Eternal vs conditional security, or OSAS vs LOS

[StanJ]

Okay let's not go nuts people. Osas is not a doctrine of demons, it is simply a bad doctrine that many people learn before they learn how to study the Bible. Best we show what the Bible says rather than resorting to self righteous vernacular.

 

[samir]

Okay let's not go nuts people. Osas is not a doctrine of demons, it is simply a bad doctrine that many people learn before they learn how to study the Bible. Best we show what the Bible says rather than resorting to self righteous vernacular.

The only way a Christian can end up in hell is willful sin without repentance because nothing external to the believer "neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities nor powers, nor things present nor things to come, nor height nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Ro 8:38-39, NKJV)"

OSAS is a demonic doctrine because the person who believes it feels no need to resist temptation and no need to repent after turning away from God through sin. I told a OSAS thief about the verse that say thieves will not inherit the kingdom of God and he told me his salvation was guaranteed regardless of how much he sinned. He even had the audacity to rebuke me (and God since I quoted scripture) for judging him! In his case, the OSAS heresy caused him to reject God's Word, willfully sin against God, and refuse to repent. How many other heresies can send someone on the path to perdition so easily?

 

[StanJ]

The only way a Christian can end up in hell is willful sin without repentance because nothing external to the believer "neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities nor powers, nor things present nor things to come, nor height nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Ro 8:38-39, NKJV)"

Christians don't go to hell, only unbelievers and apostates do.

OSAS is a demonic doctrine because the person who believes it feels no need to resist temptation and no need to repent after turning away from God through sin. I told a OSAS thief about the verse that say thieves will not inherit the kingdom of God and he told me his salvation was guaranteed regardless of how much he sinned. He even had the audacity to rebuke me (and God since I quoted scripture) for judging him! In his case, the OSAS heresy caused him to reject God's Word, willfully sin against God, and refuse to repent. How many other heresies can send someone on the path to perdition so easily?

That is that fallacious assertion and assumption. How exactly would you know unless you're God let someone who believes in eternal security does or doesn't do as far as soon as concerned? You need to start toning down your vitriol and rhetoric and start acting like a real Christian.

 

[Albion]

obviously not since you didn't even bother to confront the scriptures I posted which prove OSAS is false.

IMHO, that's a non-starter of a response. I agreed that there are verses that seem at first to indicate LOS, but my point is that there are others which go the other way, and that it's obviously wrong to try to make an argument based on the Bible while discounting part of the Bible. Yet you come back to me with a reply that suggests that very same approach.

 

[FreeGrace2]

That if you stay faithful you will be saved. If you don't, then you won't be saved which is what other passages show.

No one will be saved for being faithful. That would amount to human effort, or otherwise known as works. Salvation is strictly by grace (we can't earn nor do we deserve it) through faith, not of works. Eph 2:8,9

And please cite any verse that show that one must be faithful to be saved.

 

[FreeGrace2]

obviously not since you didn't even bother to confront the scriptures I posted which prove OSAS is false.

Did you not even bother to read the OP??

 

[FreeGrace2]

There is no splitting hairs here, Faith only exists if one is saved, otherwise they have no faith. Eph 2:8
Let's try to stay away from equivocation shall we.

Sorry if you think I'm equivocating here. I'm certainly not. The issue is about those who have believed and have received the gift of eternal life. The question is: can they lose their salvation, or eternal life? The Bible does not teach that.

The verses of the OP all teach eternal security. If they don't, who can explain to me just what they teach, if they are profitable for teaching. Or if they aren't for teaching, then what are they profitable for.

That is the jist of this thread.

I fail to see any logic or exegesis in arriving at your denial here, but in any event who exactly do you think Paul is talking about in Galatians 6:7?

Believers, of course. However, why exactly would one think Paul was teaching that one can lose salvation in Gal 6:7?

Paul was the one who described 3 of God's gifts in Romans:
spiritual gifts in 1:11
justification in 3:24 and 5:15,16,17
eternal life in 6:23

Before he wrote that God's gifts are irrevocable in 11:29.

Paul would have had to be very confused if Gal 6:7 was about losing salvation. Or Rom 6:23 with 11:29 wasn't about eternal security.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Actually there is no scriptural support for OSAS.

Please read the OP.

All of the verses they quote require a heavy dose of interpretation and those who use them aren't putting the bible first - they are reading the bible to conform it to a man-made tradition they chose to believe first.

OK, fair enough charge. If none of the passages in the OP teach eternal security, please explain just what they are teaching, without all that "dose of interpretation" and "man-made tradition". Or, if they aren't profitable for teaching, just what are they profitable for?

Do you think God would give us a book that strongly supported contradictory views? Is God the author of confusion?

Absolutely not. Which is the point of this thread; what do the verses in the OP teach, if not eternal security.

Please don't just quote verses. That doesn't solve anything. I believe the verses in the OP are crystal clear about eternal security.

But, if they don't teach eternal security, what are they profitable for, per 2 Tim 3:16?
"All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness"

If you look at the verses opposed to OSAS you'll see they are all very clear and need no interpretation.

If true, it should no problem or effort to explain what the verses in the OP are profitable for.

 

[ewq1938]

No one will be saved for being faithful. That would amount to human effort, or otherwise known as works. Salvation is strictly by grace (we can't earn nor do we deserve it) through faith, not of works. Eph 2:8,9

And please cite any verse that show that one must be faithful to be saved.

Rev_2:10 Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.

Act 26:15 And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.
Act 26:16 But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee;
Act 26:17 Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee,
Act 26:18 To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.

Rom_5:1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:

Gal 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

2Ti_3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.


Being saved through our faith is a basic fact of Christianity.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Rev_2:10 Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.

The Bible does not teach that salvation is a "crown of life". The various crowns are rewards for faithful service.

Act 26:15 And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.
Act 26:16 But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee;
Act 26:17 Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee,
Act 26:18 To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.

Rom_5:1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:

Gal 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

2Ti_3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.


Being saved through our faith is a basic fact of Christianity.

Being saved through faith doesn't mean that our action of believing is what saves us.

It is God alone who saves those who believe. And He's pleased to do so.

1 Cor 1:21 - For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not come to know God, God was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe.

How many verses teach that if one loses faith (ceases to believe) they lose salvation (cease to be saved)?

 

[samir]

Please read the OP.

I did. I didn't see any verses mentioned that taught OSAS.

OK, fair enough charge. If none of the passages in the OP teach eternal security, please explain just what they are teaching, without all that "dose of interpretation" and "man-made tradition". Or, if they aren't profitable for teaching, just what are they profitable for?


Absolutely not. Which is the point of this thread; what do the verses in the OP teach, if not eternal security.

Please don't just quote verses. That doesn't solve anything. I believe the verses in the OP are crystal clear about eternal security.

But, if they don't teach eternal security, what are they profitable for, per 2 Tim 3:16?
"All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness"


If true, it should no problem or effort to explain what the verses in the OP are profitable for.

Since you asked nicely, I'll respond to the OP and try to explain what those verses taught.

 

[samir]

Though the debate between OSAS and LOS continues, the Bible is clear about which kind of security the believer has in Christ. And it isn't both kinds.

I agree. Scripture clearly teaches against OSAS so there is no need to consider modern day novel interpretations of various passages used to support the tradition of OSAS.

Nevertheless, since you asked nicely, I'll explain the passages you quoted. The first think I notice is none of the verses actually teach eternal security. What you're doing is making a logical argument using several verses as your premises and then attempting to arrive at eternal security through logical deduction. The issue is whether your logic is sound or flawed.

First, Paul described both justification (Rom 3:24, 5:15,16,17) and eternal life (Rom 6:23) as gifts of God. Then he wrote Rom 11:29 - the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable. Since he had already described what he meant by "gifts of God", there was no reason for him to specifically list what he meant by "gifts of God".

3:24 - being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus
6:23 - For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
11:29 - for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.

I agree the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. If justification can be lost it won't be because God revoked any gifts he has given.

Rom 11 specifically refers to God's election of Israel which is unrevokable. Rom 3:24 seems to refer to justification when a person is converted which is a gift merited by Christ's sacrifice. I don't see any gift of permanent justification mentioned so if the person did not remain justified it wouldn't mean God revoked any gift he had given.

Rom 6:23 clearly refers to eternal life. I agree once a person dies and receives eternal life, it won't be taken away.

Second, every believer is sealed with the Holy Spirit when they believe (Eph 1:13). This sealing is a pledge with a view to the redemption of God's own possession (believers - Eph 1:14).

And, this sealing is for the day of redemption (Eph 4:30).

1:13 - In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise
1:14 - who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God’s own possession, to the praise of His glory.
4:30 - Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.

Those passages aren't very clear and can be interpreted a variety of ways. Something as important as OSAS would be taught clearly and directly in scripture if it were true. There wouldn't be a need to interpret ambiguous passages of scripture to discover it. Some translations say believers receive the Holy Spirit as a first installment or down payment for salvation. It's not clear what is meant by being sealed.

Third, Jesus tells us WHEN one HAS eternal life; when they believe (Jn 5:24).

What is eternal life? Everyone will live forever somewhere (either in heaven or hell) so I'd say eternal life refers to the quality of that life, not the duration which is the same for everyone. Also, there are translation issues with verb tenses in the book of John so John may have not written it in the present tense. For example, John wrote, "I glorified You on the earth, having accomplished the work which You have given Me to do. (John 17:4, NASB)." If John wrote that in English it would mean Jesus accomplished everything God gave him to do prior to dying on the cross which we know isn't true. The problem is some of the verb tenses John used don't exist in English so the translations are imperfect.

Then, He tells us that those to whom He gives eternal life WILL NEVER PERISH (Jn 10:28).

Two possible interpretations:
1. Refers to eternal life in heaven - those who go to heaven will not perish but remain there forever
2. John is not referring to everyone who comes to Christ but only the elect

Fourth, Paul stated that regardless of the believer's lifestyle, or "whether we are asleep or awake, we will be together with Him" in 1 Thess 5:10. The context begins in v.4 and contrasts believers with unbelievers, or day with night, or being alert with being asleep or sober with drunkeness.

4 But you, brethren, are not in darkness, that the day would overtake you like a thief;
5 for you are all sons of light and sons of day. We are not of night nor of darkness;
6 so then let us not sleep as others do, but let us be alert and sober.
7 For those who sleep do their sleeping at night, and those who get drunk get drunk at night.
8 But since we are of the day, let us be sober, having put on the breastplate of faith and love, and as a helmet, the hope of salvation.
9 For God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ,
10 who died for us, so that whether we are awake or asleep, we will live together with Him.

Analysis of this passage:
v.4 tells us that believers are "not in darkness"
v.5 differentiates believers (sons of light and day) with unbelievers (not of night or darkness).
v.6 encourages believers to not live like unbelievers (not sleep as others do, but be alert and sober).
v.7 describes unbelievers and what they do.
v.8 explains that "since we are of the day" (believers), we need to be sober.
v.9 explains the destiny of the believer - not destined for wrath but for salvation
v.10 says that regardless of the believer's lifestyle, we will live together with Him.

Quite a creative interpretation but I see no reason why I should interpret "whether we are asleep or awake, we will be together with Him" to mean believers will be saved regardless of how much they sin. Such an interpretation would contradict the verse that says the grace of God is not a license to sin.

Fifth, Jesus noted how people are saved in John 10:9 - “I am the door; if anyone enters through Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture.

The Greek word for “enters” is in the aorist tense, meaning “in a point in time”, as opposed to the present tense, which those who believe in loss of salvation only emphasize. Iow, one must continue to believe in order to continue to have eternal life. Further, Paul used the aorist tense in his answer to the jailer in Acts 16:31, and Jesus used the aorist tense in Luke 8:12 “believed and be saved”.

I interpret that verse as teaching salvation is through Jesus. If OSAS were true, it wouldn't be taught in parables but clearly and directly.

Sixth

, there are absolutely zero verses that warn us plainly that one can lose their salvation.

I counted over 20 verses in this thread that plainly taught justification can be lost compared to 0 that teach OSAS.

 

[ewq1938]

The Bible does not teach that salvation is a "crown of life". The various crowns are rewards for faithful service.

The crown of life symbolizes eternal life ie:salvation.

Being saved through faith doesn't mean that our action of believing is what saves us.

That's incorrect.

It is God alone who saves those who believe. And He's pleased to do so.

And he does so because we have faith in Christ.

How many verses teach that if one loses faith (ceases to believe) they lose salvation (cease to be saved)?

Heb 6:4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
Heb 6:5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
Heb 6:6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

The unfaithful will not have salvation whether they never were faithful or once they had been faithful.

Faith in Christ saves us. It is a fundamental truth about Christianity.

 

[StanJ]

Sorry if you think I'm equivocating here. I'm certainly not. The issue is about those who have believed and have received the gift of eternal life. The question is: can they lose their salvation, or eternal life? The Bible does not teach that.

The issue is OSAS. I've already answered this question and I've given you scripture. How about you read that and address the scriptures that you think are not correct?

The verses of the OP all teach eternal security. If they don't, who can explain to me just what they teach, if they are profitable for teaching. Or if they aren't for teaching, then what are they profitable for.

None of the verses in the OP support eternal security. You can't take verses from everywhere in the Old Testament put them out of context and make them say something that they don't. Go ahead and take the money first you think mostly supports osas, and exegete it for us if you can.
I'll be more than happy to show you how you are not properly exegeting it.

Believers, of course. However, why exactly would one think Paul was teaching that one can lose salvation in Gal 6:7?

First of all the issue is not losing salvation, the issue is apostasy. And secondly did you read verse 9? Question; Who reaps the Harvest?
Answer; Believers who do not give up.

Paul was the one who described 3 of God's gifts in Romans:
spiritual gifts in 1:11
justification in 3:24 and 5:15,16,17
eternal life in 6:23

You're not only deflecting here and going off track but you're mixing up gifts with results. Justification is a result of salvation eternal life is a result of enduring the salvation until we die. Hebrews 9:27 shows we all die once and Paul clearly shows that the dead in Christ will rise first. You actually have to die as a saved individual in order to receive eternal life when Jesus returns. Nobody effectively has eternal life now, they only have it effectually, if they endure.

Before he wrote that God's gifts are irrevocable in 11:29.

As is his call, but if we walk away or fall into apostasy we're basically rejecting that call and those gifts. Irrevocable in this context simply means that God will not take back what he is offered but that doesn't mean that we are bound to accept them. Do you seem to have a misunderstanding of the word irrevocable?

Paul would have had to be very confused if Gal 6:7 was about losing salvation. Or Rom 6:23 with 11:29 wasn't about eternal security.

Paul is not confused about the context that he is addressing, but apparently you are and either didn't really read my post or didn't really understand it. The issue was sowing and reaping as a law of God and that it pertains to everything in our lives. Again read Galatians 6:9. What does it say?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Loss Of Salvation. Opposite of OSAS, or Once Saved, Always Saved.

The official term is "Conditional Security" or "Conditional Salvation." (CS). Personally I like the word FREE as in reference to Conditional Salvation. For we still have free will after accepting Jesus Christ and sin can be just as damaging to our souls as when we were an unbeliever. Just because someone becomes a believer in Jesus Christ does not mean anything unless they are truly striving to obey Jesus and His Commands. For surely one cannot be a practicing axe murderer and be saved; And surely somebody cannot plan on killing somebody once and yet still think they are saved while doing so. For if such was the case, then God would have to agree with a person's thinking that they can sin and still be saved. But God is holy and righteous and He cannot agree with sin. That is why Eternal Security (ES), Free Grace (FG), or Once Saved Always Saved (OSAS) is clearly not true.


...

 

[FreeGrace2]

I did. I didn't see any verses mentioned that taught OSAS.

I provided an explanation for every one of them. Now, go back and explain what all those verse are teaching then, since you don't think they do teach ES.

The Bible says that all Scripture is God breathed (inspired) and is PROFITABLE for teaching, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness.

So, the verses in the OP either teach something, or are profitable for something other than for teaching.

Please explain what they are profitable for, since you seem convinced that they are not teaching ES.

Since you asked nicely, I'll respond to the OP and try to explain what those verses taught.

Excellent!

 

[FreeGrace2]

I agree. Scripture clearly teaches against OSAS so there is no need to consider modern day novel interpretations of various passages used to support the tradition of OSAS.

Nevertheless, since you asked nicely, I'll explain the passages you quoted. The first think I notice is none of the verses actually teach eternal security. What you're doing is making a logical argument using several verses as your premises and then attempting to arrive at eternal security through logical deduction. The issue is whether your logic is sound or flawed.

No. They either teach something, or they are profitable for something other than teaching.

I agree the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. If justification can be lost it won't be because God revoked any gifts he has given.

So, an explanation is in order in how justification can be lost if God doesn't revoke that gift. And you left out the gift of eternal life.

Rom 11 specifically refers to God's election of Israel which is unrevokable.

Please quote or at least cite specific verses to back up this statement. The only use of "irrevocable" is in 11:29 and that is in reference to God's gifts and calling. And God's election of Israel was mentioned in ch 9, not 11.

Rom 3:24 seems to refer to justification when a person is converted which is a gift merited by Christ's sacrifice. I don't see any gift of permanent justification mentioned so if the person did not remain justified it wouldn't mean God revoked any gift he had given.

It is pure assumption to claim that justification isn't permanent. Every gift of God is irrevocable. What does that mean? It means permanent.

Rom 6:23 clearly refers to eternal life. I agree once a person dies and receives eternal life, it won't be taken away.

Jesus taught that those who believe HAVE eternal life: John 5:24 - “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, HAS eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.

How is any of this not permanent? Please explain.

In reference to the 2nd point, about the sealing with the Holy Spirit:

Those passages aren't very clear and can be interpreted a variety of ways. Something as important as OSAS would be taught clearly and directly in scripture if it were true. There wouldn't be a need to interpret ambiguous passages of scripture to discover it. Some translations say believers receive the Holy Spirit as a first installment or down payment for salvation. It's not clear what is meant by being sealed.

So, basically, you're admitting that you don't know what the sealing with the Holy Spirit means or is about then. At least that's honest. So it's just your opinion about those verses against mine. Well, the verses are clear enough. Believers are sealed FOR the day of redemption. What's not clear about that. And this sealing is a promise or guarantee.

What is eternal life? Everyone will live forever somewhere (either in heaven or hell) so I'd say eternal life refers to the quality of that life, not the duration which is the same for everyone.

Eternal life is God's life. And He gives it to those who believe in His Son. The fact that everyone will exist somewhere isn't relevant, because the lake of fire, which is the ONLY other place in eternity where souls will exist, is called the "second death" in a number of verses. So just because someone will exist forever in the lake of fire doesn't mean that they will have eternal life. What they will have is eternal death.

Also, there are translation issues with verb tenses in the book of John so John may have not written it in the present tense. For example, John wrote, "I glorified You on the earth, having accomplished the work which You have given Me to do. (John 17:4, NASB)." If John wrote that in English it would mean Jesus accomplished everything God gave him to do prior to dying on the cross which we know isn't true. The problem is some of the verb tenses John used don't exist in English so the translations are imperfect.

So, once again, because of "translation issues with verb tenses", you do not understand the verses in question. OK.

Two possible interpretations:
1. Refers to eternal life in heaven - those who go to heaven will not perish but remain there forever
2. John is not referring to everyone who comes to Christ but only the elect

How does any of this impact the issue of ES or LOS?

In reference to 1 Thess 5:4-10

Quite a creative interpretation but I see no reason why I should interpret "whether we are asleep or awake, we will be together with Him" to mean believers will be saved regardless of how much they sin. Such an interpretation would contradict the verse that says the grace of God is not a license to sin.

I addressed and explained EACH VERSE, and the conclusion is that lifestyle makes no difference to whether we "will be together with Him". And that fact doesn't contradict the verse about God's grace not being a "license to sin". btw, no one needs such a "license", because all humans have a sinful nature. No license needed.

However, please do what I did and explain each and every verse to show that it doesn't teach what I believe it does teach.

Regarding John 10:9

I interpret that verse as teaching salvation is through Jesus. If OSAS were true, it wouldn't be taught in parables but clearly and directly.

What you've not done is combine Jesus' teaching in Jn 10:9 with Jn 10:28. In v.9, one is saved (receives eternal life) by "entering through Him", which is a metaphor for believing in Him, the focus of the gospel of John. Then, in v.28 He says that those He gives eternal life WILL NEVER PERISH.

So, your task is to explain how Jesus can say that yet some (or many) who have received eternal life will end up in the lake of fire.

I counted over 20 verses in this thread that plainly taught justification can be lost compared to 0 that teach OSAS.

Well, then it should be quite easy to quote just one of them. And please choose the best one that is absolutely UN-ambiguous in its wording.

So far, none of the verses I've seen on the LOS side come close to mentioning either salvation or eternal life, much less the loss of either one.

However, thanks for trying. I believe this is the first attempt to address each of my points.

But since you've admitted that there are several passages that you just don't understand, you haven't proven that they don't teach eternal security.

And the explanations for the other points fell short of the same, as I've pointed out.

I've asked several questions in regard to your comments. Please be so kind as to answer them for me.

Thanks.

 

[samir]

No. They either teach something, or they are profitable for something other than teaching.

The Trinity comes from logical deduction of various scriptural passages so I wasn't criticizing your attempt to arrive at eternal security using the same approach.

So, an explanation is in order in how justification can be lost if God doesn't revoke that gift.

When a person's sins are forgiven after he converts to Christ, that forgiveness is a gift from God merited by Christ's sacrifice. His justification can be considered a gift because it is a result of those sins being forgiven. If he later rejects God, God will not revoke those sins he forgave even though he no longer remains justified before God.

Please quote or at least cite specific verses to back up this statement. The only use of "irrevocable" is in 11:29 and
that is in reference to God's gifts and calling. And God's election of Israel was mentioned in ch 9, not 11.

Rom 11:25-29 says, "For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel will be saved... Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable (NKJV)."

It is pure assumption to claim that justification isn't permanent.

Scripture never says those who become justified will remain justified forever. It's an unproven assumption.

Every gift of God is irrevocable. What does that mean? It means permanent.

I think it means God won't take back the gifts he has given. If God forgives someones sins causing them to become justified before God, then God will never take back that forgiveness and hold those sins against him.

Jesus taught that those who believe HAVE eternal life: John 5:24 - “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, HAS eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.

How is any of this not permanent? Please explain.

Since everyone will live forever, I don't think eternal life means to live forever.

If you continue reading John you'll see that he defined what he meant by eternal life in chapter 17:

"this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent (Jo 17:3, NKJV)"

In reference to the 2nd point, about the sealing with the Holy Spirit:

So, basically, you're admitting that you don't know what the sealing with the Holy Spirit means or is about then. At least that's honest. So it's just your opinion about those verses against mine. Well, the verses are clear enough. Believers are sealed FOR the day of redemption. What's not clear about that. And this sealing is a promise or guarantee.

It could simply mean that God gave believers the Holy Spirit which marks them as believers. If you want to claim those verses teach eternal security you would have to show that sealing can't refer to anything else. All I would have to show to disprove your claim is to find one alternative explanation.

Eternal life is God's life. And He gives it to those who believe in His Son. The fact that everyone will exist somewhere isn't relevant, because the lake of fire, which is the ONLY other place in eternity where souls will exist, is called the "second death" in a number of verses. So just because someone will exist forever in the lake of fire doesn't mean that they will have eternal life. What they will have is eternal death.

Since those who will suffer the second death in the lake of fire will live there forever, eternal life can't refer to living forever. Luckily, John defined what he meant by eternal life in John 17:4 and he didn't mention living forever.

So, once again, because of "translation issues with verb tenses", you do not understand the verses in question. OK.


How does any of this impact the issue of ES or LOS?

If a verse can be interpreted in more than one way, you can't validly claim that verse teaches ES unless you can prove all the other interpretations are wrong.

In reference to 1 Thess 5:4-10

I addressed and explained EACH VERSE, and the conclusion is that lifestyle makes no difference to whether we "will be together with Him". And that fact doesn't contradict the verse about God's grace not being a "license to sin". btw, no one needs such a "license", because all humans have a sinful nature. No license needed.

However, please do what I did and explain each and every verse to show that it doesn't teach what I believe it does teach.

It's not necessary to provide an alternate explanation because your interpretation can not possibly be true as it contradicts scripture. Think of a driver's license. Although everyone can drive, only those with a license can drive legally without suffering the consequences for not having permission to drive. So although everyone is capable of sinning, no one can sin without consequences because God did not give anyone permission to sin. If OSAS were true, then believers wouldn't have to fear hell regardless of how much they sinned which would mean God permits their sins.

Regarding John 10:9

What you've not done is combine Jesus' teaching in Jn 10:9 with Jn 10:28. In v.9, one is saved (receives eternal life) by "entering through Him", which is a metaphor for believing in Him, the focus of the gospel of John.

How do you know "entering through Him" is a metaphor for believing in Him?

Then, in v.28 He says that those He gives eternal life WILL NEVER PERISH.

No, it does not say that. Verse 28 says the sheep whom God gives eternal life will never perish. If the sheep refers to the elect, then others (those not elect) who come to Christ and receive eternal life (the knowledge of God) may perish.

So, your task is to explain how Jesus can say that yet some (or many) who have received eternal life will end up in the lake of fire.

John defined eternal life as knowing God and Jesus. Scripture never says everyone who comes to Jesus will remain with Jesus until the end but actually says only those who endure to the end will be saved.

Well, then it should be quite easy to quote just one of them. And please choose the best one that is absolutely UN-ambiguous in its wording.

So far, none of the verses I've seen on the LOS side come close to mentioning either salvation or eternal life, much less the loss of either one.

However, thanks for trying. I believe this is the first attempt to address each of my points.

But since you've admitted that there are several passages that you just don't understand, you haven't proven that they don't teach eternal security.

And the explanations for the other points fell short of the same, as I've pointed out.

I've asked several questions in regard to your comments. Please be so kind as to answer them for me.

Thanks.

Another poster already quoted 20 of them so I felt it was redundant to post the same verses. One thing I notice is that opponents of OSAS quote verses clearly meant to be understood literally whereas supporters of OSAS have to rely on parables and metaphorical parts of scripture that can be interpreted a variety of ways. I prefer to look at the literal passages first to learn what scripture teaches and then interpret the non-literal passages in a way that agrees with the clear teaching of scripture.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said this in reference to the verses in the OP:
"They either teach something, or they are profitable for something other than teaching."

The Trinity comes from logical deduction of various scriptural passages so I wasn't criticizing your attempt to arrive at eternal security using the same approach.

So, you're unable to determine what any of the verses in the OP are profitable for, then.

OK, at least that's honest. But your inability to determine what the verses are profitable for doesn't in the slightest mean that they don't teach eternal security.

When a person's sins are forgiven after he converts to Christ, that forgiveness is a gift from God merited by Christ's sacrifice.

Guess what?! There are no verses that describe forgiveness as a gift from God. So, please try again.

In fact, these are specifically noted in Scripture as gifts of God:
spiritual gifts, Rom 1:11
justification, Rom 5:15,16,17
eternal life, Rom 6:23
indwelling Holy Spirit, Acts 2:38 and 10:45

His justification can be considered a gift because it is a result of those sins being forgiven.

No, the Bible clearly and UN-ambiguously describes justification as a gift. See above for the proof.

If he later rejects God, God will not revoke those sins he forgave even though he no longer remains justified before God.

Please quote any verse that says any of this. I mean, any UN-ambiguous verse.

Rom 11:25-29 says, "For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel will be saved... Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable (NKJV)."

Where in v.25-28 did Paul mention any gifts? He didn't. One has to go back to 6:23 and 5:15,16,17 and 1:11 to see what Paul described as gifts that are from God.

Scripture never says those who become justified will remain justified forever. It's an unproven assumption.

What is a totally unproven assumption is that justification is only temporary or can be withdrawn. God's gifts (all of them, because Paul NEVER excluded any gift) are irrevocable. So it's just pure assumption to think that any of God's gifts can be revoked, removed, lost, forfeited, or any other wording to indicate no longer having.

I think it means God won't take back the gifts he has given. If God forgives someones sins causing them to become justified before God, then God will never take back that forgiveness and hold those sins against him.

So we see contradiction in your views then. In this very same post is your comment:
"Scripture never says those who become justified will remain justified forever. It's an unproven assumption."

Since everyone will live forever, I don't think eternal life means to live forever.

Once again, those who will exist in the lake of fire forever are said to be in the second DEATH. The Bible never refers to the lake of fire as "living". It's permanent spiritual death.

If you continue reading John you'll see that he defined what he meant by eternal life in chapter 17:

"this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent (Jo 17:3, NKJV)"

This is fulfilled WHEN one believes in Jesus Christ as Savior.

Consider (from the OP):
Jesus said in John 5:24 that when one believes they HAVE eternal life.
Then, in John 10:28 He said that those He gives eternal life (believers) WILL NEVER PERISH. This is so clear that one doesn't even need to "connect the dots".

When one believes, they HAVE the irrevocable gift of eternal life and WILL NEVER PERISH.

Does Jesus always or sometimes keep His Word?

It could simply mean that God gave believers the Holy Spirit which marks them as believers.

Yes, that's part of it.

If you want to claim those verses teach eternal security you would have to show that sealing can't refer to anything else.

No problem.
Eph 1
13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise,
14 who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God’s own possession, to the praise of His glory.

So, let's consider the red words:
1. having believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit
2. this sealing is a PROMISE
3. the sealing is given as a pledge, which means a promise
4. the view or "end point" of this promise is the redemption of God's own possession
5. God's own possession means sealed believers

So, those who have believed are sealed. God promises (pledges) that His own possession is guaranteed for redemption.

NIV for v.14 - who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory.

When God guarantees something, He always carries through with His promise.

All I would have to show to disprove your claim is to find one alternative explanation.

OK, go ahead. All that has been noted up to this point is that the sealing "marks them as believers". So, now that the REST of the verses have been shown, there's more explanation needed to prove that the verses are not teaching eternal security.

Since those who will suffer the second death in the lake of fire will live there forever, eternal life can't refer to living forever.

I'm getting a bit tired of this silliness. The lake of fire is described as the second DEATH in 4 places: Rev 2:11, 20:6, 14, 21:8.

So please cease from describing existence in eternity as living forever when in fact those in the lake of fire are experiencing the second DEATH.

Luckily, John defined what he meant by eternal life in John 17:4 and he didn't mention living forever.

Yes, the very words "eternal life" mean life without end, which is living forever.

If a verse can be interpreted in more than one way, you can't validly claim that verse teaches ES unless you can prove all the other interpretations are wrong.

What "all the other interpretations" are being referred to? I haven't seen any, from your posts or the posts of others. You've already admitted that several of the points of the OP were unclear, so how can anyone prove what they don't teach if one cannot prove what they do teach?

It's not necessary to provide an alternate explanation because your interpretation can not possibly be true as it contradicts scripture.

This is a mere opinion and has no facts or evidence to back it up.

Think of a driver's license.

I don't need to. It's irrelevant to salvation. Getting saved is NOT like being licensed for anything.

How do you know "entering through Him" is a metaphor for believing in Him?

Because I've read entirely through the gospel of John at least 120 times. And John 10:9 links "entering through Him" to being saved. And the gospel of John links believing in Him to being saved. See the connection?

No, it does not say that. Verse 28 says the sheep whom God gives eternal life will never perish.

Sure. And who are His sheep? Those who have entered through Him, per 10:9.

If the sheep refers to the elect, then others (those not elect) who come to Christ and receive eternal life (the knowledge of God) may perish.

This is seriously confused. Only believers are elect. Or, where is there any evidence from Scripture that there are any who are considered "not elect" who have been given eternal life?

But, more importantly, Jesus said in 10:28 that all the ones He gives eternal life WILL NEVER PERISH. Is not this a clear promise about all those who receive eternal life? If this is not seen as a clear promise for NEVER PERISHING, please explain what Jesus was saying and meaning.

John defined eternal life as knowing God and Jesus. Scripture never says everyone who comes to Jesus will remain with Jesus until the end but actually says only those who endure to the end will be saved.

Please consider context before making such an error. "enduring to the end" is in specific reference to the 7 year Tribulation period. It applies ONLY to that period of time; not to all of mankind.

Another poster already quoted 20 of them so I felt it was redundant to post the same verses.

More than redundant; futile. Since none of them specifically and UN-ambiguously say that one can lose salvation.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said this:
"Paul was the one who described 3 of God's gifts in Romans:
spiritual gifts in 1:11
justification in 3:24 and 5:15,16,17
eternal life in 6:23"

You're not only deflecting here and going off track but you're mixing up gifts with results. Justification is a result of salvation eternal life is a result of enduring the salvation until we die.

What am I deflecting on? I noted exactly what Paul SAID about God's gifts and what they are: spiritual gifts, justification, eternal life. And make no mistake, justification IS a gift.

Nobody effectively has eternal life now, they only have it effectually, if they endure.

So Jesus was confused? He said this:
John 5:24 - “I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me HAS eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life.

Notice the 3 tenses used by Jesus:
1. past tense: has crossed over from death to life
2. present tense: HAS eternal life
3. future tense: will not be condemned

As is his call, but if we walk away or fall into apostasy we're basically rejecting that call and those gifts. Irrevocable in this context simply means that God will not take back what he is offered but that doesn't mean that we are bound to accept them.

That isn't the point or issue. The issue is ONCE GIVEN, the gifts of God cannot be thrown away, lost, revoked, forfeited, sold, or otherwise disposed of.

Of, if there are any verses that teach such a thing, please share.

Do you seem to have a misunderstanding of the word irrevocable?

Not at all. I know exactly what it means. Once given, it cannot be removed for any reason. Or there would be verses that teach such a thing.

Paul is not confused about the context that he is addressing, but apparently you are and either didn't really read my post or didn't really understand it.

Regarding your post, maybe not. But regarding Paul's writing, I absolutely do understand what he wrote.

The issue was sowing and reaping as a law of God and that it pertains to everything in our lives. Again read Galatians 6:9. What does it say?

Let's examine exactly what it says:
"Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up."

What does "harvest" suggest or mean? It means bearing fruit. Is your view that this verse teaches that salvation is based on bearing fruit? I know some who claim so.

The verse teaches that we are not to give up (become weary) in going good. Those who don't give up will reap a harvest.

There is nothing here about either gaining or maintaining salvation. In fact, it isn't even about salvation. So why cite the verse?