There is a doctrine that is prevalent among mainstream Christian churches, which is the doctrine of eternal security. You may be familiar with this doctrine, or you may be seeking to learn what eternal security is about. Therefore, here is an example of what is being said about this eternal security:

Eternal security, also known as "once saved, always saved," is the belief that from the moment anyone becomes a Christian, they will be saved from hell, and will not lose salvation, Free grace theology says that anyone who believes in Jesus Christ will go to heaven regardless of any future actions--including future sin, unbelief, or apostasy!

Therefore, the aims of this book are to guide you toward an understanding of what eternal security is--its origin, how it arrived in the twenty-first century--as well as to help you decide whether eternal security is true or false, then to guide you in making a clear and concise decision whether to accept this theory or reject it according to where the truth points.

So, Philip ran to him, and heard him reading the prophet Isaiah, and said, "Do you understand what you are reading?" And he said, "How can I, unless someone guides me?" (Acts 8:30-31)

It is one thing to believe something because a person with some authority tells you that it is so. But it is much more believable when you have done your own research and found that what has been taught to you either is correct or in error according to that research. To that end, I have tried to present a fair and equitable presentation of this theory, showing its facts and foibles as they appear, without any bending of the truth whatsoever!

To that end, I have written some things that you might find interesting, such things as the wedding between the Word of God and the children of Israel or that the pagan Christian converts did not have to be circumcised because they were not descendants of Abraham. Therefore, Paul kept the law and did not break the law, as taught by some Christian sects.

Of course, it is only natural for people to reject that which they believe is threatening them concerning that which they hold near and dear. To that end, I have tried not to make any outrageous statements but follow up with why this or that happened and the reason for its truth or the lie, as the case might be. I only ask that you give A Layman's Challenge to Eternal Security a chance to present its conclusions to you, and then you be the judge as to whether eternal security is valid or false, then to be rejected as such! Would you say that that is fair?