July 2022
I have read most of the author’s books and greatly benefited from them. He has taught me a great deal about the King James Version of the Bible, the true history of our country, and the actual history of the Nation of Israel. For that, I am very grateful to God and to Dr. Grady. This article is about a subject that is one of the most dangerous doctrines ever taught. I am under no delusion that my objections will change the minds of those who espouse this doctrine. I am referring to the doctrine of the Eternal Security of the believer. I will let the good Doctor speak for himself and then follow up with a few comments. You can judge for yourself whether my remarks are reasonable, logical, and biblical or not. (Much of this material comes from his book, “What God hath wrought” by Dr. William P. Grady).
Dr. Grady writes the following. “The average Christian today is so temporal minded, he doesn’t even comprehend the major implication of the rapture itself. It is not insignificant that Laodicea was the only church in Revelation exempted from even a minimal commendation (praise). Modern day Laodicea constitutes the church age which has been blessed with the most-light (commentaries, tapes, Bible on computer etc), material conveniences (indoor toilets, Air Jordan gym shoes etc) and protection from persecution (Bloody Mary, the rack etc). In fact, end day believers are so spoiled, they won’t even have to meet the Grim Reaper! 1 Corinthians 15:51.” (Page 588 of Dr. Grady’s book).
My response:
According to Dr. Grady, carnal believers today are so spoiled, they are going to be raptured out of here and into heaven so they don’t embarrass Christ anymore. Now, does that sound like a punishment or reward for being useless and even sinful? If believers in Jesus Christ are taught this doctrine from the pulpits in America, and they are, what do you think the result will be? Will we see more righteousness or less righteousness on behalf of those who claim to be followers of Jesus Christ? Look around, and what do you see? If you are awake, you see the deepening moral bankruptcy of our nation and the Christian Church. The doctrine of eternal security is a primary reason for this decline.
The tendency of this teaching will ineluctably produce a carnal and sinful follower of Jesus Christ. Tell a follower of Jesus Christ that it is normal for them to sin habitually, and what do you think the outcome will be? Can anyone honestly believe the result will be less sin? Moreover, tell Christians that even though their sin is habitual, they have nothing to worry about. They are eternally secure and are going to heaven no matter how wicked they are here on planet earth. Is this not giving them a license to sin? Does it not invite and encourage them to sin? In my opinion, this is unavoidable and predictable. Maybe this explains why the “church” is just about as wicked as the rest of society.
According to the author, God is going to rapture carnal believers out of here and “punish” them for their sin by sending them to heaven. That “punishment” sounds more like a reward for sin. Sin too much and you will get to heaven much sooner than the holy person. Does that make any sense at all?
Is this the gospel of Jesus Christ? Dr. Grady and many others believe it is, but I do not believe this doctrine is true to the Word of God. I think it has sent countless deceived Christians to hell. Eternal Security gives birth to CINOS (Christians in name only) who bring disrepute to the name of God every day.
The apostle Paul, in his epistles, made it abundantly clear that the unrighteous will not inherit the Kingdom of God or the kingdom of Christ. See 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, Ephesians 5, and Galatians 5. In the author’s theology, the unrighteous “spoiled” Christian will inherit the kingdom of God in direct contradiction to these passages and many other passages of scripture. I gladly defer to the apostle Paul.
Here is another quote from Dr. Grady’s book. “Yet, in the face of a divine accountability-“for unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall much be required” Luke 12:48- the “Rosie, Elvis and Billy” generation has produced the least amount of fruit!” Matthew 25:25
My response:
“In the face of a divine accountability,” these carnal Christians have “produced the least amount of fruit”. At first glance, one might question whether Dr. Grady is serious. What accountability is he referring to? Those who espouse eternal security do not believe that the wages of sin are death. Christians sin, according to these teachers, and get raptured or killed and sent to heaven (that is no accountability!). Non-Christians sin and go to hell (that is, eternal accountability!). What they are usually referring to is the “divine accountability” of the loss of rewards or position in heaven. They do not see the infinite difference between the loss of rewards in heaven and the loss of eternal life and the loss of heaven. It seems to me that there is actually no divine accountability at all for these carnal, spoiled, and sinful believers. After all, they are sent to heaven because they are so useless and wicked here on earth. Is this the gospel of truth? I can’t believe it is. For the author to talk about divine accountability is absurd and almost obscene. Losing a few rewards is not much divine accountability in my estimation. This is akin to a thief being arrested and then released with the loot in hand. Would anyone call that being held accountable? Dr. Grady should rewrite this verse of scripture so that it says what he actually believes, “For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall little or nothing at all be required.” Yes, he or she may lose a reward or two but never worry because they will go to heaven no matter how unrepentant and wicked, they remain. I do not see this as accountability, nor do I see this as anything other than an invitation to more sin.
Let us look at another quote from Dr. Grady: “So why is there a rapture of the body of Christ in the first place? From a dispensational point of view, 1 Thessalonians 5:9 certainly does apply, “For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ.”
My response:
The author’s explanation for the rapture is that carnal or backslidden Christians will not experience the wrath of God, “for God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ.” He can’t be serious, can he? According to the author, God removes backslidden Christians (God raptures them into heaven) so that they do not experience the wrath of God, poured out on the wicked, during the tribulation period. Wicked Christians get raptured to heaven, but wicked non-Christians experience the wrath of God. Is God impartial? Does God play favorites? Is God just? These are a few of the questions that come to me.
The word of God, from beginning to end, teaches the principle of sowing and reaping. Whatever a man sows, that shall he also reap. But not according to Dr. Grady and many other teachers of eternal security. This passage, referenced by the author, is addressing God’s purpose in salvation. That purpose is to save us from sin, not in sin. God wants us saved from His wrath because we are now holy in our lives. God doesn’t rapture unholy “Christians” into heaven. To suggest that God raptures unholy “Christians” is to tell these “Christians” that sin is not deadly and that God is not just. No wonder the world is full of Christian hypocrites (CINOS). This author makes it theologically acceptable. I think that is pathetic. God doesn’t want us to experience His wrath. His solution is to make us new creations in Jesus Christ that have ceased from the practice of sin. When that is true, we will not experience His wrath.
The Jews were taught the same false doctrines. In Jeremiah’s day, the false prophets told the people that they were safe in their sins and that Jerusalem would never be destroyed. Jeremiah told them to repent of all sin, or they would either die miserably (under the wrath of God) or be taken into captivity by the Babylonians.
But there is more to consider from the author. “However, a desire to shield the last Christian generation from tribulation judgment is not the exclusive reason for the translation of the saints. God’s children have been suffering torture and martyrdom for 2,000 years. As bad as the time of Jacob’s trouble will be, pain is still pain……………A pertinent text which has been overlooked by the “modern exegete” is Matthew 5:13, “Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt has lost his savor wherewith shall it be salted? It is henceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men.” Let us consider the following quote.
“One of the most obvious reasons for the rapture is because the backslidden church of Laodicea has simply run out of spiritual gas- the salt has lost its savor!”
My response:
Prior Christian generations suffered and died for their faith. They were not raptured out of persecution but had to endure it to be saved. But today’s Laodicean “Christians” get to escape the suffering and death of the tribulation period, the wrath of God. They get to be taken directly to heaven and not experience either the persecution of believers or the wrath of God.
Will not the martyrs of the past be crushed if these carnal believers of today are taken to heaven when they paid the ultimate price for their loyalty to God? I would be. It is more reasonable and just to imagine holy believers being raptured (martyrs) than carnal believers, isn’t it? If sinning saints are in heaven, then who in heaven’s name is in hell?
I find it very troubling for Dr. Grady to say that carnal believers have run out of gas (the salt has lost its savor), therefore God raptures them into heaven. God takes those “good-for-nothing” believers to heaven while other “good-for-nothing” people end up in hell. I do not understand how anyone can believe this is true of a holy God. Maybe I am just too shallow to know how any of this makes sense. In the following quote, the author gets much clearer on what he actually believes.
“Occasionally, it becomes necessary for a preacher to explain the untimely death of a brazen backslider by referring to the Bible’s “sin unto death” John 5:16 and 1 John 5:16? According to a common interpretation, when the living testimony of a wayward Christian becomes more of a hindrance to the Gospel than a help, the lord may call him home early.” (Ecclesiastes 7:16,17)
My response:
I find his explanation very disappointing. If someone claiming to be a Christian sins too much, God may kill him or her and take him or her to heaven. The Christian’s punishment is heaven, but the unbeliever sins and their punishment is hell. How is that just? Isn’t the author excusing sin in the believer? Absolutely.
There is a sin unto death, and that death is not just physical death but eternal death as well. This is what Jesus said, “And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul; but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. Matthew 10:28. Jesus said that we should fear the one who can kill the body and cast body and soul into hell. Could it be that backslidden Christians, who refuse to repent, are killed and sent to hell, not to heaven? How is it just of God to send sinning Christians to heaven while He sends all other sinners to hell? If that makes sense to you, then I will wonder about your eternal destiny.
“Now what if this same principle were applied to the professing church as a whole within the world’s most influential “Christian” nation? How long would the body of Christ be allowed to wander around if the majority of its members were likewise found to be more trouble than they are worth?”
My response:
Who says we are the most influential Christian nation? Our nation is not now Christian but once was. The most promising way to refine and reclaim a backslidden people is by chastisement, which often includes suffering. The rapture of backslidden Christians makes that impossible. In other words, God doesn’t expect a bride without spot or wrinkle. God doesn’t expect or demand a holy bride. God is going to marry a bride who is “found to be more trouble than she is worth.” Are we supposed to believe God is going to marry a whore? Is there any other way to understand the author’s position?
The author then goes on to talk about “Christian nudists who are naked and not ashamed. These are just the latest kooks for Christ”.
My response:
No wonder the unsaved are not interested in this gospel, which can’t release them, or anyone else, from the power of sin. For those who espouse eternal security, it is expected that there will be Christian liars, Christian thieves, Christian pedophiles, Christian drunkards, Christian adulterers, Christian murderers, Christian homosexuals, and so on. If that is true, why not Christian nudists, as Dr. Grady affirms? That shouldn’t shock anyone. But all of this thinking is in direct contradiction to the word of God.
“Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye were washed, but ye were sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.” 1 Corinthians 6:9-11.
It can’t be any clearer for those who have eyes to see and ears to hear. The Word of God says explicitly, “and such were some of you.” It does not say “such are some of you.” Real Christians no longer practice unrighteousness, contrary to those who teach eternal security and say that Christians continue to live in sin. The testimony of a person saved from sin is “that was me, but now I am washed in the blood of the Lamb. I am no longer a thief, an idolater, an adulterer, a murderer, or a homosexual. I am now a child of God, and sin is the exception in my life, not the rule. Sin is no longer my master, I am now a servant of righteousness by the grace and truth of God.”
Dr. Grady wrote this statement. “Paul’s warning to the Gentiles of a potential disenfranchisement in the future.”
My response:
The author suggests that Paul wrote to the Gentiles, warning them of the potential of being “disenfranchised” in the future, like Israel was in the past. Was most of Israel “disenfranchised” but not sent to hell? Can the author be serious? Israel lost the covenant and was divorced by God. They also lost the land for thousands of years. Many were killed violently and with much suffering. God divorced backslidden Israel, and that is a picture of a relationship and covenant that is ended. It is not a picture of a loss of fellowship (or simple disenfranchisement) as many believers in eternal security would have you believe. Were the Jews driven to the far ends of the earth after rejecting Jesus, but saved all the while? Impossible.
“Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not high minded, but fear: For if God spared not the natural branches (Israel), take heed lest he also spare not thee.” (Romans 11:20,21 emphasis added)
“Paul goes on to explain that as the lord turned his attention away from rebellious Israel to the Gentile nations in the first century, he will one day reverse that very process”.
My response:
“Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again. Romans 11:22,23”
According to the author, all that this implies is that God turned his attention away from rebellious Israel because of their sin. He then directed his attention to the Gentiles. But is being “cut off” more severe than simply not being noticed or attended to by God? Isn’t being cut off the same as being under God’s condemnation? God divorced Israel and cut her off. It was much more serious than simply a lack of attention by God. This is the severity of God, being cut off from Him. If Israel abides not in unbelief, Israel will be grafted back into God. And if Gentiles abide not in His goodness, by continuing to believe in Him, they too shall be cut off and eternally separated from God, just like those unbelieving apostate Jews.
Are we to believe that rebellious, sinful, and unbelieving Israel went to heaven? Are we to believe that rebellious, sinful, and unbelieving Christians today get raptured into heaven? Can the author be serious? Does this make any sense to you? Or am I raving like a madman?
At the birth of Jesus, the angel said the baby would be named Jesus, for he would save his people from (not in) their sin. Apparently, Dr. Grady and all other believers in eternal security believe in salvation in sin, not from sin. Is Christ then minister of sin? May it never be. Romans chapters 6 and 8, as well as the book of 1 John, should clarify this. These passages make it clear that habitual sin is not a characteristic of a born-again child of God. If any man be in Christ, he is a new creation. Old things (sin) pass away and all things become new (righteousness and holiness).
All of the Old Testament and all of the New Testament are aimed at the people of God having a heart to do the will and law of God. Period. There are hundreds of passages that attest to this truth. The carnal Christianity espoused by the author and those who believe in eternal security tells the world that becoming a Christian means very little in terms of practical righteousness. It doesn’t mean you can now be trusted because you have become a follower of Jesus Christ. It doesn’t mean that Christians are good and righteous people. Unfortunately, it does mean that Christians are hypocrites, who are going to heaven even if they sin more than non-Christians. This type of Christianity will never save the world. It will destroy the world.
My final comment:
The deception of eternal security is often very subtle. Words are used that may seem to convey one thing but mean something different. For instance, when the author uses the phrase “divine accountability.” To the uninformed, it may seem sensible at first, but only upon closer examination of its meaning. If Christians can sin with eternal impunity, then there is no divine accountability. The same is true for the word “disenfranchisement.” Backslidden Israel was disenfranchised, not damned to hell, is the subtle suggestion. Gentile Christians can also be disenfranchised and not sent to hell. But what if the word of God makes it clear that the wages of sin are death for all who practice sin? What then?
Dr. Grady is one prominent advocate for dispensationalism and for the doctrine of eternal security. There are many others, and I am sure that many of them are quality individuals in many ways. However, I do not understand how they can’t see the danger of this doctrine of eternal security to the spiritual health of the individual and our nation.
Eternal security eliminates the fear of the Lord, which is the beginning of wisdom. If a person believes in eternal security and lives a permissive lifestyle that is expected of all believers, they can’t fear the Lord. Without the fear of the Lord, there is no limit to the wickedness Christians will practice. Ultimately, those deceived by this error may find themselves in a state of eternal damnation. If there is one thing that the Christian church in America needs, it is a baptism of the fear of the LORD.
