OSAS does not survive the "sola scriptura" test. Now what?

[Major1]

Here's what you said - 'What exactly do you think is meant by “salvation” and “eternal life”? That God still isn’t going to “spare” us after all? That He didn’t mean what He said? That Jesus somehow failed?'

Why did you bring up that 'Jesus somehow failed'? I have no doubt, it's not Jesus who failed, but rather, people who fail. If they lose salvation, it's not Jesus' fault. If they aren't spared, Jesus did not fail. He gave many, many words on eternal life, not just a few that are thrown around in favor of eternal security.

The main one I see that people have a hard time with is, 'if you want to enter life, keep the commandments'. I have heard every excuse under the sun, as to what this means and why it's not for us today.

If some of these eternal security people don't make it to Heaven, they can't blame Jesus, for He gave us the truth to live by. They only have themselves to blame, not that Jesus failed.

You said...…………
"If they lose salvation, it's not Jesus' fault. "

That is IMO YOUR opinion.

I for one can not accept your opinion.

First of all, a Christian is a new creation according to 2 Corth. 5:17...……
“Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come!”.

A believer in Christ is not just an updated and improved person. A Christian is a totally NEW CREATURE. Because of his faith he is "IN CHRIST". Then for anyone to lose his salvation, the new creation would have to be destroyed completely.

Secondly, the New Creature is redeemed according to 1 Peter 1:18-19...……
“For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your forefathers, but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect”.

Now with just a little study we can learn that the word redeemed refers to a purchase being made, a price being paid. We as sinners were purchased at the cost of Christ’s death. For a Christian to lose salvation, God Himself would have to revoke His purchase of the individual for whom He paid with the precious blood of Christ.

Now then, just how would that happen and what would be the process to take place????

Then if YOUR opinion is true and man can lose his salvation after he is TRUELY saved, we are then calling God a liar which makes Him a sinner and if that is the case then NO ONE IS SAVED!!!

You see, when a person comes to Jesus Christ and accepts Him as Saviour, he is promised eternal life for we read in John 3:16 that ………….
“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life”.

THAT IS A PROMISE OF GOD!

Eternal life is the promise of God of a saved person spending forever in heaven with God. God promises, “Believe and you will have eternal life.”

Isn't that exactly what the Word of God says??????

For a Christian to lose salvation, eternal life would have to be redefined. The Christian is promised to live forever. Does eternal not mean “eternal”?

 

[GodsGrace101]

One should not simply assume that all those who are “OSAS” or who believe in “eternal security” are Calvinist or thinking of becoming Calvinist.

Ultimately, we should follow no man or woman, only God.

The article is not about OSAS.
It's about how God gives SOME very little grace to some of us to trick us into thinking we're saved but really we aren't.

Do you understand this?

 

[Major1]

I agree with the above.
I'm told I'm an arminian; if I were forced to choose, it would have to be that since, at least, it doesn't change the nature of God.

I don't know too much about arminianism. Would you be willing to tell me what you don't agree about it?
Just to clarify -- I'm very much against calvinism and I do not believe in eternal security -- I DO believe that God requires obedience and that we're to do our best.

If you don't care to answer -- it's OK.

The thief on the cross, to whom Jesus promised paradise, had no time to be obedient. So obedience is clearly not required for salvation. Salvation is, indeed, by faith alone in Christ alone.

But those of us with the opportunity to be obedient, yet who choose to disobey and show no inclination or desire to obey, show ourselves not to be Heaven bound. That’s not because obedience is required for salvation but because a lack of obedience, or inclination to obey, suggests that the Holy Spirit has not changed our hearts and that we remain dead in our sin.

In other words, obedience is not necessary for salvation but unwillingness to obey most certainly means we aren’t saved.
https://is-obedience-necessary-for-salvation/

 

[Major1]

The article is not about OSAS.
It's about how God gives SOME very little grace to some of us to trick us into thinking we're saved but really we aren't.

Do you understand this?

I would ask you to consider the Words of Scripture that tells us.

Acts 10:34...………..
"And Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons".

That means clearly that God is not a respecter of persons and if grace was not the same it would not be grace.

Ephesians 4:7 then says...……….
"But grace was given to each one of us according to the measure of Christ’s gift."

2 Corth. 10:13...…...
"But we will not boast of things without our measure, but according to the measure of the rule which God hath distributed to us, a measure to reach even unto you." 2

Now consider the fact that the ultimate distribution of equal grace happens on the cross when all of mankind was forgiven for it's sin.

 

[GodsGrace101]

The thief on the cross, to whom Jesus promised paradise, had no time to be obedient. So obedience is clearly not required for salvation. Salvation is, indeed, by faith alone in Christ alone.

But those of us with the opportunity to be obedient, yet who choose to disobey and show no inclination or desire to obey, show ourselves not to be Heaven bound. That’s not because obedience is required for salvation but because a lack of obedience, or inclination to obey, suggests that the Holy Spirit has not changed our hearts and that we remain dead in our sin.

In other words, obedience is not necessary for salvation but unwillingness to obey most certainly means we aren’t saved.
https://is-obedience-necessary-for-salvation/

You copied and pasted.
Please speak to me in your own words, otherwise it means you don't really understand what you believe.

Thanks.

 

[Major1]

You copied and pasted.
Please speak to me in your own words, otherwise it means you don't really understand what you believe.

Thanks.

It was wonderful speaking with you. May the Lord bless you richly and goodby.

 

[amariselle]

You are the one who asked if Jesus failed.

You still don’t understand it was a rhetorical question asked to make a point, do you? Let me explain.

The point is this: those who say we must add works to Christ’s perfect and once for all sacrifice for sin are the ones saying Christ has failed. (This is the “willful sin” by the way - Hebrews 10:26-29)) If it is true that our “good works” and obedience are necessary for salvation, then Christ did not do enough to save us.

I pointed out it wasn't Him, but man.

Of course man has failed. That is precisely why we need the Saviour.

He was speaking to whomever wanted to enter life. His point was how important His commandments were.

He was making a point to a Jew who was under the Law and who claimed to have kept it perfectly, that he had not kept it at all. (He loved his money and material possessions) And this is the point that Jesus makes:

23 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.

24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

25 When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved?

26 But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible. - Matthew 19:23-26

Although you did ask if He failed.

See above.

I'm not talking about a man's merit. A man does these things from God.

You may want to consider the story of the Pharisee and the publican.

9 And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others:

10 Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican.

11 The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.

12 I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.

13 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.

14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted. - Luke 18:9-14

Which one gave God the credit for all the good things he did? Which one simply cried out, "God have mercy on me, a sinner!" And which of the two went away justified?

Are you trying to merit something when talking about Jesus?

Absolutely not. Grace is the "unmerited favour" of God. I do not deserve salvation, neither do you, and neither does anyone else.

Exactly. Every word He says is the Truth, including, 'if you want to enter life, keep the commandments'. Many here do not think these words are the truth. Do you?

See above.

Not true. Anyone who says all it takes is faith alone, need to understand so much more is involved in salvation.

The "much more involved in salvation" was completely accomplished by Christ, who by Himself purged our sins. It is finished. Many don't believe Him and they seek to add their own "righteous" works to what He has done.

As I said above, do you believe every word Jesus spoke is the truth? If so, then, 'if you want to enter life, keep the commandments' is the truth. Do you believe these words are the truth?

See above. You have missed the point Jesus was making. No one has kept the Law perfectly in thought, word and deed, from birth to death. And if one seeks to be justified by works, this is what is required. Only Christ has perfectly fulfilled the Law and only He can save.

 

[amariselle]

I snipped your quote there for two reasons; first, I have no desire to wade into the Calvin vs Arminius debate. I see both views as two sides of the same errant coin. You may differ.

No. I agree. I have no desire to debate it either.

However, it was trying to reconcile those views that was one step (of many) that directed me toward Orthodoxy and why I tend to read all of the threads on the topic.

Fair enough.

Second reason I snipped, and in fact this was originally in the previous post but I deleted before posting. If this thread shows anything it is that there is plenty of scriptural support for OSAS as well as the opposing view. Both views are scriptural. For that matter, lots of erroneous teachings can be gleaned from the pages of scripture standing by itself.

Which is why it's important to "rightly divide the word of truth" as I'm sure you agree.

I think it's important to not only know the scriptural foundation of a teaching but the context from which it came as well as the history of where and when it came from. Again, you may differ.

When it comes to Scripture, I absolutely agree. When it comes to the teachings and traditions of men, if one seeks to learn more of the history of such, that is their choice. It is not something necessary in terms of learning the truth of salvation. I do believe we have all we need in God's inspired word.

My desire is not to debate the merits/challenges of either view.

And that's fine. My desire is that people would understand the truth of salvation, which is not of ourselves but is a gift of God. For many years I did not understand that, even though I attended church all my life. I was constantly striving to add my own works to what Christ had done and I was never at peace. I just want people to "rest" in Him.

I do find the centuries old, ongoing debate on this issue fascinating. I think it's resolved when two things are realized; one, they're both wrong and two that's because of the doctrinal development that took place in the west, moreso by those who used Augustine's words than Augustine himself.. but going back to the snipped quote; it requires research where the teaching came from.

Indeed. And as I said, if one wants to research historical figures and their teachings, that is fine. I enjoy various historical topics also. When it comes to the truth of our salvation, however, God's word is more than sufficient. Therefore, we ought to devote ourselves to careful study of it, so that we can "show ourselves approved."

 

[amariselle]

The article is not about OSAS.
It's about how God gives SOME very little grace to some of us to trick us into thinking we're saved but really we aren't.

Do you understand this?

As I said, I do not agree with Calvin. Of course God does no such thing.

 

[GodsGrace101]

I would ask you to consider the Words of Scripture that tells us.

Acts 10:34...………..
"And Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons".

That means clearly that God is not a respecter of persons and if grace was not the same it would not be grace.

Ephesians 4:7 then says...……….
"But grace was given to each one of us according to the measure of Christ’s gift."

2 Corth. 10:13...…...
"But we will not boast of things without our measure, but according to the measure of the rule which God hath distributed to us, a measure to reach even unto you." 2

Now consider the fact that the ultimate distribution of equal grace happens on the cross when all of mankind was forgiven for it's sin.

I think you came in at mid-sentence and may not be aware that we were discussing calvinism and how God distributes grace in THAT theology.

 

[nonaeroterraqueous]

It's about how God gives SOME very little grace to some of us to trick us into thinking we're saved but really we aren't.

As I said, I do not agree with Calvin. Of course God does no such thing.

That wasn't Calvin's position. That was someone's disingenuous representation of his position.

 

[GodsGrace101]

That wasn't Calvin's position. That was someone's disingenuous representation of his position.

The below, which I posted, is taken from a book on theology that John Calvin wrote. It states the book and chapter and section.

How could it be "someone's disingenuous representation of his position". Are you sure YOU know his position? Please provide some support if you think John Calvin did not write the below in blue...

This is from wikipedia...

Institutes of the Christian Religion (Latin: Institutio Christianae Religionis) is John Calvin's seminal work of Protestant systematic theology. Highly influential in the Western world[1] and still widely read by theological students today, it was published in Latin in 1536 (at the same time as Henry VIII of England's Dissolution of the Monasteries) and in his native French language in 1541, with the definitive editions appearing in 1559 (Latin) and in 1560 (French).
**************************************


from Calvin's Institutes (Book III, Chapter II, Section 11):


I am aware it seems unaccountable to some how faith is attributed to the reprobate, seeing that it is declared by Paul to be one of the fruits of election; and yet the difficulty is easily solved. [...]

But in this there is nothing to prevent an inferior operation of the Spirit from taking its course in the reprobate. Meanwhile, believers are taught to examine themselves carefully and humbly, lest carnal security creep in and take the place of assurance of faith. We may add, that the reprobate never have any other than a confused sense of grace, laying hold of the shadow rather than the substance, because the Spirit properly seals the forgiveness of sins in the elect only, applying it by special faith to their use.

Still it is correctly said, that the reprobate believe God to be propitious to them, inasmuch as they accept the gift of reconciliation, though confusedly and without due discernment; not that they are partakers of the same faith or regeneration with the children of God; but because, under a covering of hypocrisy, they seem to have a principle of faith in common with them. Nor do I even deny that God illumines their minds to this extent, that they recognize his grace; but that conviction he distinguishes from the peculiar testimony which he gives to his elect in this respect, that the reprobate never attain to the full result or to fruition. [...]

Thus we dispose of the objection, that if God truly displays his grace, it must endure for ever. There is nothing inconsistent in this with the fact of his enlightening some with a present sense of grace, which afterwards proves evanescent.

John Calvin "disposes" of the idea that one could lose salvation by stating that God only gave a small amount of grace to someone to make them think they were saved when actually they were not. God illuminated their mind ONLY TO THIS EXTENT. Gosh. Why not go all the way if God is a God of love??

Calvinism cannot represent the nature of God!

 

[amariselle]

That wasn't Calvin's position. That was someone's disingenuous representation of his position.

That is what many say. Deep down I think they know how terrible it is to suggest that God would create most people to burn in hell for all eternity.

I have studied the 5 points (TULIP) of Calvinism. They are not consistent with the loving and merciful God of Scripture.

 

[marineimaging]

LOL
In the rules it says not to use "you".
What are we supposed to use???
In every other language there is a singular you and a plural you.
tu
voi

usted
vosotros

English:
you
you !!

Yeah. We should have another word.

How's about Y'ALL?!

I would have said Ya'll except I meant Us, We, All of us guilty folks. You know, the ones who commit sins. Not the ones that don't. They don't count.

 

[redleghunter]

I've already addressed that and most certainly agree....The Spirit himself testifies with our spirits that we are the children of God. Such does not mean however that there can't be some or many who walk away from the Lord who no longer really feel that witness. You would wrongly assert that somebody who doesn't make heaven their home never had such a witness at any time. I'd contend Hebrews 6 :4 declares otherwise.

It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age and who have fallen away, to be brought back to repentance. To their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace Hebrews 6:4

Your personal litmus test is someone falls away and to such a degree they can't be brought back to repentance?

If so how does one quantify this? What is that line in the sand whether we are Re-Redeemable or not?

 

[redleghunter]

The elect is a term of the bigger picture of things God sees outside time. I'd say God still responds IN TIME with the way things are in the present moment so yes I would say God would testify to one's spirit that they're saved and a child of God although they could leave that Salvation. God doesn't force someone to stay in fellowship with himself.

You had me nodding until the bolded above.

I agree God does not "force us" in the human sense, but He is Sovereign and quite jealous for us.

 

[redleghunter]

Really? Will Judas be saved? Will all the Jews in Paul's time be saved who did not believe?

Good point. That's why we should not pluck out verses and try to apply them to a particular pet theology.

I was making the point if you want to pluck out "cut off" you have to explain "all saved."

Context matters.

 

[Major1]

That is what many say. Deep down I think they know how terrible it is to suggest that God would create most people to burn in hell for all eternity.

I have studied the 5 points (TULIP) of Calvinism. They are not consistent with the loving and merciful God of Scripture.

Agreed.

 

[Major1]

Your personal litmus test is someone falls away and to such a degree they can't be brought back to repentance?

If so how does one quantify this? What is that line in the sand whether we are Re-Redeemable or not?

Just think. If we have to keep the commandments to be saved, and stay redeemed, then the only person in heaven will be Jesus.

 

[Major1]

I think you came in at mid-sentence and may not be aware that we were discussing calvinism and how God distributes grace in THAT theology.

I understood completely. Life is just to short and difficult to live and I just refuse to be involved with anyone who exhibits such an attitude as you did. Have a wonderful day.