header-craig blomberg blog

The Most Important Statistic Never Kept In Church

← back to blog home

Oct 17, 2011 by Craig Blomberg | 10 Comments

"’You do not want to leave too, do you?’ Jesus asked the Twelve.” (John 6:67 NIV)

How many people died as believers in your church last year? Many churches scrupulously keep track of weekly attendance, the number of people who trust in Christ, get baptized, or become church members.  But who keeps track of how many people leave their church each year, how many stop going to church altogether or how many repudiate their faith?  It’d be a lot harder to do that and it’d be very depressing if we did, so we make no such efforts.  On the other hand, if we made every effort to conduct “exit interviews,” we’d probably keep some people from exiting and we’d have a much better handle on what we could be doing to prevent as many from considering exiting in the first place.

From not long after A.D. 30 until the mid-twentieth-century, Christians identified with a particular local congregation for two main reasons—it was their denomination (or theological tradition) and it was their parish (the church of that tradition closest to them geographically).  Then the proliferation of the automobile changed all that.  People could drive an extra distance to go to church, so they could drive right past the church of their denominational preference nearest to them to attend one they liked better.  Then the proliferation of nondemoninational and interdenominational churches (including denominational churches that no longer functioned very much as if they belonged to a denomination) allowed them to go to still other churches that they liked better without having to sacrifice cherished denominational distinctives (if indeed they had any).

Since all these changes have taken place, only a few people are ever able or ever care to track what happens to fellow church members who leave and go elsewhere.  How would we ever know if such people died in belief or in unbelief?

Jesus’ teaching becomes more pointed and more focused on suffering and identification with his death, the more his public ministry progresses.  After his “Bread of Life” discourse in John 6, he talks about eating his flesh and drinking his blood (v. 56)—of so identifying with his upcoming death for the sins of humanity that it is as if one were consuming Christ himself.  Not surprisingly, John writes that this teaching was hard to accept and offensive (vv. 60-61), A few verses later he adds, “From this time many of the disciples turned back and no longer followed him” (v. 66).  Verse 67 makes it clear that these were from the wider circle of his followers than the Twelve.  Yet none of this catches Jesus by surprise, for John has already indicated that he knew that some didn’t really believe and that only those whom God empowered could truly come to him (vv. 65-66).

A generation ago, one might have a debate on “eternal security,” better labeled, with the Reformers, as the perseverance of the saints, and never have actually met someone who was a professing believer, active in church and ministry, and who subsequently chucked it all and spent the rest of their life fighting against Christian beliefs and behaviors.  Today, tragically, it’s hard not to know several, to say nothing of those who seem to be on their way to that fate, though they are still alive.  It’s tempting to give up on the doctrine of perseverance altogether.  And yet right in the same context in which Jesus experiences the greatest number of defections ever from those in his close, regular company, we also learn that these people by definition demonstrate in so doing that they never were truly his.  After receiving the potentially reassuring response from Peter that the twelve aren’t similarly defecting (vv. 68-69), Jesus discloses that he knows already that even one of them is a “devil” who will betray him (vv. 70-71).

The doctrine of the perseverance of the saints, rightly understood, promises that those who truly believe will persevere to the end.  With twenty-twenty hindsight we may call these people “elect.”  But the only way we know who the elect are is to see who perseveres to the end.  Shouldn’t that make us far more serious about walking with people all the way to the end of their lives and not putting so much emphasis on people apparently crossing the initial threshold of faith and then leaving them largely to fend for themselves when the crises of life emerge?

The Baby Boomers are defined as those born between 1946 and 64.  The first “class” of boomers to retire (at 65) have done so this year.  Millions will soon follow suit— from the largest defined “generation” in world history.  In the U.S., a substantial majority of boomers have had church experience at some point in their lives; most identify, however nominally, with some form of Christian faith; most have at least a rudimentary understanding of the gospel.  (There is no subsequent generation for which any of these statements holds true.)  How much Christian ministry over the coming decades will be expended on helping boomers die in the faith?  If they don’t, then it really doesn’t matter how much energy and resources we’ve expended on them earlier in their lives!

Comments

10 Comments | Login to Post Comments

Tom Sathre Oct 17, 2011 3:27pm

A topic closely akin to yours is discussed in the book "Exit Interviews" by Wm. D. Hendricks. (CCU library has a copy. Your library can, almost certainly, borrow it for you.) Sometimes the reason given for departure is as simple as XYZ congregation has no use for a B-flat clarinet. One of my prejudices is that we who stay behind need to communicate to these departers that (a) we are interested in them as people, not simply as statistics, and (b) Christ loves them and died for them, whether or not they ever return to XYZ congregation. Departures are hard on the egos of us who stay behind, so paid church staff may not be best suited to call on departers.

Craig Blomberg Oct 18, 2011 8:43am

Hi, Tom. Good to hear from you. Hope you and Donna are well. Yes, I've read parts of Exit Interviews and I agree entirely with what you've written. Thenks for posting.

Damien Riegel Oct 18, 2011 5:33pm

Very good article; I found it very thought-provoking.

I'm curious, though, how would you apply this to the practical area of eternal security? For example, most would agree that the Holy Spirit is the mark of a "saved" individual. So would you say it's possible for a non-elect person to be "saved," and receive the Holy Spirit, and then "fall from grace" later? (In the sense of Heb 6.) (Because otherwise, perseverance would be inevitable for those with the initial faith.)

Craig Blomberg Oct 19, 2011 9:17am

Here's what I wrote above: "The doctrine of the perseverance of the saints, rightly understood, promises that those who truly believe will persevere to the end. With twenty-twenty hindsight we may call these people “elect.” But the only way we know who the elect are is to see who perseveres to the end. " So yes, I believe perseverance is inevitable for those who initially have true saving faith. I'm just less confident than ever I can actually know who those people are until I look back over someone's entire life and see how they died.

Paul Adams Oct 20, 2011 6:16am

For where your treasure is, there will your heart [and accounting] be also.

Steve Martin Oct 21, 2011 3:19pm

I didn't anyone could possibly know who really is in Christ, and who is not.

Brett Lee-Price Oct 21, 2011 7:46pm

Personally, I feel that genuine Christians can apostatize and, thus, lose their salvation. Rather than unconditional perserverence.

That said though, I think you bring up some very relevant points concering how a lot of Churches primarily focus on the initial salvation step, and only superficially touch on other steps, such as equipping and training, and helping them to perservere. Indeed, our need to further equip individuals throughout their lives is crucial not only to them, but to also effectively get them to evangelize in a much more meaningful manner.

Carl Ayers Oct 22, 2011 5:36am

Hi Craig. I'm a new commenter. Thank you for your incisive posts.

It seems to me that there is a bit of a tension in the NT between confidence in someone's "electedness" and the "perseverance to the end" aspect. Paul at times seems to have strong confidence in one's genuine salvation - perhaps a confidence that is appropriate unless given reason to question?

Brian Woolard Oct 23, 2011 9:05pm

Craig Blomberg, I am curios, you never commented on Heb 6., refered to by Damien Riegel. Do you interpret this scripture to say that a "saved" christian can fall away from the faith. How do you interpret this scripture. For me common sense tells me that if Christ know how a person chooses in the future, God would not seal that person with the Holy Spirit. However, some folks whom I dealy respect do now believe as I do.

Craig Blomberg Oct 25, 2011 11:18am

Hebrews 6 and 10 are classic Arminian texts just like Romans 8 and John 6 are classic Calvinist texts, but there are in fact a lot more that at first blush line up more with one "camp" than with the other. One of the more rewarding assignments I had in seminary years ago was to take a prescribed list of passages that are the favorite Calvinist prooftexts for eternal security and another list that are the favorite Arminian prooftests against it and research how the other side dealt with each and then come to a conclusion as to who had the better overall argument. For me, 1 John 2:19 provided for me a "kairos" moment--suggesting that those who do commit apostasy show in so doing that they were never truly Christ's in the first place. But as in the original blog, the only way one ever came to know that was by watching the results of their entire life, not how they started. Herbert Bateman's edited volume on four views on the warning passages in Hebrews is an excellent place to compare and contrast exegeses of the relevant texts. Of the four I'd line up most closely with Randall Gleason's "Moderate Reformed" perspective.