Gospel Guidebook: Getting and Keeping It Right  

---

Correctly Understanding Perseverance of the Saints

I believe that perseverance of the saints (POTS) is a true doctrine, and there are plenty of Bible verses that teach or suggest that believers will be kept to the end and will not aposatatize. However, POTS is merely a benefit believers receive in Christ. If Christ really accomplished everything necessary for justification, then POTS cannot be a cause or necessary effect of justification, lest the work of Christ be nullified. It is a grave error to teach that POTS is a grounds of final justification (e.g., John Piper) or a necessary proof of justification (e.g., typical Reformed theologian). For John Piper, POTS is an element of justification. For the typical Reformed theologian, POTS is inherent in justification. In either case, POTS is required of justification. This is why I say that there is not much difference between what John Piper teaches and what the typical Reformed theologian teaches. They describe things differently, but arrive at the same conclusions. In the end, they both teach a form of works salvation. At least John Piper is overt about what he teaches, whereas typical Reformed theologians "dress the wound of my people as though it were not serious. 'Peace, peace,' they say, when there is no peace" (Jer. 6:14 NIV).

Christ's life, death, and resurrection serve as the substitute for the believer's life in the world. This means that, hypothetically speaking, the benefit of POTS could be withheld from the believer for a purpose only known to the inscrutable counsel of God, and yet the believer still be secure as one of God's elect destined for eternal glory. And why should this be surprising? We make exceptions for elect children who die in infancy and others incapacitated, although faith is another benefit in Christ that is given to the elect. If it is okay to make exceptions for faith, why not POTS? Doesn't Christ get all the glory? And what if He wants to show the riches of His glory in such exceptional cases?