preached plenty on God’s love, grace, and mercy. Again, it is not a point of emphasis, but proper teaching. The Bible teaches both and so should we.

    I have also seen and known many who held to ES do extremely heinous things because they held to that doctrine and felt they had nothing to fear or worry about in their sin or lack of devotion to God. I have seen many such people lose their love for God over time as a result. Could preaching fire and brimstone and warnings turn someone off to Christ or lead someone to a place where they live in fear? I suppose so, but only if those teachings were improperly taught or received.

    The bottom line for me is that Jesus did not shy away from warnings of hell fire preaching. Neither did Paul. Neither did the writer of Hebrews, or Peter, or James; and the list goes on. So if you think that such things are not really important and the church could do just as well without them, I wonder why the writers of the NT testament thought such things were important?

    Also, it is true that perfect love casts out all fear, but perfect love comes from a place of extreme devotion to God. Very few of us are in that place, though it is a goal. However, the solution is not to just not worry about anything. That is self deception. John himself often warns of falling away and going after false teaching, and “deceiving our selves”. Likewise, Paul warned the Gentile believers to “not be arrogant, but afraid” since they too could be broken off from God’s covenant people if they did not “continue” in God’s kindness. I wonder why Paul felt the need to say such things?

    Why should someone who has no more condemnation fear it on a regular basis? It makes no sense to me…

    Such a fear is a healthy concern so that such a person will remain in Christ where alone there is no condemnation. It isn’t the type of fear that is suppose to be anxiety producing. Maybe that is the problem with how you are seeing things. For example, if I have no concern (or fear) at all over the possibility that I might at some point commit adultery on my wife, then I would probably not be careful not to look too long at attractive women, or thumb through magazines that I shouldn’t. If I had no concern (or fear) over the strength of my relationship with my wife, I wouldn’t make the effort to love her and do things for her that she appreciates. I wouldn’t invest in our relationship which would inevitably weaken it, possibly even to the point of breaking up. But such “fear” is not the same as a constant anxiety. Still, that fear is very important. I love her and know she loves me, but I also know I am weak and susceptible and need to be on guard (i.e., “don’t be arrogant”). It’s the same with God. We can know that God loves us and love Him too, but if we have no concern to keep that relationship strong and no understanding that despite our love, we are weak and susceptible in the flesh, we would not strive to overcome the flesh through His Spirit. But that doesn’t mean we need to live in anxiety or constantly worry that we will fall away. You may think that is how Arminians live, but that is not how I live and it has not been the experience of so many more like me who share my view.

    God Bless,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s