Once Saved Always Saved - Why is it so hard?

thecolorsblend

If God is your Father, who is your Mother?
Site Supporter
Jul 1, 2013
9,199
8,425
Gotham City, New Jersey
✟308,231.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
"Move to a different area and I'll make a great nation of you" is in no way the same as "keep my commandments which you cannot keep because of your weak flesh in order to go to heaven": the former puts faith in God and ends up in edification, the latter puts faith in self and ends up in destruction. The former is "I believe God can do this" the latter is "I believe I can do this"

Someone who practices murder on a weekly basis is clearly not loving their neighbor. Thus the man, having hatred of neighbor in his heart, was never saved to begin with.
I think this is getting a bit muddled. You seem to be saying someone can't lose their salvation... unless they don't love their neighbor, and then they can lose their salvation.

Your position represents a conflict with scripture. Romans 10:9, for example, says one must confess with one's mouth and have faith, you are saved. It seems a bit off then that you apparently think someone who confesses with their mouth and has faith can't be saved just because of a pesky few murders.

As a Catholic, I can point to all those things and say that this person has obviously fallen out of state of grace and, without repentance, may very well not go to Heaven if he were to die at that moment. That doesn't cast any doubt upon his state of grace after professing the faith; it simply acknowledges that his sins (some of which I mentioned are mortal sins) would prohibit from entering Heaven upon death until he repents and takes the other steps necessary to address those sins.
 
Upvote 0
Dec 16, 2011
5,208
2,548
57
Home
Visit site
✟234,667.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Salvation requires that we believe and confess that Jesus Christ the Savior is risen from the dead, and that we keep (obey) His commandments -- all of them. Our great God and Savior Jesus Christ plainly speaks of sheep and goats in the judgment. His sheep are those who keep His commandments and the goats are those who don't, even if they had deceived themselves in this regard.

Don't be deceived. Repent! Believe in Jesus Christ and keep all of His commandments strictly for the sake of pleasing Him, and be filled with the Holy Spirit. For the Kingdom of God (righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit) is at hand! It's just that simple (Romans 14:17) (Luke 17:21).
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

bcbsr

Newbie
Mar 17, 2003
4,085
2,318
Visit site
✟201,456.00
Faith
Christian
Most of my beliefs about OSAS come from this massive blog that explains every single controversial verse, the other side's interpretation on those verses and the "correct" interpretation. It's huge, but every verse is there, and you can google the verse and "hischarisenough" if you just want to skip to a particular verse:
70 myths about losing salvation. Myth No: 1 Parable of the Sower Luke 8:13

If you want a nice summary, here is a very summarized video that summarizes the theme of OSAS (by the same author):

Summary:
1. The verse about "luke warm" people being spat out by Jesus in Revelations isn't referring to "zeal" because zeal is relative. If "hot" means "passion for Christ" then everyone is "luke warm" because relative to someone else, you're not hot. Furthermore the verse says that God finds "hot" or "cold" more acceptable than "luke warm" - so if hot means zeal - that means that someone who tries to be zealous ('luke warm') is less acceptable than someone who is a satanist? Doesn't make any sense.

Hot should be interpreted as those who believe in grace, and "Cold" should be interpreted as those who believe in the law. Because God finds both Hot and Cold acceptable - but not "luke warm" - ie. those who believe in grace AND the law (which implies that those who believe you are saved by grace, but can lose it by works are "luke warm").

2. "Acts of the Flesh" is not referring to sins, it is referring to trying to keep the law!! If interpreted in this way, it gives a whole new perspective on Gal 5:20. Please watch the video above to understand the interpretation in a very concise and understandable manner.

3. Verses that list sins that seem to imply that doing them will send you to hell (eg: 1 Cor 6:9) are not addressed to believers. For example, 1 Cor 6:9 is telling the Corinthians not to follow Romans who like to sue each other in court, because they do terrible sins that will send them to hell. If you read Corinthians in context, it's referring to believers who take each other to court like the Romans do.

The other verses that list sins that result in hell (eg. Revelations 21:8) are explained eloquently here: Does Major Sin Prove a Person Is Unsaved? Revelation 21:8

Another set of often quoted verses is the Sermon on the Mount, where "you can lose salvation if you sin" crowd says if you look at someone lustfully you will go to hell - but they forget the "pluck out your eye" and "chop off your hand" part - why aren't they plucking out their eye or chopping off their hand if you take "hell" literally? I think that verse is figurative - it is better to "chop your hand off than for your whole body to be burned in the cursed place where people used to sacrifice children which was called Gehenna aka Hell".

4. We know that Abraham was righteous by faith. Abraham clearly had sins that were listed elsewhere that seemed to imply you go to hell if you had them (eg Rev 21:8) - then how could Abraham who didn't know Jesus be saved? Because he was saved by grace, not by works. He didn't live a perfect life, but he believed in God. I find it hard to believe that you can lose salvation by having unrepented sins (eg lying), when Abraham was considered righteous by faith.

5. There are many verses (eg Eph 2: 8-9) which indicate that salvation is all God's doing, not ours so that no-one can boast. Believing you can lose salvation through a lack of works is functionally identical to believing you can only gain salvation through works: both allow man to pat themselves on the back and said "well God, I did this and gave this all to you, therefore I deserve heaven or deserve not to lose heaven". It treats the blood of Jesus like the blood of bulls and goats, rather than something that God alone did on the cross.

6. I believe that Genesis to Revelation is God's love story. It begins with Adam and Eve living in grace. Then they ate of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, and they became under "merit" - that is knowing right from wrong, and became ashamed because they knew they did not meet God's standard any more. And then Jesus came back to restore us back to our innocence and living under grace again. When Jesus died and rose again, and we accept his gift, we are adopted children. When we are children we sin, but like our own children - they do not lose their place in the family from sin. "Once adopted, always adopted". This is the overall theme of the Bible that I believe. If we can lose salvation through sin, then my view of God's perfect plan becomes marred, because it is a "method of salvation" that would result in a very low success rate. The Bible is clear that we need Jesus because few of us can get to heaven on merit - therefore few Christians can keep salvation on merit if we can lose salvation!

The OSAS side believes there are two types of forgiveness: judicial forgiveness (salvation); and parental forgiveness (for post salvation sins) where you lose favor with God but not salvation - similar to the children analogy. If human parents can forgive the atrocious sins of their children, how much greater is God's love for those who accept Jesus as their Lord and Saviour?

7. The "strength" of the "you can lose salvation" crowd does not lie in the interpretation of Scripture (in my opinion) - it lies in these people who claim to have either died and been told by Jesus or an angel, or had a similar vision where they saw Christians in hell for their works or lack of works. While these visions are frightening, I find it hard to believe that we can be judged by visions (especially if they contradict the Word) - how can we be judged based on someone's vision? (what if we didn't watch it on youtube?). If we are earnestly seeking the true interpretation of Scripture, instead of trying to pigeon hole Scripture into our convenient belief boxes, can we be judged by God for having the wrong interpretation? This is the part I struggle with the most - if my interpretation is wrong, but I earnestly tried to follow what I believed to be the right interpretation of the Word, can I lose salvation if I sinned?

The visions are unanimous in their condemnation of most Christians. Apparently MOST Christians end up in hell in these visions. I think that if you can lose salvation through lying, or getting angry with someone ("murder"), or looking at someone lustfully, or being envious of your friend's new toy - then few Christians will end up in heaven. I find it difficult to believe that God would devise a method of salvation that is SO HARD. That's what my 6 year old son said when I was discussing this with my wife, he said "why does God make it so hard to get to heaven".

8. I personally feel that based on the arguments above that believing in a middle ground, that is: OSAS is generally true if someone is earnestly seeking after God is the truth. That is: you can lose salvation if you simply walk away; but if you try to obey God and fail, you do not lose salvation.

I am not saying I am correct, but that I want to know the truth. I have heard the OSAS side address the other side's arguments. I wouldn't mind someone who believes you can lose salvation address the OSAS' interpretation of these controversial verses. Thanks.

I think you need to realize there are different versions of "Eternal Security".

Reformed theology advocates Eternal Security, but they believe not in salvation by faith, but salvation by election, which according to them occurs prior to one's birth. Thus the "elect" were never not saved, never in danger of going to hell, even while unbelievers. (You can tell from my rhetoric I discard that theology)

Another is Free Grace Theology which seems to be what you've heard. It advocates Eternal Security but denies the correlation between a person's behavior and their salvation status. They end up having to try to get around alot of verses and end up making a lot of unconvincing arguments (in my opinion) to get around those verses.

Another is what I and many believe. I think generally Baptists would advocate this viewpoint, namely believing in Eternal Security, but also recognizing that the scripture do indicate a correlation between one's behavior and one's salvation status. However unlike the "salvation by works" idea, the correlation is that good behavior is a natural byproduct of one's regeneration rather a cause of one's salvation. For example we note 1John 3:9,10 "No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God’s seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God. This is how we know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are: Anyone who does not do what is right is not a child of God; nor is anyone who does not love his brother." So works are an indicate rather than a cause of one's status. What causes one's behavior (not continuing to sin) is not the fear of condemnation (which is contrary to the idea of trust in Christ for salvation), but rather it's in the nature of regeneration (being born of God).

And this gets at a major point. What are we to trust in to be saved? The Eternal Security Christians like myself trust in Christ, while in my experience even on this forum, there seems a significant category of "Christians" who depend on their own works, their own performance to qualify them to be saved. And as you've noted they are so vehement, much like the unbelieving Jews, that they reckon people like myself heretics and subject to condemnation in hell fire because we trust in Christ. (Seems nothing has changed)

Just to mention a couple of verses.

"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." John 5:24

"Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation. However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness." Rom 4:4,5

And for the anti-Eternal Security Christians I would say, This is what the Sovereign LORD, the Holy One of Israel, says: "In repentance and rest is your salvation, in quietness and trust is your strength, but you would have none of it." Is 30:15
 
Upvote 0

rockytopva

Love to pray! :)
Site Supporter
Mar 6, 2011
20,046
7,674
.
Visit site
✟1,063,347.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Single
Fruit....
Fruit......
Fruit........

Show me some fruit baring qualities in your life then yes.... I will buy into your eternal security. If someone was once saved and is now turned into a party gal/guy, in which I know many, then no, I do not buy into their eternal security....

ff83fe822c6e85a2fa198dd7065be2d8.jpg
 
Upvote 0

bcbsr

Newbie
Mar 17, 2003
4,085
2,318
Visit site
✟201,456.00
Faith
Christian
And what did Abraham do, friend? He believed and he obeyed.

Actually you're kind of mistaken on that point. Note Paul's interpretation of Gen 15:6

Rom 4:1 What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, discovered in this matter?
2 If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about— but not before God.
3 What does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness." (Gen 15:6)
4 Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation.
5 However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness.


Paul's point here is that Abraham didn't do anything to be justified, but simply believe the promise of God. That's Paul's conclusion, Paul's interpretation of Gen 15:6.

So, no, Abraham didn't "obey" in order to be justified.

But what about you? What are you doing in order to be saved? Or if you think you're saved presently, then what did you "do", besides believing the promise of God, if indeed you had even done that.

Now if your salvation status is contingent upon your compliance to commands, exactly what command are those? And have you perfectly lived up to those commands to this point? Have you been living a perfectly sinless life? If not, then how can you think you are saved, if indeed salvation is contingent upon not sinning.
 
Upvote 0

bcbsr

Newbie
Mar 17, 2003
4,085
2,318
Visit site
✟201,456.00
Faith
Christian
you are talking about something completely different but often confused as the same thing. We are not talking about those who were never saved in the first place. We are talking about people who are genuinely saved. Can someone who is genuinely saved but had unconfessed sin at the point of death - for example, they had an argument with someone and did not forgive them, and then they died - would they lose their salvation? There are some that believe that people who die in their sins lose their salvation.

I think the fact that believers are set free from the law of sin and death covers any residual sin.

For "there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death." Rom 8:1,2
 
Upvote 0

bcbsr

Newbie
Mar 17, 2003
4,085
2,318
Visit site
✟201,456.00
Faith
Christian
If someone was once saved and is now turned into a party gal/guy, in which I know many, then no, I do not buy into their eternal security....

How do you know whether such people were "saved" to begin with?

"They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us." 1John 2:19
 
Upvote 0

rockytopva

Love to pray! :)
Site Supporter
Mar 6, 2011
20,046
7,674
.
Visit site
✟1,063,347.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Single
How do you know whether such people were "saved" to begin with?

"They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us." 1John 2:19

It is best to live this Christian life, bare fruit, and be the example Christ called us to be... And not to worry whether others are saved to begin with! As far as fruit bearing, here are some excerpts from John Bunyan's "The Barren Fig Tree" work:

6 He spake also this parable; A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought fruit thereon, and found none.
7 Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard, Behold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and find none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground?
8 And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung it:
9 And if it bear fruit, well: and if not, then after that thou shalt cut it down. - Luke 13:6-9

In parables there are two things to be taken notice of, and to be inquired into of them that read.

First, The metaphors made use of.
Second, The doctrine or mysteries couched under such metaphors.

The metaphors in this parable are,
1. A certain man;
2. A vineyard;
3. A fig-tree, barren or fruitless;
4. A dresser;
5. Three years;
6. Digging and dunging, &c.

The doctrine, or mystery, couched under these words is to show us what is like to become of a fruitless or formal professor. For,

1. By the man in the parable is meant God the Father (Luke 15:11).
2. By the vineyard, his church (Isa 5:7).
3. By the fig-tree, a professor.
4. By the dresser, the Lord Jesus.
5. By the fig-tree’s barrenness, the professor’s fruitlessness.
6. By the three years, the patience of God that for a time he extendeth to barren professors.
7. This calling to the dresser of the vineyard to cut it down, is to show the outcries of justice against fruitless professors.
8. The dresser’s interceding is to show how the Lord Jesus steps in, and takes hold of the head of his Father’s axe, to stop, or at least to defer, the present execution of a barren fig-tree.
9. The dresser’s desire to try to make the fig-tree fruitful, is to show you how unwilling he is that even a barren fig-tree should yet be barren, and perish.
10. His digging about it, and dunging of it, is to show his willingness to apply gospel helps to this barren professor, if haply he may be fruitful.
11. The supposition that the fig-tree may yet continue fruitless, is to show, that when Christ Jesus hath done all, there are some professors will abide barren and fruitless.
12. The determination upon this supposition, at last to cut it down, is a certain prediction of such professor’s unavoidable and eternal damnation.

But to take this parable into pieces, and to discourse more particularly, though with all brevity, upon all the parts thereof. ‘A certain MAN had a fig-tree planted in his vineyard.’ The MAN, I told you, is to present us with God the Father; by which similitude he is often set out in the New Testament. Observe then, that it is no new thing, if you find in God’s church barren fig-trees, fruitless professors; even as here you see is a tree, a fruitless tree, a fruitless fig-tree in the vineyard.

Fruit is not so easily brought forth as a profession is got into; it is easy for a man to clothe himself with a fair show in the flesh, to word it, and say, Be thou warmed and filled with the best. It is no hard thing to do these with other things; but to be fruitful, to bring forth fruit to God, this doth not every tree, no not every fig-tree that stands in the vineyard of God. Those words also, ‘Every branch in me that beareth not fruit, he taketh away,’ assert the same thing (John 15:2). There are branches in Christ, in Christ’s body mystical, which is his church, his vineyard, that bear not fruit, wherefore the hand of God is to take them away: I looked for grapes, and it brought forth wild grapes, that is, no fruit at all that was acceptable with God (Isa 5:4). Again, ‘Israel is an empty vine, he bringeth forth fruit unto himself,’ none to God; he is without fruit to God (Hosea 10:1). All these, with many more, show us the truth of the observation, and that God’s church may be cumbered with fruitless fig-trees, with barren professors.
 
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Site Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,501
7,861
...
✟1,192,682.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Let me begin by saying I do not want to prove any point of view. When I want to know the true interpretation of a controversial theology, I read both sides. It upsets me when one side is clearly argumentative and trying to prove that they're right instead of considering both sides of the argument.

So I have read both sides thoroughly, and the problem is this: the side that believes "once saved always saved", I think, has the superior holistic view of all Scripture. The problem is that there are so many people convinced that believing in OSAS will result in many people going to hell, so the risk of believing OSAS is the greatest so you'd better be right. The other problem is that no matter how you feel about what God should do - it's irrelevant - whether you think something is right or not doesn't make it true. If you are confronted by God and God tells you you're wrong, you do not have the luxury of arguing with Him. Too many people believe in an interpretation based on what they feel is right.

Lastly: people need to realize that whatever you believe is just an interpretation of the Word - it doesn't mean it IS the Word, even though you quote the Bible. Both sides of the debate quote the SAME VERSES, but have different interpretations. It disappoints me when I read a website quoting all these verses as if their interpretation is correct without bothering to address the other side's interpretation of those same verses (and acting as if the other side has never seen those verses before).

I believe this is a difficult subject and therefore we must carefully and prayerfully ask God to give us the complete understanding of salvation.

So what do I want? I want a careful discussion of the controversial verses of salvation and whether you can lose it. And by careful I mean - let's not approach this with a presupposition and refuse to budge from it. Let's approach it from an attitude of seeking the truth realizing that we may be on the wrong side of it.

I think this is the most important subject in this entire site. There's no point in debating theology if we're not truly saved, therefore we should really really get this theology right.

I will begin stating my opinions in the next post. Thanks.

Well, in addition to the Bible condemning Eternal Security, a major problem I see with Once Saved Always Saved (or a belief that says, "Sin Does Not Separate You From God") is that if such beliefs are preached to people by a preacher, the people can easily misunderstand such a preacher that he is teaching that they have "a license to sin" on some level (Regardless if that preacher wants that to happen or not). In other words, such beliefs merely attempt to minimize sin (Which goes against the goodness of God or morality).

Also, can God agree with sin?
Meaning, would not God have to agree with a person's thinking that they can sin and still be saved in order for God to save them?

But what about all our sins, you may ask?
There is no way we can walk perfectly and be without sin, right?

Well, first, Jesus says be ye perfect as the Heavenly Father is perfect.

Second, 1 John 5:16-18 says that there is a sin unto death and there is a sin not unto death. Meaning, there are sins that do lead unto second death (i.e. Lake of Fire) like murder, hate, coveting, theft, idolatry, adultery, etc. (Revelation 21:8, Galatians 5:19-21). Sins that do not lead unto the second death would be: Refusing to be baptized in this life (1 Peter 3:21), and boasting in each other and causing divisions (1 Corinthians 3:1-15), and hidden or secret faults (Psalms 19:12). So not all sins are serious sins that will cause you to be destroyed in the Lake of Fire.

Three, the Scriptures say, "For God hath not called us unto uncleanness, but unto holiness." (1 Thessalonians 4:7). When I think of OSAS, I think, what can I get away with now. For it is human nature to do the wrong thing. Oh, and yes. I did consider OSAS to be true for like a day or two. But after examing the Scriptures, I discovered it to be clearly false.

Four, but you might scream, "Ah, ha! You believe in Works Salvationism!"; And I would reply to that with a..... "yes" and "no." I do not believe we are saved by man directed works in any way, but I believe we are saved by God directed works. For are you not saved by the work of God with Christ's death and resurrection? Why is it hard for us to also believe that Christ has to do the good work within us to truly prove that Christ abides in us (Who is the source of our salvation)? (See 1 John 5:12). For Jesus said you can do nothing without me (John 15:5).

Romans 11:22 says,
"Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in his goodness: otherwise you also shall be cut off."


...
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: JESUS=G.O.A.T
Upvote 0

JESUS=G.O.A.T

Well-Known Member
Dec 29, 2016
2,681
659
27
Houston
✟68,441.00
Country
United States
Faith
Apostolic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Let me begin by saying I do not want to prove any point of view. When I want to know the true interpretation of a controversial theology, I read both sides. It upsets me when one side is clearly argumentative and trying to prove that they're right instead of considering both sides of the argument.

So I have read both sides thoroughly, and the problem is this: the side that believes "once saved always saved", I think, has the superior holistic view of all Scripture. The problem is that there are so many people convinced that believing in OSAS will result in many people going to hell, so the risk of believing OSAS is the greatest so you'd better be right. The other problem is that no matter how you feel about what God should do - it's irrelevant - whether you think something is right or not doesn't make it true. If you are confronted by God and God tells you you're wrong, you do not have the luxury of arguing with Him. Too many people believe in an interpretation based on what they feel is right.

Lastly: people need to realize that whatever you believe is just an interpretation of the Word - it doesn't mean it IS the Word, even though you quote the Bible. Both sides of the debate quote the SAME VERSES, but have different interpretations. It disappoints me when I read a website quoting all these verses as if their interpretation is correct without bothering to address the other side's interpretation of those same verses (and acting as if the other side has never seen those verses before).

I believe this is a difficult subject and therefore we must carefully and prayerfully ask God to give us the complete understanding of salvation.

So what do I want? I want a careful discussion of the controversial verses of salvation and whether you can lose it. And by careful I mean - let's not approach this with a presupposition and refuse to budge from it. Let's approach it from an attitude of seeking the truth realizing that we may be on the wrong side of it.

I think this is the most important subject in this entire site. There's no point in debating theology if we're not truly saved, therefore we should really really get this theology right.

I will begin stating my opinions in the next post. Thanks.
I guess my question is how can you believe in once saved always saved if everyone one of us know at least one saved individual, whether you believe in Holy Ghost speaking in tounques being salvation, baptism in water, accepting god, that has turned away? Also the Bible says some will depart the faith giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils. It mentions backsliding as well. I agree with your introduction post if you go based off scripture rather then what we want to be true it seems the evidence points against once saved sways saved. It only gets complicated if we as the Bible says give heed to philosophies. If we read certain books and study other ideologies and such a bit too much it can get confusing. I tend to personally stay with the Bible and some study tools cause of that and just cause they are enough for me but yeah. The way you define salvation determines how tough this is also. I believe in the Holy Ghost (born again of spirit) so I can just look at acts 5 where aninas and Silas lost their Holy Ghost and died. But if you define salvation based off works than only god can judge when you die really. The Bible lets us know that those under old tesetmant law will be judged this way. Now with born again water believers this becomes tough. It's because water baptism just removes sins your born with it doesn't go away. So if you believe water baptism is enough then by definition once saved always saved applies unless you add good works as well(this could explain the wide spread of OSAS in this Century). But yeah certain extra things can make this confusing for some. As well as f you focus too much on multiple ideologies and philosophies as the Bible tells us not to do.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

JESUS=G.O.A.T

Well-Known Member
Dec 29, 2016
2,681
659
27
Houston
✟68,441.00
Country
United States
Faith
Apostolic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Well, in addition to the Bible condemning Eternal Security, a major problem I see with Once Saved Always Saved (or a belief that says, "Sin Does Not Separate You From God") is that if such beliefs are preached to people by a preacher, the people can easily misunderstand such a preacher that he is teaching that they have "a license to sin" on some level (Regardless if that preacher wants that to happen or not). In other words, such beliefs merely attempt to minimize sin (Which goes against the goodness of God or morality).

Also, can God agree with sin?
Meaning, would not God have to agree with a person's thinking that they can sin and still be saved in order for God to save them?

But what about all our sins, you may ask?
There is no way we can walk perfectly and be without sin, right?

Well, first, Jesus says be ye perfect as the Heavenly Father is perfect.

Second, 1 John 5:16-18 says that there is a sin unto death and there is a sin not unto death. Meaning, there are sins that do lead unto second death (i.e. Lake of Fire) like murder, hate, coveting, theft, idolatry, adultery, etc. (Revelation 21:8, Galatians 5:19-21). Sins that do not lead unto the second death would be: Refusing to be baptized in this life (1 Peter 3:21), and boasting in each other and causing divisions (1 Corinthians 3:1-15), and hidden or secret faults (Psalms 19:12). So not all sins are serious sins that will cause you to be destroyed in the Lake of Fire.

Three, the Scriptures say, "For God hath not called us unto uncleanness, but unto holiness." (1 Thessalonians 4:7). When I think of OSAS, I think, what can I get away with now. For it is human nature to do the wrong thing. Oh, and yes. I did consider OSAS to be true for like a day or two. But after examing the Scriptures, I discovered it to be clearly false.

Four, but you might scream, "Ah, ha! You believe in Works Salvationism!"; And I would reply to that with a..... "yes" and "no." I do not believe we are saved by man directed works in any way, but I believe we are saved by God directed works. For are you not saved by the work of God with Christ's death and resurrection? Why is it hard for us to believe that we have to also believe that Christ has to do the good work within us to truly prove that Christ abides in us (Who is the source of our salvation)? (See 1 John 5:12). For Jesus said you can do nothing without me (John 15:5).

Romans 11:22 says,
"Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in his goodness: otherwise you also shall be cut off."


...
I believe this explains why people believe once saved always saved today tbh. Many don't read the word but simply listen to preaches so when they hear that it sounds right
 
Upvote 0

JellyQuest

Active Member
Dec 14, 2016
108
44
58
nz
✟18,366.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Let me begin by saying I do not want to prove any point of view. When I want to know the true interpretation of a controversial theology, I read both sides. It upsets me when one side is clearly argumentative and trying to prove that they're right instead of considering both sides of the argument.

So I have read both sides thoroughly, and the problem is this: the side that believes "once saved always saved", I think, has the superior holistic view of all Scripture. The problem is that there are so many people convinced that believing in OSAS will result in many people going to hell, so the risk of believing OSAS is the greatest so you'd better be right. The other problem is that no matter how you feel about what God should do - it's irrelevant - whether you think something is right or not doesn't make it true. If you are confronted by God and God tells you you're wrong, you do not have the luxury of arguing with Him. Too many people believe in an interpretation based on what they feel is right.

Lastly: people need to realize that whatever you believe is just an interpretation of the Word - it doesn't mean it IS the Word, even though you quote the Bible. Both sides of the debate quote the SAME VERSES, but have different interpretations. It disappoints me when I read a website quoting all these verses as if their interpretation is correct without bothering to address the other side's interpretation of those same verses (and acting as if the other side has never seen those verses before).

I believe this is a difficult subject and therefore we must carefully and prayerfully ask God to give us the complete understanding of salvation.

So what do I want? I want a careful discussion of the controversial verses of salvation and whether you can lose it. And by careful I mean - let's not approach this with a presupposition and refuse to budge from it. Let's approach it from an attitude of seeking the truth realizing that we may be on the wrong side of it.

I think this is the most important subject in this entire site. There's no point in debating theology if we're not truly saved, therefore we should really really get this theology right.

I will begin stating my opinions in the next post. Thanks.
The problem is.We are saved by faith and the end of our faith is received when Jesus returns.not before.
So what we have now by faith .
We will then' actually' have when he comes.
No one is actually saved yet (except by faith) so osas is possible only after Christ JESUS returns.until then people can walk away from the faith and perish.
 
Upvote 0

bcbsr

Newbie
Mar 17, 2003
4,085
2,318
Visit site
✟201,456.00
Faith
Christian
It is best to live this Christian life, bare fruit, and be the example Christ called us to be... And not to worry whether others are saved to begin with!

But to quote you, "If someone was once saved and is now turned into a party gal/guy, in which I know many, then no, I do not buy into their eternal security...."

So you're basing your rejection of the Doctrine of Eternal Security on the assumption that certain people you know were saved. And at the same time you say we shouldn't make judgments about other people's salvation status, which to me is a contradiction. I don't follow your reasoning.
 
Upvote 0

JellyQuest

Active Member
Dec 14, 2016
108
44
58
nz
✟18,366.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I think this is getting a bit muddled. You seem to be saying someone can't lose their salvation... unless they don't love their neighbor, and then they can lose their salvation.

Your position represents a conflict with scripture. Romans 10:9, for example, says one must confess with one's mouth and have faith, you are saved. It seems a bit off then that you apparently think someone who confesses with their mouth and has faith can't be saved just because of a pesky few murders.

As a Catholic, I can point to all those things and say that this person has obviously fallen out of state of grace and, without repentance, may very well not go to Heaven if he were to die at that moment. That doesn't cast any doubt upon his state of grace after professing the faith; it simply acknowledges that his sins (some of which I mentioned are mortal sins) would prohibit from entering Heaven upon death until he repents and takes the other steps necessary to address those sins.
You signature is the most Non scriptural load of lies I've ever seen and denies the one (1) ONE mediator between mankind and God.
 
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Site Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,501
7,861
...
✟1,192,682.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The OSAS issue ultimately deals with morality or God's goodness. If a person were to follow the ultimate conclusion of where OSAS leads, they will conclude that it is against God's goodness or morality (Unless of course they are not concerned with God's goodness or morality). Why? Because OSAS is saying you can commit sin on some level and God will still save you despite your evil.


....
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

rockytopva

Love to pray! :)
Site Supporter
Mar 6, 2011
20,046
7,674
.
Visit site
✟1,063,347.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Single
But to quote you, "If someone was once saved and is now turned into a party gal/guy, in which I know many, then no, I do not buy into their eternal security...."

So you're basing your rejection of the Doctrine of Eternal Security on the assumption that certain people you know were saved. And at the same time you say we shouldn't make judgments about other people's salvation status, which to me is a contradiction. I don't follow your reasoning.

Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear. - 1 Timothy 5:20

There is a Baptist lady I know at work whom I thought that we were right for each other. But the more that girl talked... She does not think anything of weekend affairs. I finally told her, "You know I do not believe that you can do such things and enter heaven." In which she looks at me and instantaneously says... "Are you trying to threaten my salvation?"

Yes... If you think nothing about weekend affairs outside of marriage you will get a rebuke from me... I do not care how saved you feel you are!
 
  • Like
Reactions: JESUS=G.O.A.T
Upvote 0

ToBeLoved

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 3, 2014
18,705
5,790
✟322,365.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Does one's personal conduct affect their salvation?

To use a hypothetical, can somebody profess faith in Our Lord's sacrifice on Sunday, abuse drugs on Monday, rape people on Tuesday, kill people on Wednesday, sell guns to children on Thursday, download kiddie inappropriate content on Friday, repent of none of those things on Saturday, die on the following Sunday and reasonably expect to go to Heaven?
Why does the 'you can loose your salvation crowd always grab out the most extreme example that would not be 1/5000 th of the population and then stake their cause on that. As if God is making His covenant with us looking at the 1 in 5000 th person who would have some deep, deep seeded issues if not gross mental illness.

In doing this IMHO, they show that they do not know the Bible in that they do not know the nature of God much at all, because God is indwelling each individual believer and God knows EVERYTHING that will ever happen and our motivations for EVERYTHING we have ever done. Knowing how much God knows, let's us know that no one is pulling the wool over God's eyes and He can ONLY be perfect, righteous and just.

But the naysayer's grab the most ridiculous examples making God out to be a fool in the process when God can only be what God is. And a fool is not something He can be.

This is why I have trouble holding a conversation with people who do this. They never start a "valid" conversation to begin with, they started an "extreme" example that they want us to defend our position over.

Then if they feel they are loosing, comes "extreme" example number #2 and so on ...........
 
Upvote 0

GirdYourLoins

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2016
1,220
929
Brighton, UK
✟122,682.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I will say one part of what I said on the ;ast thread on OSAS I commented on.

We should live our lives as if we can lose our salvation.

In our own lives we should be living the best life we can and if we live it as if we can lose our salvation it will/may lead to us leading a better life and doing more for the Lord. The issue imo is when people fall away. My personal belief is it has to be a concious decision in your right mind to tell God to get out of your life to lose salvation and I have known people who have done that. So I dont believe OSAS but I do believe it s hard to lose salvation and has to be a deliberate choice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JESUS=G.O.A.T
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ToBeLoved

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 3, 2014
18,705
5,790
✟322,365.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
The other thing that I think is a huge divide is that people do not understand the different covenants and their timelines. If someone jumps from New Covenant (grace) back to the Old Covenant (law) than back, then forth, then back it throws everything out of whack.

It's important to know which Books of the Bible fall under which covenant and which situations occurred under which covenant. Then one can really see the difference in the two covenants and how God deals with humans under each covenant. And then I think Hebrews is awesome for explaining some of the Old Covenant things and how they were before and what they are now.

For example, someone pulls a passage from Romans and mixes it with Leviticus probably not going to be a lot of cohesion there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JESUS=G.O.A.T
Upvote 0