Introduction
The Gospel of John was written with the explicit intention
of informing unbelievers what they must do in order to obtain everlasting life
(John 20:31). John is clear that the only requirement is belief; notice that in
the whole of the Gospel of John the words “repentance” and “repent” never
occur. So the idea of constant repentance of sin in order to be justified is a
totally foreign concept to the doctrine of eternal security. Therefore this
will not be dealt with here; there is absolutely no question that sin does not
cause loss of everlasting life. What will be dealt with is the claim made that
someone has to persevere in faithfulness to the end of their life in order to
be eternally secure.
Core Passage
The following passage is the core passage for this blog
post, parts of the verse that I wish to emphasise are put into bold text to
draw your attention to them.
John 4:7-15 (KJV)
7 There cometh a
woman of Samaria
to draw water: Jesus saith unto her, Give me to drink.
8 (For his disciples
were gone away unto the city to buy meat.)
9 Then saith the
woman of Samaria unto him, How is it that thou,
being a Jew, askest drink of me, which am a woman of Samaria ? for the Jews have no dealings with
the Samaritans.
10 Jesus answered and
said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to
thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest
have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water.
11 The woman saith
unto him, Sir, thou hast nothing to draw with, and the well is deep: from
whence then hast thou that living water?
12 Art thou greater
than our father Jacob, which gave us the well, and drank thereof himself, and
his children, and his cattle?
13 Jesus answered and
said unto her, Whosoever drinketh of
this water shall thirst again:
14 But whosoever drinketh of the water that I
shall give him shall never thirst; but
the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up
into everlasting life.
15 The woman saith
unto him, Sir, give me this water, that
I thirst not, neither come hither to draw.
It is immediately apparent that the core importance I wish
to point out from this passage is from verse 13 to 15.
Two Views Stated
The commonest two views regarding this passage are as
follows:
Standard Arminian:
One must persevere in faith (belief) in order to retain
eternal life, if the person fails to preserve then they fail to meet the
requirement by which the offer of everlasting life is offered.
Standard Calvinist:
One is eternally secure due to his election, therefore they
will necessarily preserve to the end. Therefore continual belief is the
evidence that the person is truly saved and is of the elect.
Free Grace:
One is eternally secure the moment they trust in Jesus
Christ for everlasting life, a once for all one time event is in view here.
Exegesis of John 4:13-15
- Verse by Verse
Staring with verse 13:
13 Jesus answered and
said unto her, Whosoever drinketh of
this water shall thirst again:
Jesus Christ is talking here about the physical well in
which Himself and the Samarian woman are standing at (verse 7,11). Jesus makes
it clear that whoever takes a drink from this water will become thirsty again.
14 But whosoever drinketh of the water that I
shall give him shall never thirst; but
the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up
into everlasting life.
Jesus creates a direct contrast to verse 13 by saying that
whoever drinks of the water he provides will never thirst. Jesus then goes on
to say that the water he gives shall be a well of water inside the person and
this springs up into everlasting life.
15 The woman saith
unto him, Sir, give me this water, that
I thirst not, neither come hither to draw.
The woman understood Jesus direct contrast between the water
he offers compared to the water at the well. She proves that she understands
this by asking Jesus for the water so that she will not thirst, and therefore
will not have to return at some later point.
Where the “Conditional
Security” Arminians Fall Down
The Arminian states that if someone fails to persevere in
belief then they will fail to meet their supposed requirements for everlasting
life (continual belief). Therefore the individual would need to come back to
Jesus in order to receive the living water Jesus provides. What is wrong with
this? Well it makes Jesus direct contrast completely null.
13 Jesus answered and
said unto her, Whosoever drinketh of this
water shall thirst again:
14 But whosoever drinketh of the water that I
shall give him shall never thirst;……..
Note the contrast Jesus makes, he is using the physical well
to represent a drinking that is direct contrast to that of living water. A physical
well requires for someone to come back to the well to drink the water, then
when they thrist they have to return to draw water and drink again. It is a
loop of coming to the well and drinking. Then Jesus says “But”, and creates the
contrast to show what He offers, Jesus says that whoever drinks of the water he
gives will never thirst again.
The Arminian interpretation follows the following illogical construct:
(1) Whoever
takes one drink from the well will thirst again and have to come back to draw.
(2) But
whoever takes one drink from the water Jesus provides will never thirst again
until they thirst again and have to come back to draw.
OR
(3) But
whoever continues to drink from the water Jesus provides
will never thirst again, until they
thirst again (by stop believing)
and have to come back to draw.
Regardless of which you would hold to (2) or (3), the
passage makes absolutely no sense, because one eventually will have to come
back to drink to get “saved again”.
Lets look closely at how (2) cannot be correct:
The first part of the (2) is absolutely correct, whoever
takes one drink will never thirst again, however the Arminian then adds “if
they continue to believe”, the result of not believing would mean that one
would have to come back to Jesus in order to drink again due to thirst. This
would make the verse completely wrong as Jesus is creating a direct contrast to
thirsting again by saying “shall never thirst”, to say that a contrast is not
being drawn would make the passage sound like this:
Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again:
But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him
may not thirst again….
But what contrast is being drawn? Basically none, and the
verse doesn’t even suggest one may well thirst again, it says “shall never
thirst”. Even if we allow, briefly, for the possibility the verse could mean
“may not thrist again” this does not fit “shall never thirst”, because
ultimately, the person may well thirst. So (2) cannot be correct.
What about (3)? This view basically states that if someone
were to continue to believe they would never thirst again, until they thirsted
again by unbelief and needed to drink again. Again this just makes the verse
and contrast Jesus creates mute, if anyone at any point thirsted again then the
contrast Jesus creates becomes mute and is no contrast at all. The Arminian is
in effect arguing:
Whoever drinks from the well will thirst again.
Whoever drinks from Jesus offer will never thirst again,
until they need to thirst again.
No contrast is given between verse 13 and 14. One would
still “thirst again” if it were possible one could become unjustified and loose
everlasting life.
Where the Calvinists
Don’t Actually Fall Down
The Calvinists should have no problem with this verse for a
few reasons; they do assert that one has eternal life. However they only assert
this if they are one of the “unconditionally elect”, and in Calvinist thinking
this logically leads to the conclusion that if you are one of the elect then
you will necessarily “continually believe until the end”, this is called
perseverance of the saints.
Therefore the verse does state that a person will never
thirst again, Jesus direct contrast remains; one has to drink from the well and
come back to drink again, but the water Jesus provides is a one time drink that
does not require anyone to ever drink again.
So the Calvinist interpretation doesn’t create a contradiction
in the exegesis of John 4.
Free Grace Position
Its quite simple:
Whoever drinks (one drink) from the well will thirst again.
Whoever drinks (one drink) from the water Jesus provides
will never thirst again.
The direct contrast remains, the verse remains and no eisegesis
has taken place.
Contrast:
One drink from well – will thirst again.
One drink water Jesus provides – will not thirst again.
What the verse doesn’t say:
Continues drinking from the well – will thirst again.
Continuous drinking from the water Jesus provides – will not
thirst again, until they need to thirst again when they become “unjustified”.
That’s illogical as a continuous drink from the well would never
result in thirsting and would render Jesus contrast using “But” as totally
meaningless.
One Final Stand
Finally one last argument could me presented by proponents:
One drink from the well – will thirst again.
Continuous drinking from the water Jesus provides – will not
thirst again, until they need to thirst again when they become “unjustified”.
Again, this makes no sense at all. What this view says is
that you won’t thirst again until you have to thirst again, which means you
will thirst again. Also it destroys the clear contrast Jesus gives by using the
word “But”, whatever Jesus means in verse 14 is a contrast to what is meant by
verse 13. Therefore as it is clear that verse 13 is talking about taking one
drink then thirsting again and verse 14 is talking about one drink and never
thirsting again.
One drink is enough for everlasting life.
Do you believe this?
Great article, and thanks for sharing this!
ReplyDelete