OSAS Discussion

[LostMarbels]

I think the disconnect is that the OSAS sentiment is based on the sufficiency of Christ, the adult discussion that is left out is that people may have been born into a church tradition but never born again.

This is my assertion. I myself believe and argue the same point.

Since there are intellectual assents taught to be "saved" people assume they are saved so there's this emphasis on works because if you tell someone they're not saved or born again or whatever, the conversation is over. I think the survey options tend to cater to the intellectual assent foundation mostly.

Again I agree. Also I did take a more intellectual approach to the conversation because I myself am looking to learn more about the topic.

 

[LostMarbels]

Reformed definition according to the Westminster Confession of Faith.

Chapter XVII
[1]

II. This perseverance of the saints depends not upon their own free will, but upon the immutability of the decree of election, flowing from the free and unchangeable love of God the Father;[2] upon the efficacy of the merit and intercession of Jesus Christ,[3] the abiding of the Spirit, and of the seed of God within them,[4] and the nature of the covenant of grace:[5] from all which arises also the certainty and infallibility thereof.[6]

III. Nevertheless, they may, through the temptations of Satan and of the world, the prevalency of corruption remaining in them, and the neglect of the means of their preservation, fall into grievous sins;[7] and, for a time, continue therein:[8] whereby they incur God's displeasure,[9] and grieve His Holy Spirit,[10] come to be deprived of some measure of their graces and comforts,[11] have their hearts hardened,[12] and their consciences wounded;[13] hurt and scandalize others,[14] and bring temporal judgments upon themselves.[15]

Westminster Confession of Faith

The footnotes are interactive with Scripture proofs at the link above.

So we are talking predestination here? I do not hold that to be true. I get the whole you can not come if not called but all mankind was called to repentance and to Jesus Christ.

I do however see how this would tie into OSAS.

 

[Oldmantook]

Ohhh what am I missing on the edit screen? I can't seem to edit it.

But a very valid point. Thanks for bringing it up.
Is that how you feel?

I think you missed one which is a common OSAS fall back position. The idea that since one is forever secure, those that fall away from the faith through no longer believing and/or disobedience were never saved to begin with.

 

[LostMarbels]

The Bible is nearby in my study. It is abundantly available on my desktop. OSAS is Spiritually-provided Truth. It cannot be debated or argued or made the topic of alternate views in any study group. It is what it is.

And yet I do not know if my own armory is sufficient, if I do not know the sharpness of their blade or if my own bows will pierce their armor. Learning counterposed ideology is not a foolish as it seems.

 

[redleghunter]

So we are talking predestination here? I do not hold that to be true. I get the whole you can not come if not called but all mankind was called to repentance and to Jesus Christ.

I do however see how this would tie into OSAS.

OSAS has to do with the perseverance of the saints.

What I quoted is the Reformed position based on Scriptures.

All that the Father gives to Christ He will not lose one sheep.

 

[redleghunter]

I think you missed one which is a common OSAS fall back position. The idea that since one is forever secure, those that fall away from the faith through no longer believing were never saved to begin with.

I guess that was the Beloved apostle's position too.

1 John 2:19

 

[Radagast]

As a christian I do not see why we cannot go to God with this and get an answer.

The answer is in the Bible... but getting agreement on what the Bible means regarding this topic is not exactly easy. People have been arguing about this for centuries.

And I don't think the poll in the O.P. helps at all. Quite the contrary.

 

[redleghunter]

The answer is in the Bible... but getting agreement on what the Bible means regarding this topic is not exactly easy. People have been arguing about this for centuries.

And I don't think the poll in the O.P. helps at all. Quite the contrary.

Wonder how a poll that asks "are you born again" would be taken.

 

[LostMarbels]

I think you missed one which is a common OSAS fall back position. The idea that since one is forever secure, those that fall away from the faith through no longer believing were never saved to begin with.

There is only one litmus test given in the bible: For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.

If an individual cannot confess Christ, I will not confess them as Christian. If they cannot confess Christ they are not saved. Those who are not saved do not bear fruits of the spirit, and you will know them by their fruits.

 

[Linktogunner]

I would add the option "God's grace allows us to be reconciled to Him and trains us in righteousness"

 

[Oldmantook]

I guess that was the Beloved apostle's position too.

1 John 2:19

No, you have committed a very common error in logic known as a hasty generalization. While the verse you quoted does refer to those who were not of us, it is not logical to extend those in particular to all in totality. In other words, just because some were not of us, it does not logically compute that all were not of us. Thus your logical fallacy is one of overgeneralization. Just because some chickens lay brown eggs, it does not mean that all chickens lay brown eggs. Thus the verse you cite cannot support your view.

 

[Oldmantook]

There is only one litmus test given in the bible: For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.

If an individual cannot confess Christ, I will not confess them as Christian. If they cannot confess Christ they are not saved. Those who are not saved do not bear fruits of the spirit, and you will know them by their fruits.

Someone can confess Christ, become a regenerate believer and yet fall away from the faith. Indeed you will know them by their fruit but it does not automatically entail that they were never true believers in the first place. By definition to apostatize is to depart or fall away from the faith. It is impossible for an unsaved person who doesn't belong to the faith to depart from the faith. Only believers who once belonged to the faith can depart from it. You cannot fall away/depart from something you never belonged to in the first place.

 

[Buzz_B]

"In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory." - 1 Corinthians 15:52-54

Please answer this for me. If, as Paul says above, it be not until the last trump that we are changed from our corruptible state to our incorruptible state, how is it that OSAS speaks of us as if not able to be corrupted now? Do you imagine that only applies to our physical bodies as if it is not the combination of our body and our spirit which constitutes our life?

We temporarily, during this dispensation of grace, have Christ's body for the sake of our individual spirits having an uncorrupted dwelling place wherein our spirits can learn free of the corruption of the flesh which we figuratively laid down in death so as to enable us to rise and live only for the life that is in Christ that we might learn to become one with Christ's and with each others spirits. It is called "... changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord." - 2 Corinthians 3:18

And in so doing that we become one with God as sons and daughters of the same spirit as is in Christ.

"Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God." - 2 Corinthians 7:1

"I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness." - Romans 6:19

"For God hath not called us unto uncleanness, but unto holiness." - 1 Thessalonians 4:7

"For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness." - Hebrews 12:10

While I voted for the third one above, I chose it only because it would be closer to correct than any of the rest. But I believe OSAS is a wrong doctrine which works well for money hungry preachers precisely because it can be so easily tailored to tickle the ears of a broad variation of believers and keep the seats filled with people to put into the collection plates.

"Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord: Looking diligently lest any man fail of the grace of God; ........." - Hebrews 12:14, 15a

"For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God? And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?"- 1 Peter 4:17-18

Why waste time focusing on trying to prove doctrines? Wouldn't it be more expedient to focus on learning what we need to know and to do?

 

[Radagast]

how is it that OSAS speaks of us as if not able to be corrupted now?

OSAS doesn't say that, at least, not in any version I've heard.

 

[redleghunter]

No, you have committed a very common error in logic known as a hasty generalization. While the verse you quoted does refer to those who were not of us, it is not logical to extend those in particular to all in totality. In other words, just because some were not of us, it does not logically compute that all were not of us. Thus your logical fallacy is one of overgeneralization. Just because some chickens lay brown eggs, it does not mean that all chickens lay brown eggs. Thus the verse you cite cannot support your view.

It's not a logical fallacy as the Beloved apostle is speaking in objective terms. As Jesus did when He opined on the Father giving Him sheep He would never lose.

These were very concrete statements by our Lord.

Jesus also stated in concrete terms there are wheat and tares. They both grow together but he knows the difference between the two.

A tare never becomes wheat. Wheat never becomes a tare ; a goat never becomes a sheep and a sheep never becomes a goat.

Jesus does not deal with all the "what abouts" we see on these internet sites. He deals in concrete concepts and illustrations. We should do the same.

Another example. Many are called few are chosen.

Yet in these OSAS discussions we get comments as if we can influence His choosing. We can't. That's the very definition of Grace.

 

[Blood Bought 1953]

No.

Amen!

 

[GingerBeer]

I want to understand the disconnect here. I almost feel as we are arguing the same point from a differnt perspective. So tell me what you think. I am thinking that if we have a more defined and stated position, we may have a better conversation seeing that an individual that has voted has stated their belief. There is then no question from where they are coming from once it has been made known.

Doesn't the name of the doctrine tell the main story in it? Once one has done/said/believed/been-called/elected-by-God or anything else that people say is being saved then nothing can ever take salvation away not even a person's own determined efforts to sin so much and so badly as to make salvation a travesty.

 

[GingerBeer]

Hmmmm. Ya got chapter and verse for that viewpoint...”works as important as grace”
“ by grace you are saved through faith Lest any man should boast”

"Faith without works is dead" seems to fit the bill. That's in James chapter two.

 

[GingerBeer]

I think so. In growing up, the OSAS-teaching church and school that I attended taught that sins after salvation only mean a loss of rewards in heaven. This doesn't seem like a good perspective. Heavenly rewards should be seen as a gain, not a loss.

I think that the most pertinent question is "can a person who is saved lose salvation through reckless sinful and wicked living?" if the answer is no then OSAS is true, no? And if the answer is yes then OSAS is false, yes?

 

[redleghunter]

not even a person's own determined efforts to sin so much and so badly as to make salvation a travesty.

How determined and how badly? What would be some Biblical examples of someone in such a state?

That seems to be the important question.

Which leads to another important question. Once one is born again/from above--Justified before God, does God's Grace become "deistic" , meaning fleeting or subjected to our will alone?

 

[redleghunter]

"Faith without works is dead" seems to fit the bill. That's in James chapter two.

Which James is pointing out works are "symptomatic" of saving faith.