"If you could lose your salvation, you would."

[Tree of Life]

I recently came across this quote from John MacArthur. I don't love everything from him (see footnotes on dispensationalism), but I thought that this hit the nail on the head.

It's the simplest and best argument for OSAS (aside from its overwhelming Scriptural evidence) that I can think of.

How can anyone who is truly saved deny this? If you truly know the power of God and the depths of your own sin, how can you deny this?

You'd have to say something like:

"Well I wouldn't lose my salvation because I'm determined!" or
"I wouldn't lose my salvation because I'm smart!",
"I had a good upbringing!",
"I'm stronger than most!"​

Isn't it much better to say:

"If I am saved at all it is because the marvelous strength and grace of God which he continually supplies me"?​

To say that you can lose your salvation (as if some part of it depends on you), and then to hope that you won't lose your salvation (because, after all, you're pretty serious about God) is the height of arrogance!

 

[A_Thinker]

I recently came across this quote from John MacArthur. I don't love everything from him (see footnotes on dispensationalism), but I thought that this hit the nail on the head.

It's the simplest and best argument for OSAS (aside from its overwhelming Scriptural evidence) that I can think of.

How can anyone who is truly saved deny this? If you truly know the power of God and the depths of your own sin, how can you deny this?

You'd have to say something like: "Well I wouldn't lose my salvation because I'm determined!" or "I wouldn't lose my salvation because I'm smart!", "I had a good upbringing!", "I'm stronger than most!"

Isn't it much better to say: "If I am saved at all it is because the marvelous strength and grace of God which he continually supplies me!"

To say that you can lose your salvation (as if some part of it depends on you), and then to hope that you won't lose your salvation is the height of arrogance!

Say that !!!

 

[razzelflabben]

I recently came across this quote from John MacArthur. I don't love everything from him (see footnotes on dispensationalism), but I thought that this hit the nail on the head.

It's the simplest and best argument for OSAS (aside from its overwhelming Scriptural evidence) that I can think of.

How can anyone who is truly saved deny this? If you truly know the power of God and the depths of your own sin, how can you deny this?

You'd have to say something like: "Well I wouldn't lose my salvation because I'm determined!" or "I wouldn't lose my salvation because I'm smart!", "I had a good upbringing!", "I'm stronger than most!"

Isn't it much better to say: "If I am saved at all it is because the marvelous strength and grace of God which he continually supplies me"?

To say that you can lose your salvation (as if some part of it depends on you), and then to hope that you won't lose your salvation (because, after all, you're pretty serious about God) is the height of arrogance!

I am not following your argument at least as it applies to non OSAS teaching, can you clarify for me based on non OSAS teaching not on the twisted versions that are used to justify OSAS teaching...thanks I just want to make sure I understand before saying anything for or against either side of the issue.

 

[Tree of Life]

I am not following your argument at least as it applies to non OSAS teaching, can you clarify for me based on non OSAS teaching not on the twisted versions that are used to justify OSAS teaching...thanks I just want to make sure I understand before saying anything for or against either side of the issue.

I'm sorry. I'm not sure what you're asking for here.

 

[razzelflabben]

I'm sorry. I'm not sure what you're asking for here.

non OSAS teaches that we are saved by grace through faith, just like OSAS teaches...the only difference is whether or not we can return the gift of salvation. OSAS teaches that we loss our right to return or reject Christ after coming to the point of salvation. NOn OSAS teaches that we retain our right to choose who we will follow thus are able to return or reject both salvation and God after we have believed unto salvation.

IOWs neither side is claiming it is anything we do, only that we don't loss the right of free will choice. Something that both sides assume were in place to begin with. So how does the above statement speak against what NON OSAS teaches?

 

[A_Thinker]

I am not following your argument at least as it applies to non OSAS teaching, can you clarify for me based on non OSAS teaching not on the twisted versions that are used to justify OSAS teaching...thanks I just want to make sure I understand before saying anything for or against either side of the issue.

I believe that the OP is asking the question ... "Do we truly believe that we can "hold on" to a salvation ... that we had no strength to acquire in the first place ?"

 

[Tree of Life]

non OSAS teaches that we are saved by grace through faith, just like OSAS teaches...the only difference is whether or not we can return the gift of salvation. OSAS teaches that we loss our right to return or reject Christ after coming to the point of salvation. NOn OSAS teaches that we retain our right to choose who we will follow thus are able to return or reject both salvation and God after we have believed unto salvation.

IOWs neither side is claiming it is anything we do, only that we don't loss the right of free will choice. Something that both sides assume were in place to begin with. So how does the above statement speak against what NON OSAS teaches?

Well I suppose according to this rendering, you'd be suggesting that, once saved, a person can freely choose to "return the gift" and, thus, lose their salvation.

MacArthur says that if you can return the gift, then you would return the gift. The reason is because you're sinful and "prone to wander".

If you say: "Well not necessarily. I might choose to keep the gift!" Then you are presuming upon your own resolve and faithfulness in order to keep your salvation. This is an arrogant presumption which misunderstands the sinfulness of the human heart.

 

[Emli]

I do not believe in OSAS exactly as a lot of people define it, but I know this by now: If I could lose my salvation, I already would have...

 

[Tree of Life]

I do not believe in OSAS exactly as a lot of people define it, but I know this by now: If I could lose my salvation, I already would have...

Sounds like OSAS to me!

 

[razzelflabben]

I believe that the OP is asking the question ... "Do we truly believe that we can "hold on" to a salvation ... that we had no strength to acquire in the first place ?"

well that isn't about OSAS then, that is something totally unrelated as per the teachings which is why I am confused. Thanks for clarifying...so are we talking then about OSAS or about holding onto our salvation?

 

[A_Thinker]

non OSAS teaches that we are saved by grace through faith, just like OSAS teaches...the only difference is whether or not we can return the gift of salvation. OSAS teaches that we loss our right to return or reject Christ after coming to the point of salvation. NOn OSAS teaches that we retain our right to choose who we will follow thus are able to return or reject both salvation and God after we have believed unto salvation.

IOWs neither side is claiming it is anything we do, only that we don't loss the right of free will choice. Something that both sides assume were in place to begin with. So how does the above statement speak against what NON OSAS teaches?

So ... your position is that we can GIVE BACK our salvation ... as is sort of described in Hebrews 6 ...

4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6 if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame.

... but it is NOT your position that you can LOSE your salvation, due to a FAILURE to HOLD ON to it ?

I am not sure that I disagree ...

 

[razzelflabben]

Sounds like OSAS to me!

NON OSAS teaching says that we don't loss our right to choose it says nothing about having the power or strength to hold onto the salvation in the first place. That is just a misconception that many OSAS people promote in order to push their beliefs to the forefront...something that is distasteful but both sides do.

 

[razzelflabben]

So ... your position is that we can GIVE BACK our salvation ... as is sort of described in Hebrews 6 ...

4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6 if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame.

... but it is NOT your position that you can LOSE your salvation, due to a FAILURE to HOLD ON to it ?

I am not sure that I disagree ...

close enough if we are discussing holding onto our salvation vs. OSAS teaching.

consider this Romans 8 teaches that God is the one that holds us secure as far as salvation goes and that nothing can pluck us from His hand. The OSAS argument usually goes that that means we can't even remove ourselves from His hand and yet there is nothing about our losing our free will choice after we believe with the heart unto salvation. In order for the OSAS teaching to be right we would have to loss our right to choice. I don't see anything in scripture that says we do.

But to clarify, both sides usually believe that God holds us secure, or another way to say it is that our salvation is not about our ability to hold ourselves anywhere but rather God's ability to keep us protected in His might power.

 

[Emli]

Sounds like OSAS to me!

Yes, it does. But I also know people who have lost their salvation, because they decided to leave the faith completely... So I believe OSAS is only for those who continue in faith until the end, and for those who stray and come back, because God will uphold those who love Him, but not for those who choose to leave and remain in the world. But it's all about faith, and not about whether we sin or not. So that's why I don't agree with OSAS completely.

 

[Tree of Life]

So ... your position is that we can GIVE BACK our salvation ... as is sort of described in Hebrews 6 ...

4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6 if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame.

... but it is NOT your position that you can LOSE your salvation, due to a FAILURE to HOLD ON to it ?

I am not sure that I disagree ...

"Give back" and "lose due to a failure to hold on" have no real significant difference in this context.

 

[razzelflabben]

Yes, it does. But I also know people who have lost their salvation, because they decided to leave the faith completely... So I believe OSAS is only for those who continue in faith until the end, and for those who stray and come back, because God will uphold those who love Him, but not for those who choose to leave and remain in the world. But it's all about faith, and not about whether we sin or not. So that's why I don't agree with OSAS completely.

What I have found over the years is that most of the time the OSAS crowd and the non OSAS crowd talk past one another because they are too busy trying to argue things that the other does NOT teach so that their arguments sound better. If we set aside the rhetoric and just discuss scripture we might decide we agree more than disagree we just don't really know how to express that

 

[razzelflabben]

"Give back" and "lose due to a failure to hold on" have no real significant difference in this context.

sure they do....there is a huge difference between having the strength to hold onto something and purposefully letting go.

Let's say that someone is dangling off the edge of a cliff. I grab hold of the persons hand....are you seriously telling me you don't see a difference between the person who is falling holding onto my hand the best they can and them purposely letting go?

 

[Tree of Life]

Yes, it does. But I also know people who have lost their salvation, because they decided to leave the faith completely... So I believe OSAS is only for those who continue in faith until the end, and for those who stray and come back, because God will uphold those who love Him, but not for those who choose to leave and remain in the world. But it's all about faith, and not about whether we sin or not. So that's why I don't agree with OSAS completely.

I think you've gotten yourself in a situation where you're saying two things at once. You've just said on this thread:

1. I don't think I can lose my salvation. If I could, I would have lost it by now
2. I know people who have lost their salvation.

So which is it?

We all know people who have apostatized - walked away from the church and the faith. But the OSAS (and biblical) perspective on apostates is that they never truly had salvation to begin with even though they professed faith and were in the church. A genuine salvation cannot be lost.

 

[Emli]

What I have found over the years is that most of the time the OSAS crowd and the non OSAS crowd talk past one another because they are too busy trying to argue things that the other does NOT teach so that their arguments sound better. If we set aside the rhetoric and just discuss scripture we might decide we agree more than disagree we just don't really know how to express that

I completely agree. That's why I don't like the term. I believe all terms like that limit the understanding of Scripture. So does rhetorics and arguments in general.

 

[razzelflabben]

I think you've gotten yourself in a situation where you're saying two things at once. You've just said on this thread:

1. I don't think I can lose my salvation. If I could, I would have lost it by now
2. I know people who have lost their salvation.

So which is it?

We all know people who have apostatized - walked away from the church and the faith. But the OSAS (and biblical) perspective on apostates is that they never truly had salvation to begin with even though they professed faith and were in the church. A genuine salvation cannot be lost.

Non OSAS teaching says that one cannot loss what they never had...aka genuine salvation.

It further teaches that a simple sin is not enough to loss our salvation over for there is still forgiveness when we have a moment of weakness. As I said, there is much more agreement then disagreement on the issue if you actually just listen to one another.