Once Saved Always Saved - Why is it so hard?

[Bible Highlighter]

I'd like to address OSAS believers:

I have spent most of my time appearing to argue against "conditional salvation", because (see previous post) my method of examination is to explore whether it is true. I do not do the same for OSAS, because I believed in it (right now, I am not sure whether OSAS is true).

Jason has been patient in addressing arguments from many people, but we need to take the time to only address what he is trying to say. I notice a lot of posts wasting time on semantics or points of view that have nothing to do with Jason's key message. We need to really try to understand why he believes what he believes, because we all must seek the truth. What if Jason's POV is the true interpretation?

I am struggling with it, because I think that for some verses, Jason has made some very strong arguments (in particular Romans 11:21) that stand alone, and are very difficult to argue away as meaning something else. It IS true that some verses are ALSO very difficult to interpret to mean anything other than "once saved always saved" - but that could be because I am interpreting it from an incorrect presupposition. That is my next step in this journey - to examine if alternative interpretations for key verses that imply OSAS could be interpreted another way (eg. Eph 2:8-9). I am going to do the reverse of what I've been trying to do so far - I will try to poke holes in OSAS interpretation to see if it lives up to scrutiny from an objective standpoint.

Thank you for striving to be objective.
The Biblical Conditional Salvation View teaches that Ephesians 2:8-9 and Titus 3:5 are dealing with Initial Salvation.

James 2:17 says faith without works is dead.
Our works or God's works?

Well, we do not seek to save ourselves by our own power alone.
Jesus is the One who does the good work thru us (in Sanctification) by faith.
We are saved by Jesus both in believing in Jesus and by allowing Jesus to work in our lives (to do His will according to His Word).

Also, Paul was referencing the works of the Law of Moses and not all law whatsoever in his writings to the various churches. So when Paul says that we are not under the Law, he is talking about the Old Law. This is obvious by the fact that he talks about "circumcision" which is something that is commanded in the 613 Old Testament Laws and not in the New Testament Laws or Commands. Jesus said he came not to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it (i.e. to fulfill by His obedience to the death of the cross and to fulfill the Law in being more perfect in that the New Covenant Law focuses on love). For Hebrews 7:12 says the Law has changed.

A person is ultimately saved by God's grace because if they slip up into sin briefly on the road to overcoming sin they do not go out and do another work so as to get grace or to get clean or forgiven. They confess their sins to Jesus so as to get cleansed and forgiven. They believe He is their Savior and they throw themselves down before the mercy of the Lord. From that point, the Lord will work thru the believer. So no believer can boast in their own work or boast in themselves or falsely claim that they are saving themselves. It's all about Jesus.


...

 

[supescritter]

Jason,

I must say that I am not fully convinced that "conditional salvation" is the truth, but nor am I convinced yet that "OSAS" is the truth either. I am still exploring.

The part I am struggling with "conditional salvation" is still the motivation part. God wants us to live holy lives - absolutely. We cannot refute that, the Bible gives us clear verses that say that if we love Jesus, we obey him and he has clearly stated how he wants us to live.

However, OSAS believes that we live holy lives to please him not because we will be punished if we don't. This message had never been preached in human history then and now by any other religion. I believe that the highest form of holiness is to obey for no other reason than because we want to please him. If we get thrown into hell if we don't obey then 2 things become true:
1. obedience is motivated out of fear of hell
2. we depend on our own righteousness and effort (our own merit)

There is NO room for unforced, willful love in "conditional salvation" theology. As soon as you throw in the "you go to hell if you disobey", you remove a pure selfless motivation for being holy. That is a fact.

OSAS beliefs lead the Bible to becoming a love story from Genesis to Revelation. In the beginning God knew man cannot lead a sinless life. When Adam and Eve ate of the fruit, they became beings of motivated by merit - striving to be perfect through their own knowledge of good and evil. God spends most of history trying to show them that they can never succeed in their own merit. Then Jesus comes and restores that perfect family relationship with the Father (the only condition being that we accept the gift) where we are no longer led by merit - but by grace alone.

Everything that seems wrong in this world is because man's way is to live by merit. People are poor because of merit. Couples divorce because of merit. Countries go to war because of merit. People rape and kill because of merit. OSAS believes that Jesus restored perfection where the consequences of not measuring up no longer results in a permanent separation from God. This beautiful message doesn't exist with "conditional salvation" beliefs - we are still under merit - we are still under the curse of Adam (living under merit). I am not saying "conditional salvation" is false, but this is the part I struggle with the most.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Jason,

I must say that I am not fully convinced that "conditional salvation" is the truth, but nor am I convinced yet that "OSAS" is the truth either. I am still exploring.

The part I am struggling with "conditional salvation" is still the motivation part. God wants us to live holy lives - absolutely. We cannot refute that, the Bible gives us clear verses that say that if we love Jesus, we obey him and he has clearly stated how he wants us to live.

However, OSAS believes that we live holy lives to please him not because we will be punished if we don't. This message had never been preached in human history then and now by any other religion. I believe that the highest form of holiness is to obey for no other reason than because we want to please him.
.

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

Fear of God to depart evil is not in conflict with the truth of God's Word.
Job 28:28 says the fear of the Lord is wisdom but to depart from evil is understanding.

If we get thrown into hell if we don't obey then 2 things become true:
1. obedience is motivated out of fear of hell

Actually, while this can be the reason for some, that is not always the case for others. Others have been motivated by both fear and love. They fear God knowing they could be destroyed in the Lake of Fire for their sin and yet they also love God because they are grateful for the way of escape God has provided for them (thru Jesus Christ).

2. we depend on our own righteousness and effort

No. There are no rules or regulation that you write down for yourself. All commands come from God's Holy Word and it is God or Christ that helps you to obey His Word. For Jesus says you can do nothing without me (John 15:5).

There is NO room for unforced, willful love in "conditional salvation" theology.

Because forced love is not true love. True love is when two parties both agree of their own free will to love each other. For example: If you passionately have fallen in love with a girl, and she does not feel the same way, you cannot force your love upon her. True love is when both agree to love each other.

As soon as you throw in the "you go to hell if you disobey", you remove a pure selfless motivation for being holy. That is a fact.

Not true, my friend. Certain believers from the beginning of their faith are motivated by both fear and love to obey God. Also, certain other believers who fear God alone in the beginning of their faith will eventually learn to know of the love of God and be motivated by that love. But on the flip side with OSAS, it is not even an option. For if a person sins and says they are loving God, they are acting out of selfish sinful motivations to serve their flesh. So their motives are not selfless or pure. In addition, they are also going against the standard of God's holiness that is set forth within His Word, as well (Which is sin - 1 John 3:4). They really cannot be holy in this type of belief because teaching that you can break God's Commands and be saved is not a holy position but an unholy one. God can no more support a person for breaking His commands under any circumstance and be cool with it than say for rain not to be wet because God is holy, good, and righteous. 1 John 2:4 says he that says he knows Him and does not keep His commandments is a liar and the truth is not in Him. Does this mean there is no grace? No. But grace is not a license to sin but it is a means to overcome sin. Therein lies the difference.


...

 

[HatGuy]

Jason,

I must say that I am not fully convinced that "conditional salvation" is the truth, but nor am I convinced yet that "OSAS" is the truth either. I am still exploring.

The part I am struggling with "conditional salvation" is still the motivation part. God wants us to live holy lives - absolutely. We cannot refute that, the Bible gives us clear verses that say that if we love Jesus, we obey him and he has clearly stated how he wants us to live.

However, OSAS believes that we live holy lives to please him not because we will be punished if we don't. This message had never been preached in human history then and now by any other religion. I believe that the highest form of holiness is to obey for no other reason than because we want to please him. If we get thrown into hell if we don't obey then 2 things become true:
1. obedience is motivated out of fear of hell
2. we depend on our own righteousness and effort

There is NO room for unforced, willful love in "conditional salvation" theology. As soon as you throw in the "you go to hell if you disobey", you remove a pure selfless motivation for being holy. That is a fact.

OSAS beliefs lead the Bible to becoming a love story from Genesis to Revelation. In the beginning God knew man cannot lead a sinless life. When Adam and Eve ate of the fruit, they became beings of motivated by merit - striving to be perfect through their own knowledge of good and evil. God spends most of history trying to show them that they can never succeed in their own merit. Then Jesus comes and restores that perfect family relationship with the Father (the only condition being that we accept the gift) where we are no longer led by merit - but by grace alone.

Everything that seems wrong in this world is because man's way is to live by merit. People are poor because of merit. Couples divorce because of merit. Countries go to war because of merit. People rape and kill because of merit. OSAS believes that Jesus restored perfection where the consequences of not measuring up no longer results in a permanent separation from God. This beautiful message doesn't exist with "conditional salvation" beliefs - we are still under merit - we are still under the curse of Adam (living under merit). I am not saying "conditional salvation" is false, but this is the part I struggle with the most.

Hi supescritter,

What do you think of my alternative view on the matter?

Mine says you can lose your salvation, but only via a loss of faith and not by sin.

This puts faith in the very centre if it all, as opposed to works. It makes salvation very difficult to lose but accounts for scriptures that show it can be lost.

You will notice that Romans 11 is purely referencing faith, not works. The branches were broken off because of unbelief, but you stand by faith (vs 20). The cutting off is conditioned around faith vs unbelief, and not sin or works. The whole chapter's context is in reference to faith.

Conditional salvation means salvation is conditioned on faith, not works. (As opposed to Calvinism which ultimately conditions it on predestination; As opposed to semi-Pelagianism which conditions it on works).

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Hi supescritter,

What do you think of my alternative view on the matter?

Mine says you can lose your salvation, but only via a loss of faith and not by sin.

This puts faith in the very centre if it all, as opposed to works. It makes salvation very difficult to lose but accounts for scriptures that show it can be lost.

You will notice that Romans 11 is purely referencing faith, not works. The branches were broken off because of unbelief, but you stand by faith (vs 20). The cutting off is conditioned around faith vs unbelief, and not sin or works. The whole chapter's context is in reference to faith.

Conditional salvation means salvation is conditioned on faith, not works. (As opposed to Calvinism which ultimately conditions it on predestination; As opposed to semi-Pelagianism which conditions it on works).

Your belief is not all that different from OSAS.
You say that sin does not cause a separation from God.
Yet, you do not believe in OSAS.
You believe unbelief is what causes one to fall away from the faith.
However, your belief is still a doctrine that justifies that one can sin and still be saved (Which is a doctrine of immorality).

Sin is unbelief.

God sets forth commands in His Holy Word.
If you do not believe them and thereby break these laws, you are in sin.
For sin is transgression of the Law (1 John 3:4).
Faith without works is dead (James 2:17).
Whatsoever is not of faith is sin (Romans 14:23).
Jesus says if you do not forgive, you will not be forgiven (Matthew 6:15).
All liars will have their part in the Lake of Fire (Revelation 21:8).
God said to Adam,
"in the day that you eat thereof you shall surely die." (Genesis 2:17).
The devil tried to convince Eve of the lie that she would not die if she disobeyed God's command (Genesis 3:4).
Yet, this is the same lie that is being pushed by the devil today.
"Yea, you shall not surely die."
1 John 3:8 says he that commits sin is of the devil.
1 John 3:20 says he that does evil hates the light.
Unless their evil deeds are reproved (repented of) (See the KJV).
1 John 3:15 says, "Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him."
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..

In other words, 1 John 3:10 says that anyone does not righteousness (i.e. they sin) is not of God. So there is no... Hey, I can sin and still be saved type belief going on here.

God is good.
And He desires His people are good, too.
Meaning, God holds His people to a set standard of morality.


...

 

[stuart lawrence]

How can it be my own righteousness if it is a righteous standard or command put forth by God within His own Word under the New Testament?




...

Not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law but that which I through faith in Christ. The righteousness that comes from God and is by faith
Phil3:9

 

[HatGuy]

Your belief is not all that different from OSAS.
It still is a doctrine that justifies that one can sin and still be saved (Which is a doctrine of immorality).

Sin is unbelief.

God sets forth commands in His Holy Word.
If you do not believe them and thereby break these laws, you are in sin.
For sin is transgression of the Law (1 John 3:4).
Faith without works is dead (James 2:17).
Whatsoever is not of faith is sin (Romans 14:23).
Jesus says if you do not forgive, you will not be forgiven (Matthew 6:15).
God said in the day you eat of the fruit to Adam you will die (Genesis 2:17).
The devil tried to convince Eve of the lie that she would not die if she disobeyed God's command (Genesis 3:4).
Yet, this is the same lie that is being pushed by the devil today.
"Yea, you shall not surely die."
1 John 3:8 says he that commits sin is of the devil.
1 John 3:20 says he that does evil hates the light.
Unless their evil deeds are reproved (repented of) that is (See the KJV).
1 John 3:15 says, "Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him."
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..

In other words, 1 John 3:10 says that anyone does not righteousness (i.e. they sin) is not of God. So there is no... Hey, I can sin and still be saved type belief going on here.

God is good.
And He desires His people are good, too.
Meaning, God holds His people to a set standard of morality.


...

I already replied in length on some of this in my previous post to you, which you said you're thinking of getting to only later.

Romans 11 and Hebrews 6 are key scriptures and chapters I'm keen on hearing you exegete. These are the most clear scriptures about loss of salvation that clearly show it is faith that is the concern, not sinning.

In my previous post I spoke about how Romans 14:23, which you've quoted, proves my point. You would really have to engage on a deeper level of exegesis to be convincing enough on this point.

Please address that post if you want to have this discussion.

Here is also another question I think helps to address the starting point of convergence. Who makes the first move toward God and an individual: God or the individual?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law but that which I through faith in Christ. The righteousness that comes from God and is by faith
Phil3:9

And the context...

"Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision." (Philippians 3:2 KJV).

"Watch out for those dogs, those people who do evil, those mutilators who say you must be circumcised to be saved." (Philippians 3:2 NLT).


...

 

[stuart lawrence]

And the context...

"Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision." (Philippians 3:2 KJV).

"Watch out for those dogs, those people who do evil, those mutilators who say you must be circumcised to be saved." (Philippians 3:2 NLT).


...

You asked how you could be seeking a righteousness of your own.

Paul clearly states a righteousness of your own is a righteousness of observing the law

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I already replied in length on some of this in my previous post to you, which you said you're thinking of getting to only later.

Romans 11 and Hebrews 6 are key scriptures and chapters I'm keen on hearing you exegete. These are the most clear scriptures about loss of salvation that clearly show it is faith that is the concern, not sinning.

In my previous post I spoke about how Romans 14:23, which you've quoted, proves my point. You would really have to engage on a deeper level of exegesis to be convincing enough on this point.

Please address that post if you want to have this discussion.

Yes, you wrote a rather super long post. I was replying to it today. I am only in the beginning part of your post and my reply is long, as well (So that it will leave no shadow of a doubt of what the truth of God's Word says on the matter). Needless to say, I needed to take a break. But I will get back to it.

Here is also another question I think helps to address the starting point of convergence. Who makes the first move toward God and an individual: God or the individual?

Faulty assumptions can be made off this premise, though. Just because God makes the first move does not mean that God force saves people against their own free will. That is not love. Love is when two people both agree to love one another. Ask any married loving couple who are madly in love with each other. The engaged man did not win her over by forcing his love upon her. That would go against everything we know about love. For without free will there is no true love.


...

 

[Bible Highlighter]

You asked how you could be seeking a righteousness of your own.

Paul clearly states a righteousness of your own is a righteousness of observing the law

The context says that this "Law" is the Law of Moses because verse 2 references how we are to watch out for those who seek for us to be circumcised so as to be saved. Circumcision is something that is exclusive to the Old Covenant and not the New Covenant.


...

 

[stuart lawrence]

I do not commit sin that leads unto the Second Death as a way of life. There are many days I do not faulter. If I do slip on rare occasion, I confess and forsake such a sin. But I would categorize my walk as upright and not steeped in sin. Minor faults like not being baptized is not the same as murder. There is also an unforgivable sin. That is speaking bad words against the Holy Ghost. But OSAS Proponents believe this is about rejecting the faith even though the text does not say that. You may mock the believer who desires to obey God, but that will only make things worse for you (if you do so).

Anyways, I am frankly no longer interested in talking with you anymore.
I agree that people should read the Word of God in what we have both written and also read the fruits of our own words as a testimony to the truth.

People are going to do either the right thing or the wrong thing on this matter. Those who believe in God's goodness or morality will not tolerate in breaking God's commands; For they will realize that the wages of sin is death.



...

There are many days you do not falter?
On rare occasions you slip?

You don't understand where the bar is truly set concerning observing the law.

And your words contradict your beliefs
For you do not even try and obey every literal command of Christ. Therefore, according to your own belief you sin daily!

I'm sorry Jason, but as I keep stressing, your beliefs can only lead one of two places.
Hard nosed hypocrisy, or giving up crushed.
You haven't done the latter have you

 

[stuart lawrence]

The context says that this "Law" is the Law of Moses because verse 2 references how we are to watch out for those who seek for us to be circumcised so as to be saved. Circumcision is something that is exclusive to the Old Covenant and not the New Covenant.


...

That is a ridiculous comment.

If you believe you have a righteousness of observing any law you have a righteousness of your own under the law, whatever law That is.

 

[HatGuy]

Yes, you wrote a rather super long post. I was replying to it today. I am only in the beginning part of your post and my reply is long, as well (So that it will leave no shadow of a doubt of what the truth of God's Word says on the matter). Needless to say, I needed to take a break.



Faulty assumptions can be made off this premise, though. Just because God makes the first move does not mean that God force saves people against their own free will. That is not love. Love is when two people both agree to love one another. Ask any married loving couple who are madly in love with each other. The engaged man did not win her over by forcing his love upon her. That would go against everything we know about love. For without free will there is no true love.


...

Great, thanks, looking forward to the reply.

I ask the question to assess whether you are semi-Pelagian [emoji2] . Your answer seems to point that God makes the first move. That means you aren't really semi-Pelagian.

Then the next question is simple: why did Jesus die? What does his death and resurrection achieve?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Great, thanks, looking forward to the reply.

I ask the question to assess whether you are semi-Pelagian [emoji2] . Your answer seems to point that God makes the first move. That means you aren't really semi-Pelagian.

Then the next question is simple: why did Jesus die? What does his death and resurrection achieve?

No. Semi Pelaginism belief says,

"Semi-Pelaginism acknowledges that man's will and nature are somewhat affected (injured) by the Fall, but mankind retains libertarian free will. The end result is essentially the same as the Arminian view -- the difference being free will "by nature" rather than by the Arminian's universal prevenient grace. In Semi-Pelagianism, man has a free will essentially unaffected by the fall and not limited by his natural desires, inclinations, or prior dispositions. By way of reference, Pelagianism says man's will (and nature) is not affected at all by the Fall."

Free will | Theopedia

Nowhere does Semi Pelanginism deny that God cannot make the first move. Jesus knocking on the door of our heart or Christ drawing all men unto Himself is not in conflict with man's free will choice to accept Jesus.


...

 

[stuart lawrence]

Great, thanks, looking forward to the reply.

I ask the question to assess whether you are semi-Pelagian [emoji2] . Your answer seems to point that God makes the first move. That means you aren't really semi-Pelagian.

Then the next question is simple: why did Jesus die? What does his death and resurrection achieve?

If Jason doesn't answer the question why did Jesus die? I can answer it from a previous discussion with him. Just ask

 

[supescritter]

No. There are no rules or regulation that you write down for yourself. All commands come from God's Holy Word and it is God or Christ that helps you to obey His Word. For Jesus says you can do nothing without me (John 15:5).

I think this is a fundamental difference of terms we should settle before we can continue. When OSAS believer say 'conditional salvation' believers are living under their own righteousness, they merely mean "When the Bible says do not lie, 'conditional salvation' believers believe that when they do not lie - they prevented themselves from going to hell and therefore their own efforts to not lie saved themselves from the sin of lying". I have read nothing that you've written so far to refute this thinking. If you refrain from 'lying', then you depended on your successful effort of righteousness to prevent yourself from going to hell for lying - which is what OSAS believers mean "you depended on your own efforts/righteousness/merit to save you from hell".

The OSAS believer believes that even if they lie, they will still go to heaven because they believe their righteousness comes ONLY from Jesus, not because they made any effort to not lie.

Because forced love is not true love. True love is when two parties both agree of their own free will to love each other. For example: If you passionately have fallen in love with a girl, and she does not feel the same way, you cannot force your love upon her. True love is when both agree to love each other.

When I say "forced love", I mean the threat of hell gives the Christian a motivation to not sin that is based on punishment - this is forced love - that God forces us to love him through threat of hell. If I tell my spouse to stop saying "jerk" otherwise I will smash their car, it is impossible for them to stop saying "jerk" purely because they want to please me, because I have added the punishment as a motivator. For OSAS believers, there is only ONE motivation for obeying any of Jesus' commandments to be holy: that is 'because they choose to'. I believe that choosing to obey for no other reason than to please God is the highest form of holiness.

I contend that the greatest threat/punishment that God could EVER level against a Christian is throwing them to hell, and therefore placing hell as a condition of holiness strips away the 'no other reason than because I want to please God' as a motivator for doing good.

Not true, my friend. Certain believers from the beginning of their faith are motivated by both fear and love to obey God. Also, certain other believers who fear God alone in the beginning of their faith will eventually learn to know of the love of God and be motivated by that love. But on the flip side with OSAS, it is not even an option. For if a person sins and says they are loving God, they are acting out of selfish sinful motivations to serve their flesh. So their motives are not selfless or pure. In addition, they are also going against the standard of God's holiness that is set forth within His Word, as well (Which is sin - 1 John 3:4). They really cannot be holy in this type of belief because teaching that you can break God's Commands and be saved is not a holy position but an unholy one. God can no more support a person for breaking His commands under any circumstance and be cool with it than say for rain not to be wet because God is holy, good, and righteous. 1 John 2:4 says he that says he knows Him and does not keep His commandments is a liar and the truth is not in Him. Does this mean there is no grace? No. But grace is not a license to sin but it is a means to overcome sin. Therein lies the difference.

...

I just want to address the point you're making by saying that "Christians cannot say they love God if they continue to sin". This is not the point I was trying to make. Of course Christians can't say they love God if they continue to sin. What I am really saying is: "Christians can say they love God if they want to turn away from sin" - but that "love" is NOT PURE if there is a threat of hell if the Christian does not turn away from sin. We can explain it away (that living holy is not at least in part motivated by avoiding hell), but we would be living in a wilful state of denial - denying an inconvenient fact because it makes us feel uncomfortable.

The core of an OSAS belief is that Christians are ONLY motivated to be holy because they love God. That is the only motivation, because they believe the motivator of 'going to hell' does not exist. Therefore the ONLY reason for being holy is because that's what Jesus wants. It is no longer based on one's own merit, being holy is solely to please God. "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, soul and strength" has a whole new meaning in this light because the OSAS believer can say that "I obeyed you God because I chose to, even though I could have chosen to live a sinful life without fear of punishment" - this is something the "conditional salvation" believer can't say. The CS believer is forced to accept the position that "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, soul and strength - or else you'll go to hell".

My main regret about fully adopting a position of "conditional salvation" theology, is at the back of my mind, I know for a fact that I am believing I will punished if I am not holy by my own efforts/merit - I can't deny this inconvenient fact.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

That is a ridiculous comment.

If you believe you have a righteousness of observing any law you have a righteousness of your own under the law, whatever law That is.

Context is everything.
So it is not ridiculous.
Jesus said He came not to destroy the Law.
Hebrews 7:12 says the Law has changed.
Galatians 6:2 says there is a Law of Christ.
Romans 8:2 says there is a Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus.
Romans 8:2 says this New Law makes us free from another Law called the Law of Sin and Death (Which is obviously the Law of Moses).


...

 

[HatGuy]

No. Semi Pelaginism belief says,

"Semi-Pelaginism acknowledges that man's will and nature are somewhat affected (injured) by the Fall, but mankind retains libertarian free will. The end result is essentially the same as the Arminian view -- the difference being free will "by nature" rather than by the Arminian's universal prevenient grace. In Semi-Pelagianism, man has a free will essentially unaffected by the fall and not limited by his natural desires, inclinations, or prior dispositions. By way of reference, Pelagianism says man's will (and nature) is not affected at all by the Fall."

Free will | Theopedia

Nowhere does Semi Pelanginism deny that God cannot make the first move. Jesus knocking on the door of our heart or Christ drawing all men unto Himself is not in conflict with man's free will choice to accept Jesus.


...

There's more to it than that. Wikipedia states:

"In semipelagian thought, man does not have such an unrestrained capacity, but man and God could cooperate to a certain degree in this salvation effort: man can (unaided by grace) make the first move toward God, and God then increases and guards that faith, completing the work of salvation.[7] This teaching is distinct from the traditional patristic doctrine of synergeia, in which the process of salvation is cooperation between God and man from start to finish."

Does it not follow that if mankind has a free Will unaffected by the fall, then people can (and do) come to God (make the first move) without God initiating?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

If Jason doesn't answer the question why did Jesus die? I can answer it from a previous discussion with him. Just ask

Hebrews 5:9
1 John 3:8.
2 Corinthians 5:15.


...