Once Saved Always Saved??

[DawnTillery]

I attend General baptist and we do not believe that, we believe you can fall away, we believe God will not pluck you from His hand, but you surely can jump out..

I am always seeking understanding into the hereneutics of my fellow Christians. How does a Baptist understand these texts which, to others appear to contradict the idea of OSAS?

1 Corinthians 10:1-12 where Paul seems to be warning the Christians about falling away esp. when Paul concludes, Let him that stands take heed lest he fall.

Luke 8:13 IN the middle of Jesus explanation of the Parable of the Sower, he tells that some believe for awhile, but in a time of testing, they fall away.

John 15. If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch....

Romans 8:13 if you live according to the flesh, you will die. (This text is addressed to the believers in Rome and I would argue a text that warns them that if they continue to live a sinful lifestyle, they will perish eternally)

Finally Hebrews 6:4 Paul warns that those who have been believers, if they fall away, cannot even be brought back.

I look forward to your explanations

Thanks much.

 

[SteveR2021]

I hate to repeat myself, but it seems folks are posting without reading previous posts. Can you answer the following questions?

I'm sorry to make you repeat yourself. I had no intention of debating you because I recognize that you are Calvinist and I am not. I merely shared my view...

I would like to comment on one statement however...

Did not Christ's death pay for your sin of turning away?

Lockheed that is VERY dangerous theology. Christ's death covers all sins...but you and i must repent of them (remember that both John the Baptist and Jesus came preaching repentance). You cannot repent for sins you have not committed...

Repentance is something I do (with God's help). Remember that if my faith is not backed up by deeds it is dead. "The decisive issue is whether or not they obey my Father in heaven (Matt 7:21)."

To say that my future rejection of Christ is somehow automatically covered is nowhere found in Scripture.

Consider these words:

"Well then, should we keep on sinning so that God can show us more and more kindness and forgiveness? Of course not! Since we have died to sin, how can we continue to live in it? Or have you forgotten that when we became Christians and were baptized to become one with Christ Jesus, we died with him? For we died and were buried with Christ by baptism. And just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glorious power of the Father, now we also may live new lives."

I prefer not to look at Salvation as a transaction... Christ's work is accomplished...His forgiveness is available. But my choice to follow Him is a daily one. My choice to take up my cross is a daily one. Praise God He is there to help me - but He will only help those who are yielded...and that yielding is up to me.

Christ won't let the enemy snatch me away but I can surely reject Him...but then I'm not Calvinist and so there really is probably no sense debating cause it's a debate that has gone on for centuries.

We may disagree on doctrine but I'm sure we both love the Lord and desire to honor Him (hopefully that is why we defend our positions). The main thing is not what we believe in our heads...it's not so important that we have right doctrine as it is that we have right relationship with our Lord Jesus Christ...

and whether we are Calvinist or not I'm sure we both agree that true faith is reflected in action.

Anyway, I have said more than i intended to.

God Bless you Lockheed - thanks for defending the truth so vigorously (even if we disagree on how that truth is defined)...it means you care and that is much better than apathy!!

Yours in Christ,

Stephen

 

[MbiaJc]

I fully, completely, completely agree (and say a hearty amen!) ... however , I don't follow why you believe it is "Christ's faith" that saves rather than our faith in His work (which is a gift of God none-the-less.)

How abouts you explain it to me, rather than me try to attack a position I'm unclear on.



Well my duck may need crutches... but I think I'm right. I've been wrong before though.

Eph 3:12 In whom we have boldness and access with confidence by the faith of him
I think the above verse plainly says it is His faith and not mine that is saving faith. The only thing that is required of me is to believe God raised Him from the dead and confess it with my mouth. Or Jesus said if I just believe in His name.
I am assuming you believe there are different degrees of faith; some have more than others. However if man had saving faith Jesus wouldn't have had to die that horrable death on the cross.

Hope that helps

 

[Lockheed]

You mean... this verse:

Eph 3:12
in whom we have boldness and confident access through faith in Him.

?

The KJV translates this verse in a way that folks in those times would have understood it. If a woman in that era said "...the love of Mikey", she would be talking about her love for Mikey, not Mikey's love infused into her.

I believe you're imposing a more modern understanding of "of him" upon the verse that isn't suggested in the Greek. Thus most modern translations get this correctly, rather than imposing the KJV era's language upon the text.

 

[Lockheed]

Lockheed that is VERY dangerous theology. Christ's death covers all sins...but you and i must repent of them (remember that both John the Baptist and Jesus came preaching repentance). You cannot repent for sins you have not committed...

I see, so forgiveness and thus salvation is conditional upon one's ongoing repentance?

Repentance is something I do (with God's help). Remember that if my faith is not backed up by deeds it is dead. "The decisive issue is whether or not they obey my Father in heaven (Matt 7:21)."

I see, so you do believe in a one-to-one relationship between confession and forgiveness?

To say that my future rejection of Christ is somehow automatically covered is nowhere found in Scripture.

Ah, but did or did not Christ cover all one's sins? Perhaps he covered only some of them and you have to go to church every week and take communion to get the rest paid for? (See where this leads?)

Consider these words:

"Well then, should we keep on sinning so that God can show us more and more kindness and forgiveness? Of course not! Since we have died to sin, how can we continue to live in it? Or have you forgotten that when we became Christians and were baptized to become one with Christ Jesus, we died with him? For we died and were buried with Christ by baptism. And just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glorious power of the Father, now we also may live new lives."

No one is talking about "keep(ing) on sinning", we're talking about whether or not one's sins are forgiven or not. Did Christ die for my sins or not?

I prefer not to look at Salvation as a transaction...

The Bible however does. Christ's death is a propitiation, "...shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood..." He BOUGHT us from the wrath of God.

Christ's work is accomplished...His forgiveness is available. But my choice to follow Him is a daily one. My choice to take up my cross is a daily one. Praise God He is there to help me - but He will only help those who are yielded...and that yielding is up to me.

Right, thus like every other religion on earth you (seemingly) believe that one must earn their salvation through their efforts. Sure Christ made it possible, but Christ's death secured the salvation of no one, even though He claims that He came to save His people from their sins, right?

Christ won't let the enemy snatch me away but I can surely reject Him...

No, Christ "saves completely" and "seeks and saves the lost". Of those the Father gives Him, He will lose none.

...but then I'm not Calvinist and so there really is probably no sense debating cause it's a debate that has gone on for centuries.

Precisely why the debate should continue. Just because abortion was declared legal in 1971 doesn't mean we should throw up our hands.. "who can know?"

We may disagree on doctrine but I'm sure we both love the Lord and desire to honor Him (hopefully that is why we defend our positions).

But do we serve the same Lord? You claim that Christ will loose some of those the Father gives Him, that Christ cannot do what He promised and that Christ does not "save forever", things He clearly states through His word. How can we both "love the Lord" when we apparently have two very different 'lords'?

The main thing is not what we believe in our heads...it's not so important that we have right doctrine as it is that we have right relationship with our Lord Jesus Christ...

God doesn't avoid our brains, He causes us to, supernaturally, understand the things of Scripture so that we might properly tell others about His Son. Not very good news to know that Christ has made salvation possible, only if I follow the right steps...

...and whether we are Calvinist or not I'm sure we both agree that true faith is reflected in action.

Anyway, I have said more than i intended to.

God Bless you Lockheed - thanks for defending the truth so vigorously (even if we disagree on how that truth is defined)...it means you care and that is much better than apathy!!

Tis true... thanks for the compliment.

 

[SteveR2021]

Right, thus like every other religion on earth you (seemingly) believe that one must earn their salvation through their efforts. Sure Christ made it possible, but Christ's death secured the salvation of no one, even though He claims that He came to save His people from their sins, right?

No. I absolutely do NOT believe that one must earn his/her salvation...this is IMPOSSIBLE. Salvation made possible by Christ's death and resurrection...but you and I still must enter that narrow gate. You and I still must put aside our selfish ambition and take up our cross. You and I still must obey. You and I still must repent. Without repentance salvation is impossible. Unless I personally repent and make Him my Lord I am not saved.

Christ's death does not automatically cover some people's sins. It automatically makes it possible for ANYONE to be forgiven but the anyone must respond.

All through the Old Testament God's people were known for breaking the covenant relationship...the call of the prophets was to come back into relationship. The call is still is same. Because of Christ we can come back into relationship but we cannot come back in unless we're willing to acknowledge Christ as our Savior AND Lord - that means submitting to His rule.

Yes our sins have been covered (including future sins)...but if all future sins including rejecting Christ were magically forgiven with repentance then why does James say that faith without works is dead? Why would Jesus say that the decisive issue is whether or not they obey me? Why would Peter say that we should make our calling and election sure?

No, Christ "saves completely" and "seeks and saves the lost". Of those the Father gives Him, He will lose none.

I didn't say He would lose any. He won't 'lose' any but we can reject Him...if this were not possible we wouldn't have free will.

Precisely why the debate should continue. Just because abortion was declared legal in 1971 doesn't mean we should throw up our hands.. "who can know?"

Good point. I remain in the middle ground on this one. I would not label myself as Calvinist or Armenian (spelling). I typically agree with Wesley on this theological debate. However, like Wesley and Whitefield (a Calvinist...Wesley and Whitefield were at odds for many years but in later years reconciled while still holding different views) I long to see revival. So if your Calvinism draws you into an ever deepening relationship with God then I am happy. if your goal in life is the glory of God then we cannot be at odds because that too is my goal.

 

[If Not For Grace]

I believe in free will. Therefore I believe I can quit believing if I want too or is that what they call denial in AA..? IF SAVED SAVED might be better.

 

[FreeinChrist]

I believe that once we are saved, we always are. And that we are saved spiritually in this life...and the future completion of salvation is our resurrection to eternal life. I am not Calvinist or Arminian.

Why OSAS?
Because I believe that once drawn by God, He is able to see into our heart and mind and KNOW if we believe or not. He then gives us to Christ.

Jhn 6:37 "All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out.

Jhn 6:44 "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.

Jhn 6:45 "It is written in the prophets, 'AND THEY SHALL ALL BE TAUGHT OF GOD.' Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me.

Jhn 6:65 And He was saying, "For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father."

Once He knows, He is the one to do all the work of salvation - forgiving, cleansing, spiritually circumcizing us, sealing us in the Spirit, making us new, adopting us.

Since MY salvation rests on HIS work, and I believe God is all knowing and know who really believe (and He knows the future, too) - I have to believe that once saved, we don't go back to that 'old creature', to being unforgiven, unadopted, unsealed.

Scripture I am referring to:

Col 2:10 and in Him you have been made complete, and He is the head over all rule and authority;



Col 2:11 and in Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ;



Col 2:13 When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions,
Col 2:14 having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.


Tts 3:5 He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit,
Tts 3:6 whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior,
Tts 3:7 so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to {the} hope of eternal life.

(Does this mean what it says? Has a person who has accepted Christ in faith been justified, washed and regenerated and renewed…or was it done incompletely, so that it can be taken back? )

1Cr 6:11 Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.

Eph 1:13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation--having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise,
Eph 1:14 who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of {God's own} possession, to the praise of His glory.

Eph 4:30 Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.

2Cr 1:21 Now He who establishes us with you in Christ and anointed us is God,
2Cr 1:22 who also sealed us and gave {us} the Spirit in our hearts as a pledge.

Rom 5:5 and hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out within our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to us.

I often read the "but we can jump out of His hand" comment and I have to wonder at it - for God knows the future, and is able to discern our true intent.

 

[SteveR2021]

We make Salvation out to be a transaction which implies no responsibility on our part. I find J.C. Ryle in his book "Holiness" helpful in this regard.

J.C. Ryle said:

"Sanctification, again, is a thing which will be found absolutely necessary as a witness to our character in the great day of judgment. It will be utterly useless to plead that we believed in Christ, unless our faith has had some sanctifying effect, and been seen in our lives. Evidence, evidence, evidence, will be the one thing wanted when the great white throne is set, when the books are opened, when the graves give up their tenants, when the dead are arraigned before the bar of god. Without some evidence that our faith in Christ was real and genuine, we shall only rise again to be condemned."

"I can find no evidence that will be admitted in that day, except sanctification. The question will not be how we talked and what we professed, but how we lived and what we did. Let no man deceive himself on this point. If anything is certain about the future, it is certain that there will be a judgment; and if anything is certain about judgment, it is certain that men's "works" and "doings" will be considered and examined it."
"He that supposes works are of no importance, because they cannot justify us, is a very ignorant Christian. Unless he opens his eyes, he will find to his cost that if he comes to the bar of god without some evidence of grace, he had better never have been born."

(bolding is mine)

We seem to ask all the wrong questions. Instead of asking if we can lose our salvation lets ask how we can make our calling and election sure. If only the holy will see the Lord (Hebrews 12:14) let's determine to be holy. If God's children do not keep on sinning (1 John 3:9) let's determine not to keep on sinning. Instead of always asking how close we can get to the edge of the road without going into the ditch let's aim for the center. Let's not see how far from God we can get or how much sin we can get away with - let's instead strive to be in the center of His will.

Calvinism is good cause it emphasizes the sovereignty of God...and He is sovereign!!! Armenianism is good cause it emphasizes our responsibility...and we are responsible (that's why we need a Savior). Why not err on the side of caution in both ways...I don't think we can go far wrong if we emphasize God's sovereignty and our responsibility. Sure it can be difficult to reconcile the two at times but isn't the doctrine of the Trinity just as difficult to reconcile (although of course we do not dispute it).

 

[FreeinChrist]

Instead of always asking how close we can get to the edge of the road without going into the ditch let's aim for the center. Let's not see how far from God we can get or how much sin we can get away with - let's instead strive to be in the center of His will.

I don't think anyone has advocated that we see "how much sin we an get away with". And I always wonder why that gets brought up in response to OSAS.

Instead of asking if we can lose our salvation lets ask how we can make our calling and election sure. If only the holy will see the Lord (Hebrews 12:14) let's determine to be holy.

And I can agree with that.

 

[ALittleLightInDarkness]

My Sister is High Church Episcapal and does not believe in that you are once saved always saved. Therefore I had to find proof. (Biblical)

Some would ask:

what if you were saved but then later became a satanic worshiper.

Well first thing first. That wont happen. In the bible it says that once we give our lives to him he puts us in his hand where we will never wonder from. Maybe someone will falter in their faith and do it for a time. But if someone was really saved then God will bring him back.

And second you must remember that God sees all sins as equal one who kills and one who lies is just as evil as one another. So if he forgives someone who lies 1000 times he will forgive someone who kills 1000 times.

And the third peice of biblical proof is that God promises you heaven once you are saved. No matter what you do (Unlike a human) God would never break a promise.

 

[SteveR2021]

I don't think anyone has advocated that we see "how much sin we an get away with". And I always wonder why that gets brought up in response to OSAS.

I realize that no one has advocated that we see how much sin we can get away with...I didn't mean to make any accusations.

It's our approach that concerns me. It's always about my salvation, my security, my happiness. If we were primarily concerned with God's glory we would not need to ask these questions...if my goal in life is God's pleasure and God's reward I won't need to ask if those who are once saved are always saved.

Paris Reidhead (deceased missionary) said this:

I believe that the only ones whom God actually witnesses by His Spirit are born of Him are the people whether they say it or not they've come to Jesus Christ and say something like this: "Lord Jesus I'm going to obey you and love you and serve you and do what you want me to do as long as I live even if I go to Hell at the end of the road simply because you are worthy to be loved and obeyed and served and I'm not trying to make a deal with you."

The trouble with many of us is that we came to God for what he could give us. My concern with OSAS is that it diverts our attention from what is truly important - God's glory. Whether or not OSAS is true or not is almost a mute point...the question you and I should ask ourselves is what and whom we are living for...

Are we living for ourselves - for our eternal happiness? Or are we living for God?

 

[FreeinChrist]

My concern with OSAS is that it diverts our attention from what is truly important - God's glory. Whether or not OSAS is true or not is almost a mute point...the question you and I should ask ourselves is what and whom we are living for...

Are we living for ourselves - for our eternal happiness? Or are we living for God?

My concern about nOSAS (Not once saved always saved) is that the quality of God's work is questioned. And I have found in nOSAS crowds like the Nazarenes, that the focus become 'at what point do I lose my salvation', and this seems to accompany a great deal of fingerpointing at others and if they are saved or not. There is one I can think of immediately who is a real fingerpointer, and NOSAS - the epitomy of my concern ( as in "won't worship in a church because the pastor and members are all hypocrites who don't give enough money and don't love enough and don't do what I think they should do!').
to me it is an important theoretical question, and either side can abuse it.

 

[SteveR2021]

My concern about nOSAS (Not once saved always saved) is that the quality of God's work is questioned. And I have found in nOSAS crowds like the Nazarenes, that the focus become 'at what point do I lose my salvation', and this seems to accompany a great deal of fingerpointing at others and if they are saved or not.

That, I agree, is a problem. There seems to be danger in most extremes. Those who believe in nOSAS can become proud and critical of others and those who believe in OSAS could potentially become lazy. We all need to guard against these extremes...and we should always ask ourselves how a particular doctrine is changing our behavior for the glory of God.

What you have shared is a shame...and if that is what comes of nOSAS then I can understand your unhappiness with it.

 

[MbiaJc]

You mean... this verse:

Eph 3:12
in whom we have boldness and confident access through faith in Him.

?

The KJV translates this verse in a way that folks in those times would have understood it. If a woman in that era said "...the love of Mikey", she would be talking about her love for Mikey, not Mikey's love infused into her.

I believe you're imposing a more modern understanding of "of him" upon the verse that isn't suggested in the Greek. Thus most modern translations get this correctly, rather than imposing the KJV era's language upon the text.

Not so! autou in KJ is always transulated of him. It has nothing to do with then and now. The english language has not changed. It is the modern transulators transulating it to say what they wount it it say.

 

[Lockheed]

It automatically makes it possible for ANYONE to be forgiven but the anyone must respond.

So Christ who came "save His people from their sins", whose death is called "propitiatory" neither saves nor pays for anyones sins but only makes their salvation and payment possible?

 

[Lockheed]

Not so! autou in KJ is always transulated of him. It has nothing to do with then and now. The english language has not changed. It is the modern transulators transulating it to say what they wount it it say.

To the contrary, regardless of how you prefer the word translated, the modern translations more accurately translate the word into MODERN english as opposed to the old way. You have built your view upon your misunderstanding of old english. Compare the KJ to other Bibles and commentaries at the time and you will see this to be the case.

There are many such archaic things in the KJV

Job 41:18 By his neesings a light doth shine, and his eyes [are] like the eyelids of the morning. (KJV)

Jeremiah 4:22 For my people [is] foolish, they have not known me; they [are] sottish children, and they have none understanding: they [are] wise to do evil, but to do good they have no knowledge. (KJV)

You're not recognizing how the language has changed and adopting a view on the basis of how an archaic translation presents something which it clearly doesn't intend to.

 

[SteveR2021]

So Christ who came "save His people from their sins", whose death is called "propitiatory" neither saves nor pays for anyones sins but only makes their salvation and payment possible?

Exactly. Christ secured our salvation but our participation is necessary. Unless you and I respond to that salvation we are utterly and hopelessly lost.

 

[Lockheed]

So Christ who came "save His people from their sins", whose death is called "propitiatory" neither saves nor pays for anyones sins but only makes their salvation and payment possible?

Exactly. Christ secured our salvation but our participation is necessary. Unless you and I respond to that salvation we are utterly and hopelessly lost.

Sorta like a secured loan, all you have to do is sign at the bottom and then make payments?




The Bible says:

For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost (Luke 19:10)

Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners---of whom I am the worst (1 Timothy 1:15).


​

Is it your position then that Christ didn't come into the world to save sinners, but to make them saveable? It seems to me that Christ "came to save".

Did Christ come to save? Did He save anyone?

But because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood. Therefore he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them (Hebrews 7:24-26)​

Christ intercedes on behalf of those who "come to God through him". Is it your position then that Christ's intercession fails and so he is unable to "save completely" (as this verse states)?What do you understand the content of this intercession to be? On what basis is Christ interceding and what for?



We say Christ so died that he infallibly secured the salvation of a multitude that no man can number, who through Christ's death not only may be saved, but are saved, must be saved, and cannot by any possibility run the hazard of being anything but saved. ---Charles Haddon Spurgeon

 

[MbiaJc]

To the contrary, regardless of how you prefer the word translated, the modern translations more accurately translate the word into MODERN english as opposed to the old way. You have built your view upon your misunderstanding of old english. Compare the KJ to other Bibles and commentaries at the time and you will see this to be the case.

There are many such archaic things in the KJV

Job 41:18 By his neesings a light doth shine, and his eyes [are] like the eyelids of the morning. (KJV)

Jeremiah 4:22 For my people [is] foolish, they have not known me; they [are] sottish children, and they have none understanding: they [are] wise to do evil, but to do good they have no knowledge. (KJV)

You're not recognizing how the language has changed and adopting a view on the basis of how an archaic translation presents something which it clearly doesn't intend to.

Not so! You may feed that to someone that doesn't know better. The KJ is the most acurate transulation most everyone agrees to that. It does not have transulators openion built in as do the modern transulations. Every modern transulation has an agenda the authors are puting across among the $ signs.

I have a whole arnisol of transulations and commentaries plus Greek and english dictionaries and lexacons. Your transulation does not hold up with out an agenda behind it.