Featured Do all Baptist denominations believe in OSAS?

Was this individual a Free Will Baptist?

 

Chapter 17: Of The Perseverance of the Saints
1._____ Those whom God hath accepted in the beloved, effectually called and sanctified by his Spirit, and given the precious faith of his elect unto, can neither totally nor finally fall from the state of grace, but shall certainly persevere therein to the end, and be eternally saved, seeing the gifts and callings of God are without repentance, whence he still begets and nourisheth in them faith, repentance, love, joy, hope, and all the graces of the Spirit unto immortality; and though many storms and floods arise and beat against them, yet they shall never be able to take them off that foundation and rock which by faith they are fastened upon; notwithstanding, through unbelief and the temptations of Satan, the sensible sight of the light and love of God may for a time be clouded and obscured from them, yet he is still the same, and they shall be sure to be kept by the power of God unto salvation, where they shall enjoy their purchased possession, they being engraven upon the palm of his hands, and their names having been written in the book of life from all eternity.
( John 10:28, 29; Philippians 1:6; 2 Timothy 2:19; 1 John 2:19; Psalms 89:31, 32; 1 Corinthians 11:32; Malachi 3:6 )
2._____ 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, upon the efficacy of the merit and intercession of Jesus Christ and union with him, the oath of God, the abiding of his Spirit, and the seed of God within them, and the nature of the covenant of grace; from all which ariseth also the certainty and infallibility thereof.
( Romans 8:30 Romans 9:11, 16; Romans 5:9, 10; John 14:19; Hebrews 6:17, 18; 1 John 3:9; Jeremiah 32:40 )

3._____ And though they may, through the temptation of Satan and of the world, the prevalency of corruption remaining in them, and the neglect of means of their preservation, fall into grievous sins, and for a time continue therein, whereby they incur God's displeasure and grieve his Holy Spirit, come to have their graces and comforts impaired, have their hearts hardened, and their consciences wounded, hurt and scandalize others, and bring temporal judgments upon themselves, yet shall they renew their repentance and be preserved through faith in Christ Jesus to the end.
( Matthew 26:70, 72, 74; Isaiah 64:5, 9; Ephesians 4:30; Psalms 51:10, 12; Psalms 32:3, 4; 2 Samuel 12:14; Luke 22:32, 61, 62 )

http://www.vor.org/truth/1689/1689bc00.html

 

I agree with all except the highlighted. God may not grant the repentance and return to the joys and bennies of the kingdom.

 

What matters is whether or not is agrees with the Scriptures. Since this is a Baptist confession of faith, I believe it follows with the OP and this chapter deals with the subject matter. It should help those who do not agree.

 

As we all do. Yet, we must be careful to uphold the truth in love as well. Jesus came to bring a sword.

I was reading your tag/sig statement when I wrote the above. Ha!

Yes, the confession above is good Protestant and Baptist confession. Yet, I would say a majority of the General Baptists would have held and do hold to the final perseverance of the saints. However, I could be wrong. I am not that knowledgeable of the history of general baptist doctrine to speak with certainty on the matter.

 

This is the problem that I see others see in OSAS... Which btw I firmly believe in... The Primitive Baptist Church I grew up in and those brethren I associated with for 50 years... Weather all Primitive Baptist believe this I have no idea but we did hear this from others... Well If I believed the way that you did I would go out into world and wallow in sin... Hey I'm saved!... I'm on my way to heaven why not?... There is problem with this thought... You can try but our God is a jealous God... You were bought with a price and you are not as much as you think you are free to do your own thing... You are Gods property period and you belong to Christ... Your eternal grace is secure but your living grace is not... You are the Son of the Father and if you get out of line you will take a trip to Gods woodshed... As scriptures say It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God... The Lord God will lay on you enough stripes to get your attention and get you moving in the right way.... He will be patient and longsuffering and he knows just how much correction is needed and for how long to get his intended results... He will NEVER let you fall from his eternal grace but at times in your disobedience and rebellion you have doubts that you have... I have loved thee with an everlasting love and with loving kindness I have drawn thee... Brother Glen

 

The FWB's, some UB's, and even a few ORB's(individuals in her ranks, but not the denomination as a whole), believe a fall from grace/loss of salvation is possible.

"If you could lose your salvation, you would." Dr. John MacArthur

 

There are the 'free will" baptists!

 

Both groups are essentially saying the same thing. Either....

OSAS - you have faith and works to the end or you never were saved. Bottom line is that without works you go to hell

Or Conditional Security - you have faith and works to the end or you lose your salvation. Bottom line is that without works you go to hell.

Same error, different package

 

Actually that is quite in error.

Faith and works are not relevant to salvation primarily because we would have to attribute to man the possibility that he could of himself create a condition in which his faith brought about said salvation.
The truth is that salvation is initiated by God through the ministry of the Spirit in the heart of men. In this Age, we see the sequence of events as being God enlightens the hearts of men to the truth, and in this way creates the response men have. Whether that response is rejection or reception, neither would be relevant to the natural man, who has no possible means of understanding his condition.

For example, James, I could wait about two months, come back here, find you in a thread, and insult you. You would have a response, which might be anger, or, you might actually agree with me, and your reaction is one of agreement. Would you have had a reaction if I didn't do it? Even in this post, you are going to have a reaction, Generally, we don't like someone saying something like "Actually that is quite in error," right?

What is your reaction? Would you have had it if I had logged off before making this post? Can you say, "I decided to get angry," or, "I decided to agree?" The answer is no, there would have been no reaction before my intervention, or...butting in, you decide.

But the analogy fails in a context dealing with the natural man, who is dead to the spiritual things of God. We might just as easily impose an ability to a German Shepherd to have an opinion on abortion as we would in imposing an understanding of man's condition apart from the enlightening ministry of God.

And we see yet another error in your statement in this: you are imposing the conditions of your assertion as relevant to works themselves. Nowhere in Scripture is there a general statement that all believers will have works and faith to the end, but the opposite, there is warning of being diligent in these areas of our walk so that we do not, for example, make shipwreck of our faith. Scripture teaches God will judge sin in our lies, which if severe enough, may result in physical death.

But nowhere do we see that He returns us to a natural condition.

Peter gives the illustration that the pig is still a pig, though washed, and the dog returns to his vomit again. The point? No change.

Now what OSAS does teach is that if one does reject Christ after professing to have faith, or if one does not evidence faith by their works, it is questionable that they were ever saved. But for me, as a firm OSAS advocate, I take the position that sometimes, perhaps, that person is simply one in need of restoration.

So your assertion requires quite a few assumptions, and imposition of premise which is not entirely relevant to OSAS, or how it is taught by differing people. Sure, some new believers might get the impression that Eternal Security is a license for sin, but it is doubtful that you will ever quote the first endorser or teacher of OSAS actually saying that. It is an argument which is falsely attributed to those who embrace Eternal Security.

Now, however you decide to respond to this, again I ask you, who created the response, me...or you? Secondly, when men are saved, who created their response? Who created the response of the rejecter? THey wouldn't be objecting if they were not first privy to what it is they are rejecting, right?

Okay, hope to see you guys before too much time passes, I will check back in at the appointed time.


God bless.

 

That was like reading a Matthew Henry commentary. One sentence which only halfway pertained to what I wrote, and 6 paragraphs of nonsense.

 

So the response was disdain. Excellent. Now did you have that prior to my post?

And I have broken my resolve in stepping away, lol, so not sure if I will be able to follow up.


God bless.

 

Disdain prior to your post? Of course I did. But not toward you. My disdain is toward 2 groups who pretend they're opposed to each other, but both systems lead to the same end.

But then your rebuttal....
You wrote at least twice that I was in error, then hardly anything you wrote even remotely pertained to my post.

Here's the gist of my post:
OSAS and Conditional Security agree...no works, no heaven.

And I didn't read anything beyond your first sentence which related to that assertion. And your first sentence only halfway at that.

Here's my assertion again - OSAS and Conditional Security agree that if you have no works, you will die a second death in hell.

I have demonstrated my assertion in other threads, and I've demonstrated the fact that, to their credit, the CS group plainly states it while the OSAS group does everything they can think of to not give straight answers

Now, if your reply addresses anything other than my assertion that the two camps agree, then you have successfully wandered into left field.

Capisce?