Saturday 9 November 2013

Is “Continual Drinking” a necessary Requirement for Eternal Life according to the John 4?

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?

1 comment: