Once Saved Always Saved (OSAS) or Keep the faith until the end?

[Bro.T]

That's strange. What do you think happened with the penitent thief on the cross? For some people, I agree it's a process. But for others, why can't they believe instantly?

Concerning the thief on the cross that was a very special situation, because keep in mind Jesus haven't even died yet. That goes to show you that if you truly repented God will have compassion and or mercy upon you. Jesus says in Luke 5:32 I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

 

[Clare73]

That's strange. What do you think happened with the penitent thief on the cross? For some people, I agree it's a process. But for others,
why can't they believe instantly?

It's all the work of the sovereign (Jn 3:6-8) Holy Spirit (Jn 3:3-5), and he can do it in whatever way he chooses, instantly or in a process or whatever else he wills.

 

[Romans 8]

It's all the work of the sovereign (Jn 3:6-8) Holy Spirit (Jn 3:3-5), and he can do it in whatever way he chooses, instantly or in a process or whatever else he wills.

Ohhhhh! So He makes us believe? And if it's slow we can blame Him? Or, if quickly we praise Him? First I've heard!

Be careful not to believe Calvinist doctrine. The act of believing falls on the individual, not on the Holy Sprit. We're saved the instant we believe. There's no delay. The Holy Spirit responds to our hearts, He doesn't make us believe when He feels like it.

 

[Clare73]

Ohhhhh! So He makes us believe? And if it's slow we can blame Him? Or, if quickly we praise Him? First I've heard!

Be careful not to believe Calvinist doctrine.

Thanks. . .my belief is in Paulist doctrine.

The act of believing falls on the individual, not on the Holy Sprit.

Not according to Paul, et al.

Faith is not the work of man, faith is a gift (Php 1:29, 2 Pe 1:1, Ac 13:48, 18:27, Ro 12:3) of the Holy Spirit accompanying his sovereign (Jn 3:6-8) gift of rebirth (Jn 3:3-5).

We're saved the instant we believe. There's no delay. The Holy Spirit responds to our hearts, He doesn't make us believe when He feels like it.

How can one believe when he can't even see (much less believe in) the kingdom of God without being born again (Jn 3:3-5) by the sovereign choice (Jn 3:6-8) of the Holy Spirit?

We have no more to do with our spiritual rebirth than we did with our natural birth.

Wanna' address Jn 3:3-8. . .being true to its words and context?

 

[Romans 8]

Thanks. . .my belief is in Paulist doctrine.

Not according to Paul, et al.

Faith is not the work of man, faith is a gift (Php 1:29, 2 Pe 1:1, Ac 13:48, 18:27, Ro 12:3) of the Holy Spirit accompanying his sovereign (Jn 3:6-8) gift of rebirth (Jn 3:3-5).

How can one believe when he can't even see (much less believe in) the kingdom of God without being born again (Jn 3:3-5) by the sovereign choice (Jn 3:6-8) of the Holy Spirit?

We have no more to do with our spiritual rebirth than we did with our natural birth.

Wanna' address Jn 3:3-8. . .being true to its words and context?

Clare, thanks for your post! May I know something? Are you a Calvinist?

 

[Clare73]

Clare, thanks for your post! May I know something? Are you a Calvinist?

No, I am a Paulist. . .and know these various theologies in a genreral way and, therefore, am in no position to discuss them in detail.
It is Scripture that I discuss in detail.

 

[Romans 8]

Thanks. . .my belief is in Paulist doctrine.

Not according to Paul, et al.

Faith is not the work of man, faith is a gift (Php 1:29, 2 Pe 1:1, Ac 13:48, 18:27, Ro 12:3) of the Holy Spirit accompanying his sovereign (Jn 3:6-8) gift of rebirth (Jn 3:3-5).

How can one believe when he can't even see (much less believe in) the kingdom of God without being born again (Jn 3:3-5) by the sovereign choice (Jn 3:6-8) of the Holy Spirit?

We have no more to do with our spiritual rebirth than we did with our natural birth.

Wanna' address Jn 3:3-8. . .being true to its words and context?

I think that faith vs belief should be another thread but a simple way to explain this is asking the question, "Why does the Bible tells us to believe, if He's the one responsible for it?". It's like a chicken vs egg, circular reasoning. I'll post this reply I borrowed which might help explain the difference between belief and faith.

"Faith and belief are used interchangeably. However, the New Testament does recognize that people can have false faith or incomplete belief, which is inadequate. The difference is not between the two words but between the concepts of mental agreement and wholehearted commitment. In modern usage, belief often refers to mental agreement, and faith refers to wholehearted commitment."

 

[Clare73]

I think that faith vs belief should be another thread but a simple way to explain this is asking the question, "Why does the Bible tells us to believe, if He's the one responsible for it?".

For the same reason that it gives warnings to the redeemed.

So that those he has enabled to obey them will not omit obeying them.

It's like a chicken vs egg, circular reasoning. I'll post this reply I borrowed which might help explain the difference between belief and faith.
"Faith and belief are used interchangeably.

Because they are the same word (pistis) and mean the same thing in the NT; i.e., to be persuaded of, to place confidence in, to trust.

However, the New Testament does recognize that people can have false faith or incomplete belief, which is inadequate.

Keeping in mind that by definition, counterfeit (false) faith is not Biblical faith, just as counterfeit (false) money is not legal tender, regardless of what either one is called.

The difference is not between the two words but between the concepts of mental agreement and wholehearted commitment.
In modern usage, belief often refers to mental agreement, and faith refers to wholehearted commitment."

And there we have me. . .

My use is Biblical usage.

Faith and belief are the same Greek word (pistis) in the NT, and mean the same thing; i.e., to be persuaded of, to place confidence in, to trust on.

 

[fhansen]

Where is that in Scripture?

Jesus had two distinct natures, human and divine, in one person. just as the Trinity has three distinct persons in one Being.

Just as with "hypostatic union", nowhere in Scripture does it explicitly state, "Jesus had two distinct nature's, human and divine..." They both mean the same thing!

 

[Clare73]

Just as with "hypostatic union", nowhere in Scripture does it explicitly state, "Jesus had two distinct nature's, human and divine..." They both mean the same thing!

Jesus said he was God (Jn 8:58). . .that makes him human and divine.

"Hypostatic" is not in my Bible. . .and I seem to manage without it.

 

[fhansen]

Jesus said he was God (Jn 8:58). . .that makes him human and divine.

"Hypostatic" is not in my Bible. . .and I seem to manage without it.

So for some reason you choose to use English words that are not in the bible over a Greek word, a language that the NT was at least actually written in and which describes the same thing?? Whatever.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Jesus said he was God (Jn 8:58). . .that makes him human and divine.

"Hypostatic" is not in my Bible. . .and I seem to manage without it.

You had no problem using the word "Trinity" a few posts earlier. Why the sudden problem with "hypostatic"?

-CryptoLutheran

 

[fhansen]

So that those he has enabled to obey them will not omit obeying them.

This is a key concept. Because it implies choice, the choice to fail to obey even though they've been enabled to do so. That's how grace really operates in man; he can resist it. And so the warnings make perfect sense

 

[Aseyesee]

When I became a born again Christian over 5 years ago, I loved coming to this forum to learn about the Bible. The topic of OSAS was the topic which significantly held my interest. I went back and forth on the issue, and I really wanted to believe OSAS is true, for peace of mind. Thing is, I could never get peace in letting this doctrine settle,and I believe it's for this reason: OSAS is a false doctrine meant to make us lazy, useless in the body of Christ, and possibly even send one to hell. Without posting every verse in the Bible which supports my belief, I will post this one: Matthew 24:13 says: "But the one who endures to the end will be saved."
If you believe in the doctrine of OSAS, I beg you to reconsider. By negating OSAS you do not automatically get pigeonholed as one who subscribes to "Lordship Salvation", as this is also a false doctrine. However, you will see that maintaining your relationship (abiding in Christ) is necessary for Christians in order to finish the race. You CAN be born again, yet end up in hell because of your apostasy. Do not be fooled nor lazy about your relationship with God. While it's not a religion, it is a relationship, albeit your most important one and it's so easy to drop the ball in this Laodecian church age we find ourselves. Renew your relationship with God every morning and read His Word everyday. I want all of us to make it and not take our relationship with Him for granted. That means NO deliberate sin, as continual deliberate sinning puts Jesus back on the cross and there is no sacrifice left for us...

Hebrews 10:26-27 says, For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins.

Of course we aren't perfect and the Bible tells us that if we say we don't sin, we are liars. However, there's a difference between slipping up, and repenting, and living in sin and, "Oops, Jesus forgive me, Oops, I did it again Jesus, Oops, oops, oops",all in the span of a day or a few days or weeks.

There's a difference between a Christian and a disciple and Jesus want us to be the latter. God bless brothers and sisters, finish the race and will see you in heaven soon!

*I recant. OSAS is true. Once we're sealed, we're sealed unto the time of redemption. Our names are written in the book of life. For he raised us from the dead along with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms because we are united with Christ Jesus.*

What is the end we endure to?

 

[Clare73]

You had no problem using the word "Trinity" a few posts earlier. Why the sudden problem with "hypostatic"?

-CryptoLutheran

I also don't have a problem using the word "sovereign."

 

[Clare73]

This is a key concept. Because it implies choice, the choice to fail to obey even though they've been enabled to do so. That's how grace really operates in man; he can resist it. And so the warnings make perfect sense

God changes our disposition. . .according to which we willingly and freely act.

 

[fhansen]

God changes our disposition. . .according to which we willingly and freely act.

That's like saying I changed a dog into a cat so now it freely meows. That requires an entirely different being, not the same being now making a different free choice. If God just wants obedience at the end of the day then there'd be no reason for allowing disobedience to begin with, no reason for ever giving man the gift of free will, IOW

 

[Clare73]

That's like saying I changed a dog into a cat so now it freely meows.

You know theology better than that.

That requires an entirely different being, not the same being now making a different free choice.

And you know, or you should know, that a change of disposition (from fear to love, from discouragement to courage, from rejection of God to love of God, from indifference to obedience) is not a change of natural being, one is still the same human being.

If God just wants obedience at the end of the day then there'd be no reason for allowing disobedience to begin with, no reason for ever giving man the gift of free will, IOW

For starters, "free will" is not in the NT. . .we are born slaves to sin (Jn 8:34). . .slaves are not free.
Free will is a philosophical notion (asserted by Pelagius), not a Biblical notion.

And indeed, disobedience/sin is part of God's plan from before creation (Ro 11:32) to show forth his glorify through the glory of his Son.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I also don't have a problem using the word "sovereign."

Well that's good. Especially since there are words in Hebrew and Greek that can be rendered as "sovereign".

It doesn't address why you are okay with one non-biblical word but then take issue with another. Unless you're just admitting to being arbitrary.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[fhansen]

For starters, "free will" is not in the NT. . .we are born slaves to sin (Jn 8:34). . .slaves are not free.
Free will is a philosophical notion (asserted by Pelagius), not a Biblical notion.

And indeed, disobedience/sin is part of God's plan from before creation (Ro 11:32) to show forth his glorify through the glory of his Son.

I see, so then Adam didn't will freely when he sinned since God is the sole and direct cause of not only good but all moral evil (sin) as well, but blames man for it anyway and man cannot will rightly unless God gives him the right disposition and otherwise he'll go to eternal torment for the evil that God causes and this all brings glory to God.