Barry, our benevolent dictator on the RTDISC list, had written the following on the list, “The doctrine of perseverence is not to be used as some sort of shield or excuse for wrongful associations: “Bad company corrupts good morals” was written to the church… Secondly, both the means and the ends are ordained. If we neglect the means, we cannot be sure of the ends..”

I responsed to him with this….

While I heartily agree with what you write above, it’s my observation that your opinion is in the minority amongst Reformed folk. Either it’s due to bad teaching, or (dare I say it) bad doctrine in the Reformed Confessions, I don’t know, but Rod’s statement is one that I often hear, from lay folks and from pastors in Reformed churches.

I’ve lost count of how many times I’ve heard that the warnings of Hebrews 6 (“it is impossible for those who were once enlightened… ^ if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance”) or Ephesians 6 (“Therefore take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.”) don’t really apply to me if I’m “truly a Christian”. In the case of Ephesians 6, we were told in a Sunday School class (by an elder) that if we’re truly Christians, the worst the devil can do to us is to cause our Christian life to be less fulfilling. I mean, the confession says that we can’t fall away!

Personally, it’s my current opinion, that while the WCF does a very good job of sorting out the ideas of election, justification, regeneration, perseverance, assurance, etc., it doesn’t do a good job _at all_ at tell us how we apply those terms to ourselves.

Even in the section on assurance, where it makes wonderful statements about how we can know that we’re part of God elect, etc., it prefaces the whole paragraph with the caveat, “Although hypocrites and other unregenerate men may vainly deceive themselves with false hopes and carnal presumptions of being in the favor of God”. Nowhere does it say how I can tell I’m assured and not a hypocrite. And sadly, neither do any of my teachers.

The amazing part is that the lack of application is not found in Scripture… Paul is not afraid of calling his audience “the Saints”, and saying that God “chose us in Him before the foundation of the world”, yet still warning his audience of falling away. In my sacreligous opinion, Paul sounds less Reformed than he ought to.

You may be anticipating my next statement with dread. In the last few weeks, I’ve been reading Norman Shepherd’s “Call of Grace”, and I’m finding a breath of fresh air to the “conventional” Reformed lack of application of God’s grace upon the people of God.

I his book, he writes a criticism of Reformed preaching, “We are told that the results of election and regeneration can be seen in the changed lifestyle of the believer, but then we are also reminded of the danger of misunderstanding and self-deception. We are told that as Christians we are still sinners, and that there is only a small beginning of new obedience in even the best of us. Honest and searching self-examination would appear to yield more reason for doubt than assurance.” YES! THAT’S IT EXACTLY! Over and over, Shepherd nails “stereotypical” Reformed preaching and evangelism.

Shepherd later talks about applying the promises of God (including perseverance) to the congregation.

“Furthermore, since Christ has died only for particular persons (limited atonement), whose identity can never be known with certainty, it is inconsistent with the Reformed faith to say to any specific person what Christ has done for him. This is certainly the case with respect to people outside the church of Christ, but it is also true to a large extent with respect to people inside the church. The pastor hesitates to cultivate a hearty assurance in this or that believer, because he does not know for certain whether that person is one of the elect and this one for whom Christ died. His faith may prove to be temporary and his works hypocritical. To cultivate assurance under those circumstances would lead him away from the cross of Christ.”

While this attitude is the opposite side of the coin from Rod’s statement, both are apparent dangers that I see so often in Reformed churches, and on Reformed lists from Reformed elders and teachers.

Shepherd insists that such an opinion is due to a misunderstanding of the Confessions, and I tend to agree. I have no problem saying that the elect cannot fall away if we’re using Confessional language. I do believe that Saints can fall away if we’re using biblical language. Those ideas aren’t in conflict… it’s just a matter of perspective and definition.

Ok… I’m done rambling… burn me at the stake.