Does this scripture refute OSAS? [Updated]

[Chinchilla]

We do not know what that worse thing is. We cannot assume it is a worse sickness. It could be physical death followed by hell. Why? Because Matthew 5:28-30 says you can be cast bodily into hell because of looking at a woman in lust. Jesus says in Matthew 6:15 that if you do not forgive, you will not be forgiven. While believers can be made sick because of their sin as per James 5:14-15, that does not mean that sin only leads to sickness. The wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23). Just physical death? No. There is a second death (the Lake of Fire) for those who break God's Moral Law (See Revelation 21:8).

Paul spoke of death , it is appointed to man once to die both saved and lost . Lost people don't die because they are not saved but because they sinned .

Paul did not talk about second death.

 

[Blood Bought 1953]

The law of God reveals to a saved sinner his wretched dead self by Gods grace. It shows himself his inability to measure up to its perfection and holiness. It exposes a sinners true self.. a vile creature in need of mercy! In conversion a dead sinner awakens to see his need for Christ. As he desires righteousness, he is broken and in despair over his sin. And cast himself upon Christ and His righteousness for forgiveness. And pleads for Gods Sovereign mercy. This is the fruit of a believer throughout the days of his life. Although some bear more fruit than others, nevertheless Gods elect bears fruit by Gods grace. And will persevere in faith by Gods power and grace. But to the self righteous Judaizers, the law of God is nothing more than a boast, to show how righteous and obedient they are and can be. As they seek approval from God by their arrogance, they do not realize how dead wretched and vile they are. By espousing that salvation can be lost in Christ, shows the fruit of these imposters

Excellant post. The problem with the legalists here is that they have never had their hearts made contrite by the Holy Spirit.Their self-righteousness has blinded them to the fact that they need to acknowledge their absolute wretchedness before a Holy God.If and when they are blessed enough to see themselves as the utterly lost sinners that they are and that the only reason anybody is saved is due to the Blood Of Christ and the Grace of God, only then will they abandon the Judaizers greatest delusion......” Jesus saves—- BUT.” As Paul warned, they pervert the true Gospel, Christ is no benefit to them and they are “ accursed”. There is a “ fear and trembling” involved in our salvation.It comes when you really SEE yourself for the vile thing that you are.Understanding this and that God can forgive you anyway and provide you with everything you need to be saved is the impetus for living a life that is pleasing to Him.Its a life of FAITH plus nothing. “The just shall live by faith”.....legalists never get it.I hope Newbies to the faith simply BELIEVE 1 cor15:1-4 for their salvation and don’t make the mistake of trying to add to it.Trust God and if you do He will put His Spirit in you and you will FIND yourself doing the things that He wants from you.He wants you to be transformed into the image of His Son.You can change your outside and fool many like some in here do.......or you can let Him change the inside.Only He can do that.

 

[MDC]

Excellant post. The problem with the legalists here is that they have never had their hearts made contrite by the Holy Spirit.Their self-righteousness has blinded them to the fact that they need to acknowledge their absolute wretchedness before a Holy God.If and when they are blessed enough to see themselves as the utterly lost sinners that they are and that the only reason anybody is saved is due to the Blood Of Christ and the Grace of God, only then will they abandon the Judaizers greatest delusion......” Jesus saves—- BUT.” As Paul warned, they pervert the true Gospel, Christ is no benefit to them and they are “ accursed”. There is a “ fear and trembling” involved in our salvation.It comes when you really SEE yourself for the vile thing that you are.Understanding this and that God can forgive you anyway and provide you with everything you need to be saved is the impetus for living a life that is pleasing to Him.Its a life of FAITH plus nothing. “The just shall live by faith”.....legalists never get it.I hope Newbies to the faith simply BELIEVE 1 cor15:1-4 for their salvation and don’t make the mistake of trying to add to it.Trust God and if you do He will put His Spirit in you and you will FIND yourself doing the things that He wants from you.He wants you to be transformed into the image of His Son.You can change your outside and fool many like some in here do.......or you can let Him change the inside.Only He can do that.

Amen!

 

[JIMINZ]

What about this parable?

I am the true grapevine, and my Father is the gardener. He cuts off every branch of mine that doesn’t produce fruit, and he prunes the branches that do bear fruit so they will produce even more. You have already been pruned and purified by the message I have given you. Remain in me, and I will remain in you. For a branch cannot produce fruit if it is severed from the vine, and you cannot be fruitful unless you remain in me. “Yes, I am the vine; you are the branches. Those who remain in me, and I in them, will produce much fruit. For apart from me you can do nothing. Anyone who does not remain in me is thrown away like a useless branch and withers. Such branches are gathered into a pile to be burned.

John 15:1-6

.
Just a question, what is it in these verses, that brings you to the conclusion that this is a Parable?

 

[PeaceByJesus]

James says he will show you his faith by his works (See James 2:18).

So works are not in conflict with God's grace by faith. It is a part of it (after we come to the Lord Jesus by faith - seeking His forgiveness) we then bring forth works (Which is a reflection of our continued faith or belief in the Savior).

For the very goal or reason why Christ died for us was so as to make us holy and without blemish (Ephesians 5:25-27) and for us to be zealous of good works (Titus 2:14).

1 John 1:7 says,
"But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin."

So you have to walk [i.e. keep God's commandments] in the light [i.e. God the Father] as He [i.e. Christ] is in the light in order for the blood of Jesus to cleanse you from all sin. Compare 1 John 1:5-7 with 1 John 2:3-4.

"Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him." (John 14:23).

Also, Hebrews 5:9 says,

"And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;"

Do you believe this above verse in what it plainly says?
Or would you seek to change what it says because you don't like it?
Hebrews 5:9 plainly says that Jesus is the author of eternal salvation to ALL who OBEY him.
It does not say to all who believe and do not worry about sin but just focus on his sacrifice.



You obviously did not read and understand Romans 8:1 or you are reading from a Modern Translation that left out certain key words to what it fully says.

"There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." (Romans 8:1).

I mean, what do you do when you encounter and or read Romans 8:13?

"For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live." (Romans 8:13).

For Romans 8:13 clearly says,

1. If you live after the flesh, you will die.
2. If you through the Spirit do mortify (put to death) the deeds of the body (sin), you shall live.



Not true. Nowhere does Paul condemn the Moral Law as a part of the faith or after we are saved by God's grace. Paul lists that those who break the moral law will not inherit the Kingdm of God (See Galatians 5:19-21). Paul distinguishes what law he is talking about when he says that if you seek to be circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing (Galatians 5:2). Paul does not say if you seek to not murder, and or if you seek to not steal, Christ will profit you nothing. Nowhere does Paul ever say that.

Also, the context of Galatians 3:10 is in reference to the Law of Moses (the 613 commands given to Israel) and Paul is not referring to God's Eternal Moral Laws or the Commands given to us by Jesus Christ and His followers in the New Testament.

"And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect." (Galatians 3:17).

Which law came 430 years after the promise made to Abraham?

Is it the Law of Moses or the Law of Christ?

Obviously it is talking about the Law of Moses and not all law.

But we still have to serve, though.

"But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter." (Romans 7:6).

Romans 7:6 says that we are to serve in newness of spirit and NOT in the oldness of the letter.

What is the oldness of the letter?

It is the 613 Laws within the Law of Moses given to Israel.



What makes you believe that doing good as a part of salvation is immoral?
Or are you just blindly reading those verses you want to see in the Bible to fit your own personal belief?

God's Word is not contrary to Moral Law or in doing good.
Why? Because God is good.
For his people are a reflection of God.
For God is the One who works within His people.
If they regulated sin to not being all that important, then it would destroy the very reason Christ died on the cross for us. For sin was so serious that it required the death of God's Son (Jesus Christ). So God takes sin very seriously because the wages of sin is death. Jesus does not undo sin for us so we no longer have to worry about sin. Jesus cleans our past slate and gives a fresh new start. If we sin again, we have to go to His grace and seek to overcome that sin. If not, then we are turning God's grace into a license for immorality (See Jude 1:4 (NIV)).

Life teaches us that if a person has a low regard for something, then chances are that person is not going to care about it and they are going to end up doing the very thing that they have very low regard for. For if a person does not care about staying in shape, chances are (if they do not have a high metabolism) they are going to be fat and overweight. The same is true with someone who does not regard sin as being that vital or important in their walk with God. If they feel sin only damages the fellowship with God, and not their salvation, chances are they are going to commit sin on some level and think they are saved (Thereby turning God's grace into a license for immorality).

Just look at the fruit from the life of George Sodini (Who was a huge proponent of Eternal Security).

http://eternalsecurity.us/george_sodini.htm



1 John 5:2 says,
"By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments."

1 John 3:10 says,
"In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother."

Also, again, not all sin is the same. 1 John 5:16 says clearly that there is a sin NOT unto death. The sin not unto death is clearly in reference to a believer confessing their sin with the intention of forsaking that sin (See 1 John 1:9 cf. with 1 John 1:7 and Proverbs 28:13). For John only mentions the only exemption for sin is through confession (1 John 1:9) and forsaking it (1 John 1:7). John says that person who commits sin, they are of the devil (1 John 3:8). John says that all who do evil hate the light (John 3:20).

Also, there are other kinds of sins that do NOT lead unto death. Peter says baptism does not save us for the putting away of the "filth of the flesh" (1 Peter 3:21). This "filthiness of the flesh" is clearly in reference to "sin" (As shown elsewhere in the New Testament - See 2 Corinthians 7:1). So baptism is not in reference to a Command with spiritual death consequences (if a believer does not obey it). Paul lists many times those sins that will cause a believer to not inherit the Kingdom of God (Galatians 5:19-21) (Ephesians 5:3-7) (Colossians 3:5-10) (1 Corinthians 6:9-11). This is further repeated by John in Revelation 21:8. In addition, Jesus also lists certain commands that have spiritual death in mind for a person if they were to break them (Like looking upon another in lust (Matthew 18:9), not forgiving others (Matthew 6:15), and leading a child to stumble into sin (Matthew 18:6 NLT)).

Why are you verbosely arguing against faith without works when I have consistently stated that saving faith is only that which effect works? Nor did i ever express that i believe that doing good as a part of salvation is immoral? It is not the basis for justification but again, faith without works is dead, and works justify one as being a believer, confirming one is saved. Why then are you fit for further attempts to reason with you??

As for some sins being not unto dead, as said, while not all sin is the same, and some can bring severe chastisement, even death, yet as said, the wages of sins is death, and ultimately all sins are unto death. And as said and also ignored, your proof text does not say "sins not unto death," but "a sin," for which prayer is not exhorted, and is not sins like fornication.

But in order to escape your problem of having to know, remember and confess every sin as a believer, you must come up with this artificial distinction and unreasonable recalcitrant reiteration despite what counters you.

I am thus done with trying to reason with you and your unique false teaching.

Again, may God peradventure grant you "repentance to the acknowledging of the truth." (2 Timothy 2:25) The end.

 

[aiki]

As for John 15:1-6:

Well, some OSAS proponents think that appealing to the Greek is the answer to making sense out of this passage. For the OSAS proponent will naturally claim that Jesus really did not say that we had to abide in Him and be fruitful or we will be burned. However, is this true? Surely not. Again, the Bible means what it says plainly in the English. God did not require us to seek out another language in order to understand Him. God was more than capable of translating the people's language just fine in Acts 2.

Well, this set of remarks deflects rather than addresses the points I made about translation, wording, and cultural practices that bear upon the passage. "The Bible says what it means" is just a careless, superficial response to what has been pointed out concerning the passage. It ignores the original language in which the Bible comes to us; it ignores the viticultural practices of the time; it ignores the import of the wording of the verses themselves. Responding with "Surely not," doesn't even begin to wrestle with the things I explained. It certainly doesn't refute them.

If you want more than a milk-level understanding of God's word, you will have to dig into the languages out of which our English translations of Scripture come and into the cultural milieu in which they were written. Simply assuming that modern translations fully communicate all there is to know about what was intended in the original versions of our Bible (written, not in English, but in Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic) is to keep yourself forever on the surface of what Scripture means.

Besides, there are plenty of verses that say we have to be fruitful in order to be saved.

”His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.”
(Matthew 25:21).

There is nothing in this verse about being fruitful in order to be saved. Nothing. Just the commendation of a faithful servant. You have to read into this verse the idea that it says one earns or maintains one's salvation by works. The verse itself says nothing about works-salvation.

”And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness:
there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” (Matthew 25:30).

So, where's the bit about works-salvation, about "being fruitful in order to be saved"? Is the "unprofitable servant" a saved person who is losing his salvation by being unprofitable? Where is that stated in the verse or in the parable itself? Where is it even implied? No where. But this is what you often do: You throw out reams of verses that you claim prove your case without any explanation as to how they actually do so. And when I check through the verses you offer, I find - as I have in these two verses above - that they offer no ground at all for your thinking.

"Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.” (James 2:17-18).

As has been explained to you many times now, James did not mean that works save a person, only that they are the inevitable, natural result of a genuine saving faith. Good works complete - in a sense - one's saving faith. If you contend otherwise, if you contend that works do, in fact, save, then you put yourself - and the apostle James - in direct contradiction to both Jesus and Paul, both of whom exclude works as salvific (Ephesians 2:8-9; 1 Corinthians 1:8-9; Titus 3:5; John 3:5-6; John 3:15-16; John 3:36, etc.) Again, good works reflect, or reveal, or manifest saving faith, but they don't save anyone.

"They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate." (Titus 1:16).

Who does? Saved people? No, Paul is not describing people who were once saved but because they are "abominable, disobedient and reprobate" have lost their salvation. He is speaking of people who reveal in the wretched way they are living that they are not - and have never been - genuinely born-again believers. They are "unruly and vain talkers and deceivers," Paul says, and he gives no hint that they are, or ever were, of the household of faith. How, then, does this verse show that being fruitful is necessary to being saved? This is not stated in the verse at all. The verse just describes some bad, hypocritical people. Paul says nothing about salvation and fruitfulness in the verse. So, here, again, you are reading into the verse what is not there.

Are we to assume all these other verses do not mean what they plainly say, too?

Surely not.

But, as you can see, what you think is "plain" in the verses and passages you have offered is actually no such thing. What is plain is the lens of false doctrine through which you are reading all of these verses and forcing into them that false doctrine. You are seeing what you want to see, not what is actually there.

 

[aiki]

The New Testament tells a believer to Fear God (God the Father) (1 Peter 2:17).

The New Testament tells a believer to fear Jesus instead of fearing the person who can kill their body.

Fear not them that can kill the body but fear the One (Jesus) who can destroy both body and soul in Gehenna (i.e. the Lake of Fire) (Matthew 10:28).

Also, again, "fear" is the beginning of knowledge (Proverbs 1:7).
But 1 John 4:18 says perfect love casts out fear.
How does one do that?
As I said before, he that keeps God's Word perfects God's love within their life (See 1 John 2:5).
So as you obey God, you put away the judgment and wrath of God and thereby you put away being in fear of God because you are obeying Him.
Jesus says if you love me, keep my commandments (John 14:15).

The thief on the cross rebuked the other thief for not fearing God.

"But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation?" (Luke 23:40).

This is because the thief who did not fear God was insulting to God (His insults were a violation the commandments of God and he did not care; It's because he had no fear of God).

Also, there are those who turned God's grace into a license for immorality (Jude 1:4), they fed themselves without fear.

"These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots;" (Jude 1:12).

Some believers save with fear.

"And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh." (Jude 1:23).

Conclusion:

As we can see the word "fear" means "fear" in the Bible. Do not fall for the non-sense of men who will seek to change God's Word because they do not like what it says.

Your entire post totally ignores the fact that words often have a variety of meanings. Consequently, your post is simply one long deflection of this fact.

 

[aiki]

I am sorry, but basic rules of grammar do not support you here.

Oh? Show how these "basic rules of grammar" don't support my explanations, then. Keep in mind that I used to teach High School grammar - among other subjects - and know English grammar very well. So, carry on. Show me how these "basic rules" defy my explanations.

You are inserting your own grammar fantasies into the text.

Well, show me that I have, then. Where are my "grammar fantasies," exactly?

Not one grammar teacher (who is not biased) would approve what you just wrote here. It's utter non-sense.

I'm a former grammar teacher. I approve what I wrote. The word "for" does exactly what I said it does. No grammar teacher (who is not biased) would disagree with me. Your "grammar objection" is sour grapes, I think, not an actual grammatical mistake on my part. Certainly, you haven't shown at all that "for" doesn't do what I said it does. You have simply asserted there is a problem without explaining what it is. You do this a great deal, you know.

A person can just change the meaning of the sentence around in Romans 8:13 using other things and see the falseness of what you are trying to propose.

Uh huh. I didn't change anything around. In my explanation of the purpose of "For," words remain where they are in the verses in question.

For example:

13 "If you drink lots of rat poison while you work, you will die, but if you drink lots of water while working on a hot day (as per the instructions of your company), you will live.
14 For as many who drink lots of water on a hot day are called "smart" within their company."

Stick to the verses themselves if you want to make a point about them. I'm not getting embroiled in discussing your false parallel here.

Verse 14 does not undo the first half of verse 13.

??? I never said it did.

A person is given a choice between two options in verse 13.

Two kinds of living and their consequences are described, yes.

Verse 14 is merely an extension of the latter half of verse 13.

Yes, but in what way? As I've said, the word "for" means that verse 14 gives the reason for, or is an explanation of, what is said in verse 13 (in particular, the last half which describes a person who is led of the Spirit).

The first half of verse 13 is not addressing an entirely different group of people here.

It is describing a particular kind of living that results in death. This fleshly living is in distinct contrast to living that, through the Spirit, "mortifies the deeds of the body" and results in life.

It's still talking to YOU the reader! For it uses the word "you" in there.

??? So? When have I indicated otherwise? And what does this have to do with what I wrote about the import of Romans 8:13-14? My point had nothing to do with the audience to Paul's words but with the fact that verse 14 explains the reason for the difference between the two kinds of living described in verse 13. A man who "mortifies the deeds of the body" does so because he is led of the Spirit (vs. 14), that is, he is saved. The contrast Paul offers to this kind of living is the fleshly living of one who is not led of the Spirit and thus is not saved. Paul, then, is describing the living of the lost and the saved; he is not teaching that one can lose one's salvation or that one's works are vital to making one saved. Show me where what I've explained here is wrong and not merely different from what you think.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Oh? Show how these "basic rules of grammar" don't support my explanations, then. Keep in mind that I used to teach High School grammar - among other subjects - and know English grammar very well. So, carry on. Show me how these "basic rules" defy my explanations.

Yeah, I remember you saying that you used to teach High School grammar before. I said a person who is not BIASED and is a grammar teacher would not agree with the interpretation that you have made. Do you want to honestly check it with professionals?

Be my guest.

https://editmypaper.ca/

I know they will not agree with you (if they are not OSAS proponents).

 

[JIMINZ]

Besides, there are plenty of verses that say we have to be fruitful in order to be saved.

”His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.”
(Matthew 25:21).

”And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness:
there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” (Matthew 25:30).

The whole of this Parable only pertains to those Jews of that Generation, spoken to by Jesus, the verses are about the Kingdom of Heaven (God)
Have nothing at all to do with Salvation, or the losing of it.

You don't quite get the concept, people can and do lose the Kingdom, but they cannot lose Salvation.

Maybe this will help you understand.

1) Explain what Salvation is, what we are Saved from.
2) Explain what the Kingdom of Heaven (God) is.

If you are able to explain them, you will be able to see they are not Synonymous.


Tell me truthfully, do you actually believe in a God who would come to earth suffer a Crucifixion for your soul, knowing all the while that you would walk away from that Salvation once received by you?....Really?

 

[BNR32FAN]

The Father indeed prunes and disciplines those whom he loves so that they REMAIN IN ME. Despite this, those believers who choose NOT TO REMAIN in the vine are USELESS and WITHER and thrown into the fire. Only believers have the choice whether to remain in Him. Unbelievers on the other hand, are not part of the vine in the first place as they are not attached to Jesus.

That would mean a nonbeliever can be in Christ and Christ is in that person. That’s not a nonbeliever. Just like the parable of the servant of the master. The servant is a believer and the master is God. That person is a servant of God otherwise they wouldn’t be a servant of the master if they didn’t believe. How can you be a servant if you don’t believe in the master?

 

[BNR32FAN]

.
Just a question, what is it in these verses, that brings you to the conclusion that this is a Parable?

Because we are not literally branches and Jesus is not literally a vine. It’s a metaphor.

 

[Oldmantook]

That would mean a nonbeliever can be in Christ and Christ is in that person. That’s not a nonbeliever. Just like the parable of the servant of the master. The servant is a believer and the master is God. That person is a servant of God otherwise they wouldn’t be a servant of the master if they didn’t believe. How can you be a servant if you don’t believe in the master?

One must be a believer in the first place in order to ABIDE. It is impossible for an unbeliever to abide since he/she is not in Christ. From the moment of belief, a believer has the choice whether of not to remain attached to the vine. A believer can detach from the vine through no longer believing and/or habitual disobedience.

 

[JIMINZ]

1) From the moment of belief, a believer has the choice whether of not to remain attached to the vine.

2)A believer can detach from the vine through no longer believing and/or habitual disobedience.

1) You make it sound as though from the moment of your Salvation you have been looking for a way out of it.

2) If you read very carefully, you will see, there is no mention of a branch breaking or pruning itself off of the vine, no not at all, this is because, the husbandman is the one who does the pruning of the branches, and he prunes the ones that have produced fruit, that they would produce even more fruit, then He cuts off those unproductive branches and has them cast into the fire.

The branch can only abide in the vine until the husbandman either prunes it, or removes it.

 

[JIMINZ]

Because we are not literally branches and Jesus is not literally a vine. It’s a metaphor.

.
With that as the criteria, is the Book of the Revelation also considered to be a Parable by you, because it is nothing but Metaphor?

 

[JakeyB123]

Brothers and sisters, this was not meant to be a debate. We can send scriptures but as far as that goes that should be the end, let the Lord speak to those who have a ear.

 

[BNR32FAN]

One must be a believer in the first place in order to ABIDE. It is impossible for an unbeliever to abide since he/she is not in Christ. From the moment of belief, a believer has the choice whether of not to remain attached to the vine. A believer can detach from the vine through no longer believing and/or habitual disobedience.

I would add that it is impossible for a believer to abide also. No matter how hard we try or how often we succeed we will all ultimately fail.

 

[BNR32FAN]

.
With that as the criteria, is the Book of the Revelation also considered to be a Parable by you, because it is nothing but Metaphor?

Not necessarily there is much that is not a parable in revelation. Chapters 2&3 are just one example

 

[Butch5]

I've been tossed between doctrines many times.
I come across scriptures that seem to support OSAS and some refute it.
I really want to stop being tossed and be justified by faith in Christ and not by the law, yet live holy before the Lord without saying is this getting me to heaven? But simply just knowing the truth... For example there's a scripture that talks about that some are ever-learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth, and I don't want that to be me...
Please explain to me if this supports OSAS somehow, or it simply refutes it.
The scripture is Matthew 24:48-51 KJV
Matthew 24:48-51 King James Version (KJV)
48 But and if that evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming;

49 And shall begin to smite his fellowservants, and to eat and drink with the drunken;

50 The lord of that servant shall come in a day when he looketh not for him, and in an hour that he is not aware of,

51 And shall cut him asunder, and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Brothers and sisters, this was not meant to be a debate. We can send scriptures but as far as that goes that should be the end, let the Lord speak to those who have a ear.

My beloved brothers and sisters, please do not be deceived by false doctrine.
Please, draw near to God by faith through the Spirit and listen to his voice.
For he is gentle and humble and he will teach you all you need to know.
He has moved so much in my life and a lot today and I have gained much understanding. Any disobedient and careless act can bring us to another unholy deed that can lead to many more. We are to workout our salvation. We are to test ourselves to see if we are in the faith.
My beloved brothers and sisters, please search the word of truth for yourself, do not listen to any website, family member, or church, but listen to the true word of God that liveth and abideth for ever. Please do not deny Jesus but allow him to speak to you.
Please before you read or answer below, take some time to humble yourself, draw near to God by faith, to be in the Spirit.
I ask that before answering you ask the Lord for understanding and wisdom.
May Jesus abundantly bless you with his knowledge, and many many miracles that worketh mightily in those who abideth in him. Praise the Lord!

UPDATE:
I have found many scriptures that just simply refute the doctrine I believe.
Here are two more -
James 5:19-20
Acts 5:1-11
Let no man deceive you!
If you have a answer for how these do not refute it, please post it below, thank you!

Yes, this passage refutes OSAS. There are quite a few of them. Osas is not a Biblical doctrine. It was rejected by the church and only became accepted by the Reformers when the Reformation came about. The Reformers were students of Augustine. It came from Gnostic thinking.

 

[Blood Bought 1953]

Yes, this passage refutes OSAS. There are quite a few of them. Osas is not a Biblical doctrine. It was rejected by the church and only became accepted by the Reformers when the Reformation came about. The Reformers were students of Augustine. It came from Gnostic thinking.

200 verses appear to say one can lose their salvation.....400 say you can’t......take your pick , but be aware that all the anti OSAS verses are either takeen out of context or are not addressing The Body of Christ