1 John 2:19—Proof of Eternal Security?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
JohnRH

JohnRH

Junior Member
#21
Mar 5, 2018
676
324
63
#21
ResidentAlien said:
Proponents of eternal security are quick to quote 1 John 2:19: "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us." This supposedly proves that if someone falls away and returns to a life of sin they were never saved in the first place. I have some problems with this notion and I'd like to examine it more carefully.

First, it says they "were not of us." The whole basis of the argument rests on this phrase. So what does it mean, really? I don't think it's conclusive that John meant they weren't saved at one point. It could very well mean they were saved but didn't have the same level of commitment and when trials and temptations arose they fell away.

Second, think about the implications. If falling away and returning to a life of sin means a person was never saved to begin with, then no saved person would ever succumb to sin.

Third, how does someone know the people described in 1 John 2:19 were never saved? Because they succumbed to sin? You can say they were never saved, but where in this passage does it indicate these people were never saved? You can't just speculate, you have to follow the text.

For these reasons we have to reject arguments for eternal security based on 1 John 2:19.
Click to expand...
"They" are antichrists (vs 18).
Antichrists deny the Father and the Son (vs 22).

They went out from "us". "Us" could be the apostles (chapter 1:1-5), not the apostles plus the readers.

They went out from the apostles with antichrist doctrine to the born-again readers, claiming to represent the apostles. They were never of the apostles. If they had been, they would have continued with the apostles in their doctrine. They manifested to the readers that they were not of the apostles by denying the Father and the Son.
 
ResidentAlien

ResidentAlien

Well-known member
#22
Apr 21, 2021
8,314
3,618
113
#22
JohnRH said:
They went out from the apostles with antichrist doctrine to the born-again readers, claiming to represent the apostles.
Click to expand...
I might agree except for this, if you mean what it appears. You seem to be implying the "false apostles" aren't born again; they are deceiving those who are born again. Again, it can't be established from the text itself that these people aren't born again.
 
JohnRH

JohnRH

Junior Member
#23
Mar 5, 2018
676
324
63
#23
ResidentAlien said:
I might agree except for this, if you mean what it appears. You seem to be implying the "false apostles" aren't born again; they are deceiving those who are born again. Again, it can't be established from the text itself that these people aren't born again.
Click to expand...
Well, they were antichrists. So, no, they weren't born again.
 
Nehemiah6

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
#26
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,776
113
#26
ResidentAlien said:
Proponents of eternal security are quick to quote 1 John 2:19: "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us." This supposedly proves that if someone falls away and returns to a life of sin they were never saved in the first place. I have some problems with this notion and I'd like to examine it more carefully.
Click to expand...
This verse would hardly be used to support the eternal security of the believer. It is a reference to false teachers, and by definition, false teachers ("antichrists") are not saved. John also notes that antichrists do not have "the doctrine of Christ" (which includes His deity as well as the Holy Trinity). So the cults would qualify for this description. NO ONE WHO DENIES THAT JESUS IS GOD WILL BE SAVED.
 
ResidentAlien

ResidentAlien

Well-known member
#27
Apr 21, 2021
8,314
3,618
113
#27
Nehemiah6 said:
This verse would hardly be used to support the eternal security of the believer. It is a reference to false teachers, and by definition, false teachers ("antichrists") are not saved. John also notes that antichrists do not have "the doctrine of Christ" (which includes His deity as well as the Holy Trinity). So the cults would qualify for this description. NO ONE WHO DENIES THAT JESUS IS GOD WILL BE SAVED.
Click to expand...
There's nothing at all in the text to suggest these people were never saved or born again. If there is, what is it? Not conclusions, but statements in the text itself.
 
F

ForestGreenCook

Well-known member
#28
Jul 8, 2018
8,441
1,213
113
#28
ResidentAlien said:
I'm sorry for your condition. You do have ADD, have you not? They're doing great things for that these days.
Click to expand...
Respectfully, I have no doubt that you are sincere in what you believe. Only a few, in comparison, believed the hard, mysterious doctrine that Jesus taught in his days on earth, and that was "the remnant of the house of Israel". The rest of the house of Israel turned away from Christ's doctrine because of the lack of knowledge of his doctrine. and are known as "the lost sheep of the house of Israel". not lost eternally, but lost to the knowledge. God's instructions to the remnant is to theah the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

All of God's elect are represented in the house of Israel/Jacob, and are from every kindred, and tongue, and person, and nation, as God changed Jacob's name to be no more called Jacob, but to be called Israel, which is not the whole nation of Israel.

I get the same, alarming remarks that Jesus did from a large portion of his elect in the days that he was preaching this doctrine.
 
ResidentAlien

ResidentAlien

Well-known member
#29
Apr 21, 2021
8,314
3,618
113
#29
ForestGreenCook said:
Respectfully, I have no doubt that you are sincere in what you believe. Only a few, in comparison, believed the hard, mysterious doctrine that Jesus taught in his days on earth, and that was "the remnant of the house of Israel". The rest of the house of Israel turned away from Christ's doctrine because of the lack of knowledge of his doctrine. and are known as "the lost sheep of the house of Israel". not lost eternally, but lost to the knowledge. God's instructions to the remnant is to theah the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

All of God's elect are represented in the house of Israel/Jacob, and are from every kindred, and tongue, and person, and nation, as God changed Jacob's name to be no more called Jacob, but to be called Israel, which is not the whole nation of Israel.

I get the same, alarming remarks that Jesus did from a large portion of his elect in the days that he was preaching this doctrine.
Click to expand...
Blah, blah, blah. When you feel like getting on topic let me know. Maybe you got your threads mixed up.
 
F

ForestGreenCook

Well-known member
#30
Jul 8, 2018
8,441
1,213
113
#30
Nehemiah6 said:
This verse would hardly be used to support the eternal security of the believer. It is a reference to false teachers, and by definition, false teachers ("antichrists") are not saved. John also notes that antichrists do not have "the doctrine of Christ" (which includes His deity as well as the Holy Trinity). So the cults would qualify for this description. NO ONE WHO DENIES THAT JESUS IS GOD WILL BE SAVED.
Click to expand...

When a person is born again, he is in Christ, and Christ in him. 2 Tim 2:13 - If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful, he cannot deny himself.
 
F

ForestGreenCook

Well-known member
#31
Jul 8, 2018
8,441
1,213
113
#31
ResidentAlien said:
Blah, blah, blah. When you feel like getting on topic let me know. Maybe you got your threads mixed up.
Click to expand...

I was hoping that your response would be a discussion of the scriptures instead of the tone you have taken.
 
F

ForestGreenCook

Well-known member
#32
Jul 8, 2018
8,441
1,213
113
#32
ResidentAlien said:
So why do you assume someone is trying to earn salvation by works simply because the don't subscribe to eternal security? It's quite illogical.
Click to expand...

Salvation, according to Greek translation means "a deliverance". If you ascribe all of the salvation (deliverance) scriptures to eternal salvation (deliverance), the scriptures will teach eternal salvation is gained by your good works. The children of God experiences many salvations (deliverances) as they sojourn here in this world, that are gained by their good works.
 
Nehemiah6

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
#33
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,776
113
#33
ResidentAlien said:
There's nothing at all in the text to suggest these people were never saved or born again. If there is, what is it? Not conclusions, but statements in the text itself.
Click to expand...
All you had to do is read the preceding verse to see that John is talking about unsaved people:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even NOW are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. 19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

So how do we know what "antichrists" means in this passage? We go to verses 22 and 23:
22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. 23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.

To deny that Jesus is the Christ is to deny that the eternal Word of God (who is also God) became a Man (John 1:1-3 and the entire chapter). That God became a Man to die for our sins and rise again for our justification (1 Tim 3:16 KJB). The Jehovah's Witnesses, the Christadelphians, the Unitarians, and many others all deny that Jesus is God. They are in fact "antichrists". And as a result they have neither the Father, nor the Son, nor the Holy Spirit within themselves. They are lost and on their way to Hell.
 
ResidentAlien

ResidentAlien

Well-known member
#34
Apr 21, 2021
8,314
3,618
113
#34
Nehemiah6 said:
All you had to do is read the preceding verse to see that John is talking about unsaved people:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even NOW are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. 19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.
Click to expand...

I've read it. I'm still looking for where it says these people were never at any point saved. The point is, it's your conclusion they were never saved, but that's not what it says. It just says they "went out from us" and began to teach false doctrine. I'm not saying you're wrong necessarily, I'm just pointing out there's nothing conclusive in the text itself.

Nehemiah6 said:
So how do we know what "antichrists" means in this passage? We go to verses 22 and 23:
22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. 23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.
Click to expand...

Again, you're coming at it with a preconceived idea that if a person was saved they could never fall into apostacy and deny the Lord. But there's nothing in the text itself that says definitively that these people were never saved.
 
E

Everlasting-Grace

Well-known member
#35
Dec 18, 2021
5,950
1,872
113
#35
ResidentAlien said:
Proponents of eternal security are quick to quote 1 John 2:19: "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us." This supposedly proves that if someone falls away and returns to a life of sin they were never saved in the first place. I have some problems with this notion and I'd like to examine it more carefully.

First, it says they "were not of us." The whole basis of the argument rests on this phrase. So what does it mean, really? I don't think it's conclusive that John meant they weren't saved at one point. It could very well mean they were saved but didn't have the same level of commitment and when trials and temptations arose they fell away.

Second, think about the implications. If falling away and returning to a life of sin means a person was never saved to begin with, then no saved person would ever succumb to sin.

Third, how does someone know the people described in 1 John 2:19 were never saved? Because they succumbed to sin? You can say they were never saved, but where in this passage does it indicate these people were never saved? You can't just speculate, you have to follow the text.

For these reasons we have to reject arguments for eternal security based on 1 John 2:19.
Click to expand...
You have misred the argument

It is not for those who return to a life of sin. It is for those who have left the church and now totally reject CHRIST, AN Anti-Christ

As for those who return to a life of sin. That would be 1 John chapter 3. and Jhns words that whoever is born of God can not continue or habitually sin, because they have been born of God
 
E

Everlasting-Grace

Well-known member
#36
Dec 18, 2021
5,950
1,872
113
#36
Locoponydirtman said:
People read too much into that passage. Details arent given so we dont really know what happened. All we see is John writing that some left and he gives reason not to distressed over it. Its possible that the statement was simple rhetoric. "They left because they really never were with us."
There just ismt enougn information there to form or support an eternal security doctrine. The only thing we can really take from that passage is that some folks left the church. We can learn from it that sometimes folks will leave the church and its not in our hands.

We use these same term when our children habe a falling out with their friends, we say they never were your friend to start with. Not because its a fact that they never were friends, but because this is where it ends and there is nothing that can be done about it.
Click to expand...
Actually yes there is

1. They left us, You can't leave us unless you have been walking with us. No one does that unless the claim to be a believer,, No person who is an unbeliever would be considered to be walking with us
2. they were not of us - They were not a true part of the church. they just walked with us. not everyone who walks with us in the church is saved. there are many make believers who never had true faith, then left and now deny christ. they are anti christ.
 
E

Everlasting-Grace

Well-known member
#37
Dec 18, 2021
5,950
1,872
113
#37
ResidentAlien said:
John doesn't say, the left because they never were of us, but they are not of us. The context seems to suggest they left over disagreements about doctrine.
Click to expand...
lol

the context is they NOW DENY CHRIST.

it has nothing to do with disagreements.. thats why he calls them antichrist

They left because they were NEVER OF US,, they were never a true part of the church
 
E

Everlasting-Grace

Well-known member
#38
Dec 18, 2021
5,950
1,872
113
#38
ResidentAlien said:
So why do you assume someone is trying to earn salvation by works simply because the don't subscribe to eternal security? It's quite illogical.
Click to expand...
because if they can LOSE salvation. they have to EARN salvation

You can't lose something you can never earn..
 
E

Everlasting-Grace

Well-known member
#39
Dec 18, 2021
5,950
1,872
113
#39
JohnRH said:
"They" are antichrists (vs 18).
Antichrists deny the Father and the Son (vs 22).

They went out from "us". "Us" could be the apostles (chapter 1:1-5), not the apostles plus the readers.

They went out from the apostles with antichrist doctrine to the born-again readers, claiming to represent the apostles. They were never of the apostles. If they had been, they would have continued with the apostles in their doctrine. They manifested to the readers that they were not of the apostles by denying the Father and the Son.
Click to expand...
where does it say apostle?

Us in john 1 would be the people john wrote to and himself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.