"Perseverance"
It was recently brought to my attention that there is a historical definition of "perseverance" that makes it more akin to “preservation” and that this what many theologians and creed writers had in view when they used the term. I am aware of that fact, but I regard the term “perseverance” as damaged beyond repair as a result of how it has been unbiblically defined and liberally promoted among those in the “sovereign grace” theology camp:
Four Reasons THAT “Perserverance” is Totalled
1. The definition of “perseverance” upon which some insist, which is essentially equivalent to preservation, is antiquated and largely unknown outside of those few in the sovereign grace community who have studied the language of the historical creeds and theologians. To use “perseverance” with this particular definition, requires that one provide and explain this historical usage to their audience. It would be simpler to use “preservation” where no such explanation is needed.
2. In common English parlance, “perseverance” speaks of something one must do, not something that is done for you. When using “perseverance” in a theological discussion, one must also battle the audience’s tendency to resist the aforementioned, little-known definition in favor of one with which they are more familiar. The measure of abstraction required to continually bear this distinction in mind should not be underestimated. It is often an insurmountable impediment to clarity.
3. The English word “perseverance” is used once in the bible (Ephesians 6:18) and it is not used in reference to a monergistic work of God. It is used as an exhortation to consistent, synergistic obedience. To say that more plainly, the bible uses “perseverance” in a way that is consistent with common English parlance, and inconsistent with the antiquated definition required to make “perseverance” compatible with sovereign grace theology (as when used as the “P” in TULIP for example). This is the main reason I regard “perseverance” as “theologically totaled.” When one’s theological argument requires a biblical term, with an externally imposed, antiquated, little-known definition that is at odds with how the bible uses the term, one should ditch that argument altogether and find another term to use. Indeed, why would we ask someone to define a term in a way that is inconsistent the bible’s definition and to do all the abstraction required to bear that in mind simply to justify our use of the term, when the term “preservation” carries no such baggage? When spelled out that plainly, it seems clear that salvaging “perseverance” is not worth the investment.
4. The most prominent promoters of “perseverance of the saints” (POTS) further muddy the waters in a way that is difficult to untangle for most disciples. To their credit, they use “perseverance” in a way that is consistent with its biblical usage. However, they apply THAT meaning of the term to POTS, and in so doing, insist that the synergistic works of men are a part of eternal salvation that is absolutely predestinated. This obnoxious doctrine is one of the most difficult matters to untangle in the minds of those trapped in Absolutism. In my experience, those who have been proselytized in this contradiction soon become pickled in it to such a degree that they can no longer see it even when it is held before their eyes.
FINALLY
There is more that could be said on the matter, but instead I’ll say that in the context of modern evangelicalism, I believe we do well to draw out the contrast between our theology and Calvinism with great clarity. In my opinion, this is best done by speaking of PRESERVATION (Jude 1:1) and rejecting the term PERSEVERANCE in the way it is so frequently employed, because where redeeming that meddlesome term is concerned, the juice isn’t worth the squeeze.
- Elder Daniel Samons