Debunking the Idea That Reformed Theology Makes Salvation "Complicated"
Let me clarify what I think about the preaching of a C.O.P. Theology or in other words Commitment, Obedience and Perseverance. I am afraid that some of its critics haven't really done enough research or taken out-of-context. What does it mean to have commitment, obedience and perseverance? With the statement that salvation is by faith alone but not a faith that is alone, is it very complicated to understand and is it works salvation? Not if you understand what genuine faith is and remember James warned that faith without works is dead (James 2:14-26). Authentic faith will produce good works as a result.
I don't see why Reformed Theology or C.O.P. makes salvation so complicated. I don't teach salvation is attained by works but the kind of works that shows up, can prove whether you are truly saved or you were never saved at all. Now commitment, obedience and perseverance follow each other. When you commit your life to Christ i.e. to entrust your life to Christ, stop trusting yourself and let Him be your Lord and Savior, you stop working for salvation and instead, you work as a result of salvation. After commitment, obedience then perseverance follows. Now can a Christian sin and fall away? The answer is indeed a yes. But can a Christian continue in sin and consistently fall away? Absolutely not because God is too loving to let anybody who is truly saved to be in sin (Hebrews 12:5-7). The Bible teaches that anybody who is in Christ will by God's grace eventually endure to the end, they will obey and should they have their shortcomings, God will lovingly chastise them. Those truths are very simple to understand that but Easy "Christianity" that it's too complicated.
When I think of how Easy "Christianity" goes then think of what they are doing to start with. Most of the time, their evangelism is flimsy. While you can confront sin without love but you can never love without confronting sin. When the person supposedly gets saved but shows no evidence of being born again, they do follow up. Now I do understand the need for follow-up but there is a need to differentiate an immature Christian from a false convert. I've seen immature Christians have some problems like quarreling somebody or playing violent video games but I have not seen any of them live so wantonly or arrogantly as the false convert. Worse, it's stupid to think that after the false convert leaves church and returns back to the world that they are still saved never mind the warning in 1 John 2:19 about true and false converts.
What makes Reformed Theology stands out biblically against Easy "Christianity" is that it seeks to see who's a sheep and who's a goat. It's not enough to teach Once Saved, Always Saved but who is really in that category and as said, distinguish the true convert from the false convert. Now Christians do sin at a daily basis and old habits like lying and getting mad die hard. However, Christians would not be in reveling in so much immorality because God chastises them. When I think of George Sodini's claims that he was saved and did what he did, I really can say that he was really a false convert, Sad to say but Easy "Christians" would still insist that he was truly saved. Just because Sodini went to Tetelestai Christian Church for 13 years does not mean he was truly saved. I suspect that he was really a Jesuit plant and two, his church also denies the life-changing power of the Gospel, choosing only to focus on profession but not possession which is also a dangerous heresy.
See also: