Can You Believe It?

Wrote Elder Ronnie Loudermilk recently in an article titled "God Shall Take Away His Part Out of the Book of Life" (here)

"Because the children of Israel rebelled against God’s commands, they lost the opportunity to enter Canaan and enjoy the Lord’s bountiful temporal blessings. This does not mean that those people went to hell and torment. Moses was one of those who did not enter Canaan, and we find him in the New Testament with the Lord on the Mount of Transfiguration (Matt 17; Mark 9; Luke 9). The names of those disobedient people were removed from God’s book “under heaven.”"

Who can believe such heresy? Live like the wicked Israelites, fornicate, tempt Christ, murmur and complain constantly, rebel and refuse God and his word, and it does not mean you are lost! Wow! Anyone who preaches this is to be marked as himself a rebel of God and doing harm to inquiring minds. I have answered this nonsense in my debate with Hardshell Jason Brown. In my article "Entering God's Rest" (here), under the heading "What About Moses?", I said the following things (under citations). I welcome all to review what I said in that posting, for it uproots and destroys the Hardshell heresy of Loudermilk.

Citations

Some argue that the fact that Moses was not permitted to enter the promised land proves that the typology of Canaan cannot refer to Heaven and salvation. But, here are some things I said in response.

First, Jason is wrong to affirm that some of those who fell under the wrath of God, in the wilderness, were truly saved people.  He affirms this in spite of all the verses I cited which described them in terms that make it impossible to apply to saved people, to true believers.  They were described as "liars" in their religious profession.  They were stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears.  They were unbelievers, practicing heathens, idolators.  All those cited texts categorize all who "fell in the wilderness," not just some of them.  They are all put into the same group, the group of those who fit the description given of them.

Second, Jason is wrong to affirm that Moses, likewise, "fell in the wilderness."  The Scriptures never place Moses into that category.  When the NT writers speak of "falling after the same example of unbelief" as those unbelieving Israelites whose carcasses "fell in the wilderness," no reference is to Moses.  In fact, the testimony is rather that "Moses was faithful in all his house."  (Num. 12: 7; Heb. 3: 2)  Moses is thus distinguished from those Israelites who fell under the wrath of God and died in the wilderness, for they are called "unbelievers" and unfaithful. 

Besides, the case of Moses still upholds the proposition that says "no unbelievers allowed entry."  Moses was forbidden entry for "unbelief."  Those who fell in the wilderness could not enter for unbelief.  Thus, the lesson still remains.  Unbelievers will not enter God's rest nor receive his inheritance.

Not all is correlation or significant between types and antitypes.  Men can make too much out of the parabolic use of types.  What is typical versus what is A-typical (or unique) about the case example of Moses' not entering the promised land?  Does his singular example show that not all those who died in the wilderness were reprobate and died in their sins?  No.  Does his singular exception undermine the general rule?  No. 

It is not inconsistent with sovereign grace theology to teach that the Christian serves Christ with an eye on obtaining eternal life and salvation thereby.  It is no more false than teaching that faith and repentance are for salvation.  Perseverance is as much a gift of God as is faith. 

The NT writers did not see any contradiction in affirming, on the one hand, that salvation was all of the Lord, by his grace alone, and affirming, on the other hand, that the sinner and the Christian must be actively involved in their salvation.  Calling upon Christians to "work out your own salvation" (Phil. 2: 12) was not inconsistent with salvation being the work of God, in the mind of the Apostles.  Even the Lord, though affirming that faith was the sovereign gift of God (John 6: 65), nevertheless exhorts - "have faith in God" (or "have the faith of God").  (Mark 11: 22)  This is an exhortation and implies that the ones addressed have some decisive role in whether they have, or have not, faith.

The story of the Exodus is a picture of Christian conversion and of salvation and redemption from the slavery of sin.  The wilderness wandering is a picture of the life of the professing Christian.  The Israelites who were declared to be "unbelievers" are a picture of hypocritical Christians, or false professors.  The Israelites who persevered, and who did not "draw back," are a picture of true believers.   Canaan's land is a picture of the eternal rest that God will give to his people in the new heavens and the new earth. 

The unbelieving Israelites, though actually saved from the land of Egypt by the Red Sea miracle, were nevertheless not saved from the trials of the various deserts.  The desert wilderness was the means God employed to manifest who was truly an "Israelite indeed" and who was only one externally and in pretense.  It was the trials of life that showed that the shallow ground hearer did not have saving faith.

Perhaps some Hardshell, or even Loudermilk himself, will come and debate this important subject? I am not holding my breath!