Take the 2-minute tour ×
Christianity Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for committed Christians, experts in Christianity and those interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

For the upright will live in the land,
     and the blameless will remain in it;
but the wicked will be cut off from the land,
     and the unfaithful will be torn from it." Proverbs 2:21-22

This is the NIV translation. The land seems like it is the land of God, which might symbolize heaven. So how is the eternal security doctrine defended in light of these verses? Do these verses not count because they are in the Old Testament? Thanks.

share|improve this question
    
Does it mean Heaven? Or the New Earth? –  wax eagle Aug 22 '13 at 14:37

2 Answers 2

up vote 13 down vote accepted

It is problematic to spiritualize verses too quickly. Recall that the Proverbs were written by Jewish people living in the Jewish homeland of Israel under the Mosaic Covenant--not the New Covenant spoken of by Ezekiel and identified by Jesus at the Last Supper.

This proverb is speaking about upright and wicked people living in the land of Israel at that time. Proverbs are general wisdom also--not incontrovertible truths. Some upright people died young, and some wicked people live to be quite old.

So, again, this is a general proverb that identifies that those who live righteously are often rewarded with long life. The wicked, however, often receive God's judgment in various forms or are just exposed to greater risks for various reasons.

This has nothing to do with the New Covenant.

share|improve this answer
    
Are you saying that "the land" is just not a type, or that it's not being used as a type in this verse? –  Ben Dunlap Aug 22 '13 at 16:21
1  
Right, the verses, and all of Proverbs in fact, are wisdom for this life. There is little in the Proverbs about the next one. –  fredsbend Aug 22 '13 at 20:18
    
@fredsbend Is your claim about Proverbs fairly standard? It doesn't sit right with me as a Catholic, and even a casual perusal of patristic commentary indicates that there is a long Christian tradition of reading Proverbs spiritually. I am just wondering if/when the opposite approach became standard. –  Ben Dunlap Aug 22 '13 at 20:52
    
@BenDunlap Perhaps there is a confusion on how we each define "spiritual". I would say that Wisdom, by nature, is spiritual. You cannot live a Godly life without God conferring Wisdom on you. I would not say, however, that spiritualism, by nature, confers Wisdom. There are other aspects of spiritualism that do not include Wisdom, faith being one. You seem to use the term differently enough that it seems to me that you would say Wisdom and spiritualism are nearly the same thing, or that one necessitates the other. –  fredsbend Aug 22 '13 at 21:05
    
So what we are left with is me saying, basically, that Wisdom is acquired though Spiritualism, but the Proverbs do not talk about that. They seem to be more of a definition of Wisdom; a rubric to identify it. They don't really teach any doctrine. I find that confusion on terms is common between me and Catholics. –  fredsbend Aug 22 '13 at 21:07

It depends what you mean by "once saved, always saved" (OSAS).

That is usually a catch phrase of the Free Grace brand of evangelicals (Zane Hodges, Charles Stanley, et al.). That sort of doctrine is refuted better with regard to a James 2-type argument that true faith necessarily results in good works.

The other brand of evangelicals that OSAS might apply to is Calvinists, but their doctrine is that God himself keeps his elect from falling away or being unfaithful and that any final apostasy implies the person wasn't truly saved to begin with.

See the Wikipedia's perseverance of the saints for a discussion of both types.

As for the passage in Proverbs, Narnian nailed it -- you're applying it in spiritualized way to OSAS without much warrant. There are plenty of real problem passages for OSAS such that you don't need to bend this one into service.

share|improve this answer
1  
This does not address the passage in Proverbs at all, and thus does not seem to really answer the question. –  Narnian Aug 22 '13 at 15:23
    
@Narnian: right. So how did it get three upvotes in three hours?! –  Wikis Aug 22 '13 at 18:35
1  
Updated, just for you two. :-) –  metal Aug 22 '13 at 19:25
    
@Wikis People agreed with it in general. It still does not address the particular verse mentioned in the question, though. –  Narnian Aug 23 '13 at 14:58
    
@Narnian, what more do you want?! I give you the nod, and my answer functions as a supplement to yours. –  metal Aug 23 '13 at 16:40

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.