Discussion Jumpstarter
Study leader reference - not a definitive answer
Question 3
Origen is quoted saying that returning to sin “destroys the work of Christ” for that person and that “no one in whom evil doing exists can have peace with God”; how do those statements confront common evangelical instincts about assurance and “once saved, always saved”?
Another way to ask: How do Origen’s words—that returning to sin “destroys the work of Christ” for a person and that evil-doers can’t have peace with God—challenge ideas like assurance and “once saved, always saved”?
Discussion Jumpstarter
Direct Answer
Based on the speaker’s use of Origen, assurance is meant to belong to the “normal Christian life” of endurance and repentance, not to someone who returns to sin; this directly challenges “once saved, always saved” confidence that ignores ongoing obedience.
- Origen’s warning: returning to sin “destroys the work of Christ… nullifies Christ’s suffering… no one in whom evil doing exists can have peace with God.”
- The speaker contrasts this with modern teaching: many churches say peace is “guaranteed… because you got saved,” and he says, “That’s not what Paul is saying at all.”
- He rebukes using Romans 5:9 as an absolute guarantee: people say “Aha… you’ve been saved. That’s it,” but “you can’t ever just pick and choose scriptures.”
- He says true confidence is conditional and normal for faithful believers: “Every one of us should have that expectation… Now, if you’re living a wicked life, then yeah, you should be worried.”
- He cites “if” texts against unconditional security: “If we endure… If we deny him, he also will deny us” and “he who endures to the end will be saved.”