Refuting OSAS in jesus name

[lori milne]

Yes we should already have the faith to be holy as he is holy or perfect as he is perfect with out stumbling because we are humble and appreciate are gift not like a rotten kid who takes it and tosses it aside.
Gifts is the key word
Verse 22 makes that connection

Romans 11:22,29
Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.

For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.

I want us to not have a contradiction but an understanding while we weigh this out together

 

[lori milne]

.

 

[lori milne]

.

 

[Marvin Knox]

"For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast." Ephesians 2:8-9


"...the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable." Romans 11:29

Good!

It took 71 pages. But I'm glad we finally got that established.

 

[FreeGrace2]

The verses have been given, so there's no excuse to not know what the Bible says about the guarantee of salvation.

Hebrews speaks about obeying to go to heaven [/QUOTE]
Please give me specific verses that say that.

You just didn't read verse 9 of 8-9

Does this mean ch 8, verse 9 and ch 9, verse 9, or what?

Obey to be saved is clearl

What verse specifically? Your post is not clear.

This made him the perfect high priest, who provides the way for everyone who obeys him to be saved forever. ([bless and do not curse]Hebrews‬ [bless and do not curse]5‬:[bless and do not curse]8-9‬ ERV)

Let's begin with a lexicon, so we can understand the was actually said in the original.

The word for "obey" is:
hupakouō

1) to listen, to harken
1a) of one who on the knock at the door comes to listen who it is, (the duty of a porter)
2) to harken to a command
2a) to obey, be obedient to, submit to

So, the question is what command is it that Jesus gave that results in being saved forever?

Let's look at the commands that Jesus gave regarding obtaining eternal life:

John 3:15-16
15 so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life. 16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.

John 5:24
24 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.

John 6:40
40 "For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day."

John 6:47 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life.

This is what Heb 5:8 is referring to: the command to believe in Him for eternal life. And Heb 5:8 makes OSAS very clear: "to be saved forever".

How long is "forever" in your view? Only until one sins?

 

[FreeGrace2]

Yes obedience in him TO BE saved is clear in verse 9

Hebrews 5:9
This made him the perfect high priest, who provides the way for everyone who obeys him to be saved forever .

See post 705.

 

[lori milne]

See post 705.

I can't I'm on a cell app :/

 

[lori milne]

To free grace2

All the verses I have given all mean what they say. I don't think anyone disagrees with that? My Point again" is its a clear and direct contradiction to your believe Of not being able to loose ones salvation. My request is simple Can you prove to me they aren't a contradiction.

 

[lori milne]

Lori, we do not like the term OSAS. It sounds cheap and it gets thrown around easily so it that it means very little. The truth is, the majority of the people in this country, about 65% (in the U.S.) call themselves Christians. But if we really took seriously what the bible says about a true Christian, we would find that less than 15% of those people are even converted. So "OSAS" only applies to that 15%, the rest are simply not saved at all, and the warnings of Jesus and in the epistles applies to them.

I don't have any other word for it?
What do you call it to explain the theology ?

 

[lori milne]

To free grace 2 What u said I'm not going to argue with this, because it doesn't really matter what the facts are in your view. But Strong's lexicon DOES SAY it means "disapproved".

Lexicon :: Strong's G96 - adokimos
Biblical Usage not standing the test not approved properly used of metals and coins that which does not prove itself such as it ought unfit for, unproved, spurious, reprobate


KJV Translation Count — Total: 8x
The KJV translates Strongs G96 in the following manner:reprobate (6x), castaway (1x), rejected (1x).
Thayer's Greek Lexicon
We're. saying the same thing your just not seeing it I guess
Their are also many words for love but it's how they are used

 

[Brother Chris]

All the verses I have given all mean what they say.
I don't think anyone disagrees with that?

My Point again" is its a clear and direct contradiction to your believe Of not being able to loose ones salvation.
My request is simple

Can you prove to me they aren't a contradiction.

You are misinterpreting those scriptures, and they don't mean what you think they mean. Listen, the epistles were written to different churches and they were read out loud to the believers. But, not everyone in these churches, like today, were really saved and born again. Therefore the warnings in the epistles are to those people, not to those who are already saved. The same is true with the warnings from Jesus in the gospel books.

 

[lori milne]

You are misinterpreting those scriptures, and they don't mean what you think they mean. Listen, the epistles were written to different churches and they were read out loud to the believers. But, not everyone in these churches, like today, were really saved and born again. Therefore the warnings in the epistles are to those people, not to those who are already saved. The same is true with the warnings from Jesus in the gospel books.

I never gave any assumed translation
Just the verses

Even you your self agreed with the meaning of one post that free grace disagreed on it being about obedience

I'm clearly asking for this theology to not contradict direct teachings against it

I've given a lot of fair verses what being asked now is what is your or free grace 2 idea of what they mean?

I don't disagree with the meanings of any thing you or free grace can send that validates OSAS I can tell you what it scripturally means all and any you send
I'm now asking for the favor to be returned

A Balanced understanding is what I'm looking for

 

[lori milne]

I can see how you feel a lot of verses are for the unbelievers that's fair

Ok

Do you agree then when a reference is made about brethren being saved or in the faith ?

Or I guess the questions better asked how do you know when the writers speaks of saved / brethren or none saved?

thanks for responding

 

[Brother Chris]

I can see how you feel a lot of verses are for the unbelievers that's fair

Ok

Do you agree then when a reference is made about brethren being saved or in the faith ?

Or I guess the questions better asked how do you know when the writers speaks of saved / brethren or none saved?

thanks for responding

Easy. Let's use these two verses as examples:

This is for believers:
Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, - Romans 8:1

This is for unbelievers:
And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ. - Romans 8:9

Do you see the difference?

 

[lori milne]

Easy. Let's use these two verses as examples: This is for believers: Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, - Romans 8:1 This is for unbelievers: And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ. - Romans 8:9 Do you see the difference?

Yes very clear,


When I see it refers to the world, all men ,
Brethren or just a statement with no reference to who it is to
I feel it's speaking to me
Vs any one who hasn't revived the faith.

 

[lori milne]

their are statements jesus makes in his teachings that are to all men as well I can say in fairness its to those who haven't received the faith But they would be contrastive to the theology

Examples
John 8:31,32,34-36 Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin. And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever. If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed
John 8:51-52 Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death. Then said the Jews unto him, Now we know that thou hast a devil. Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and thou sayest, If a man keep my saying, he shall never taste of death,

 

[Marvin Knox]

Let's just say for the heck of it that there are a dozen verses that most feel teach eternal security. That includes Lori from what she has said.

Now lets say that there are a dozen verses that Lori and a few others like EmSw feel teach a possible loss of salvation.

The prudent thing to do would be to believe all of scripture even though there seems to some to be contradictions. This is called a paradox. (Every major doctrine in the Bible is presented in a paradoxical way.)

After first believing all of the scriptures - we take it to God in prayer and ask for wisdom to understand. God has taught us that only if we have will more be given to us. If we choose only one side of the paradox (no matter which side) we will not be given understanding. Even what we think we have will be taken away.

What seems to me to have happened here with Lori is that she has chosen only one side of the paradox and is, as a result, awash in lack of understanding. The solution is clear.

A related point would be that it is interesting that Lori chooses the side that shows anti security and requires human works in addition to those of Christ.

This is even in light of the fact that most here see ways of understanding the other side of the paradox clearly.

One must wonder why the choice comes down to the side opposite security. She says that she has accepted Christ in a personal way. We have no reason to doubt what she says about that.

We all have many reasons to wonder just why she has chosen the particular side of what she admittedly sees as a paradox which requires human works and merit. This in spite of the fact that it would be easier and even weightier to argue from the other side of things as most do.

Just some more food for thought for the thread.

 

[lori milne]

I don't believe the bible has a paradox, I believe a bad theology has caused a paradox.
I see no verses that are contradicting each other only your theology.

What I believe with out a doubt since none of you actually no

1. We are required to obey / not sin! In Scripture )
2. Through faith and Gods imputed righteousness we will WANT to be perfect and in that be able to " thirst no more " shall not want " (remission of sin is not left out btw) in scripture )
3. We will not WANT to sin. In scripture )
4. If we do ERR we will repent/ feel bad like David did !! In scripture )
3. Through sanctification we can go from glory to glory! In scripture )

Their is nothing I disagree with in the bible at all
Your paradox is because of your theology

Humbly speaking

 

[Marvin Knox]

I don't believe the bible has a paradox, I believe a bad theology has caused a paradox.
I see no verses that are contradicting each other only your theology.

What I believe with out a doubt since none of you actually no

1. We are required to obey / not sin! In Scripture )
2. Through faith and Gods imputed righteousness we will WANT to be perfect and in that be able to " thirst no more " shall not want " (remission of sin is not left out btw) in scripture )
3. We will not WANT to sin. In scripture )
4. If we do ERR we will repent/ feel bad like David did !! In scripture )
3. Through sanctification we can go from glory to glory! In scripture )

Their is nothing I disagree with in the bible at all
Your paradox is because of your theology

Humbly speaking

You yourself said in a previous post that salvation was a gift from God.

The scripture says that, "...the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable." Romans 11:29

This isn’t my theology. This is what the Word of God says.

It also says, “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.” John 5:24

This isn’t my theology. This is what the Word of God says.

I won’t quote any of the scriptures that seem to say that the gift is revocable. I won’t quote any of the scriptures that seem to say that we only have temporary life and that we can come into judgment.

Your entire thread is for the purpose of displaying those scriptures that supposedly show these things.

And yet you tell me straight faced in this post that there are no paradoxes (apparent contradictions) in the scriptures.

You don’t make any sense. You are being argumentative or you have a loose screw. There are no other choices.

You contacted me privately and asked me to explain these things as I offered to do.

I said that I would do that.

The Lord told us to be careful not to cast our pearls before swine.

I thought a few pages back that a couple of people had judged you and unloaded on you a little quickly.

I wanted to think that it was only because I wanted to believe the best of you. But I now believe that I was just a little slower on the uptake than the others.

I can see now that all of the time spent with you on this would be for no good reason. You don’t want to know the truth or you are incapable of understanding the truth.

Either way I cannot help you with your supposed search for truth.

 

[actionsub]

Let's just say for the heck of it that there are a dozen verses that most feel teach eternal security. That includes Lori from what she has said.

Now lets say that there are a dozen verses that Lori and a few others like EmSw feel teach a possible loss of salvation.

The prudent thing to do would be to believe all of scripture even though there seems to some to be contradictions. This is called a paradox. (Every major doctrine in the Bible is presented in a paradoxical way.)

After first believing all of the scriptures - we take it to God in prayer and ask for wisdom to understand. God has taught us that only if we have will more be given to us. If we choose only one side of the paradox (no matter which side) we will not be given understanding. Even what we think we have will be taken away.

What seems to me to have happened here with Lori is that she has chosen only one side of the paradox and is, as a result, awash in lack of understanding. The solution is clear.

A related point would be that it is interesting that Lori chooses the side that shows anti security and requires human works in addition to those of Christ.

This is even in light of the fact that most here see ways of understanding the other side of the paradox clearly.

One must wonder why the choice comes down to the side opposite security. She says that she has accepted Christ in a personal way. We have no reason to doubt what she says about that.

We all have many reasons to wonder just why she has chosen the particular side of what she admittedly sees as a paradox which requires human works and merit. This in spite of the fact that it would be easier and even weightier to argue from the other side of things as most do.

Just some more food for thought for the thread.

Not so much a paradox per se in my reading, but the same reality from two perspectives. I do believe indeed that our security and our salvation rests solely in Christ; thus I can affirm the verses that teach eternal security with reservations.

The reason I say "with reservations" is because of those passages which do suggest that a person can turn from Christ. I do not go so far as to hold a sort of "one strike and you're out" stance, but there is a sense in which a person can persist in unrepented sin for so long that that person has indeed turned away from Christ.

Affirming both realities at the same time creates a tension in understanding; at the same time both are true. I have also been told by Reformed believers that there is a difference between what is popularly known as OSAS and the Reformed tenet of the "perseverance of the saints". The latter, according to these people, is that the true believer will authenticate his or her belief by persevering in holiness. However, it is also God that enables us to persevere.

The bottom line is that we are always called upon to walk out our salvation in union with Christ. It is nothing we do on our own.