-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
A bogus way to try and salvage OSAS
- Thread starter BobRyan
- Start date
Darron Steele said:
1) No, I think that most folks who believe in OSAS also believe that they should continue in living as sin free lives as possible and they will do "good works" because they are saved.
However, they will rationalize when someone falls away and either say, "they were never 'saved' in the first place" or "they've lost fellowship with God but will still be saved".
J. Jump said:
The bible has more to say on the subject than only what is recorded in Eph 2:8-9. One scripture can modify the meaning of another. When Jesus was tempted and the devil quoted scripture, Jesus replied it is written again.
To hold to one scripture at the exclusion of others is not "rightly dividing the word of truth".
John 3:22, 26, 4:1 After this Jesus and his disciples went into the Judean countryside, and he remained there with them and was baptizing...And they came to John and said to him, "Rabbi, he who was with you across the Jordan, to whom you bore witness--look, he is baptizing, and all are going to him"...Now when Jesus learned that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John...
If you hold to these at the exclusion of all other passages, then you would sincerely believe but wrongly teach that Jesus baptized people.
However, that is not all that is revealed on this subject. Notice John 4:2 (although Jesus himself did not baptize, but only his disciples).
If you exclude John 4:2, you can make a convincing case that Jesus baptized people. You would still be wrong, but convincing. You could even convince others, and they would be just as wrong as you.
That is exactly what people do with Eph 2:8-9, they hold to it at the EXCLUSION of other passages. Rather than to harmonize it, they isolate it. That is not "rightly dividing".
I know that you decide what passages are dealing with eternal salvation and which ones aren't. I know you have some rather unique views dealing with the soul and spirit. You claim that the soul has nothing to do with eternal salvation. Maybe to work things out in your head, you were forced to this conclusion, however, I have not reached that conclusion.
God makes reference to His Soul and Spirit (Matt 12:18). That would make both eternal.
The souls will be punished in hell (Matt 10:28).
Jesus' soul went to the Hadean realm (Acts 2:27).
The eternal salvation and salvation of the soul are the same thing. Notice I Pet 1:3-9 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy has begotten us again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled and that does not fade away, reserved in heaven for you, who are kept by the power of God through faith for salvation ready to be revealed in the last time. In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while, if need be, you have been grieved by various trials, that the genuineness of your faith, being much more precious than gold that perishes, though it is tested by fire, may be found to praise, honor, and glory at the revelation of Jesus Christ, whom having not seen you love. Though now you do not see Him, yet believing, you rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory, receiving the end of your faith—the salvation of your souls.
Therefore, your soul will either end up in heaven or hell. One is described as life while the other is described as death.
James is describing a Christian sinning which results in death and a multitude of uncovered sins.
Surely you are not assigning eternal life to someone the bible describes as a brother who has wandered from the truth, whose soul is headed for death and whose sins are uncovered.
James 1 tells us that sin results in death. Then in James 5 he says that a brother can wander from the truth and if he is not brought back, it will result in death with a multitude of uncovered sins. The OBVIOUS meaning of this is that he will lose his soul in eternal punishment. Since they did not continue to obey their soul will be eternally punished (II Thess 1:8-9).
You are right. Acts 16:30-31 says believe (plus NOTHING) and you WILL BE saved.
But Scripture will NEVER contradict itself and that is what you cause it to do when you say ANYTHING other than faith is needed for eternal salvation. That's just the plain and simple Truth of the matter.
This argument from the CoC is so lame and old you would think you all could come up with something a little better. N
NE is excluding Scripture. Scripture must be kept in its proper context. I'll talk about the book of James or anything else you want to bring up all day long. I don't exclude Scripture and I don't pit Scripture against Scripture either.That's the WHOLE point. NO WORKS does NOT harmonize with WORKS. It just doesn't. That should be pretty simple to understand.
Christ said It is finished. That can not be harmonized with the idea that we must do something in order to add to our salvation. That's just the simple Truth of the matter.
So it's not folks isolating Scripture, but it is folks that take the whole of Scripture and understand that not ALL passages that speak of faith, salvation, eternal life, believe, etc. are talking about eternal salvation.
You and others simply ignore the contradictions that you place on Scripture and act as though they don't exist. But sticking your head in the sand does not make then go away.
Again you are mistaken. "I" don't determine ANYTHING. Scripture determines it.
Wonder why James told "saved" folks in James 1:21 that they needed something they already had. Seems kind of silly to me. Wonder why Paul said these folks in Ephesians 2 were "saved" if eternal salvation isnt' something that can be completed until the end as I Peter 1:9 states.
See you just have all kinds of contradictions in Scripture with your view.
Well at least you see the warnings in Scripture have to do with saved folks. Most of Christendom either ignores these warnings or say they have to do with the unsaved.
However you misapply the context to the endless ages. Eternal life is not talking about forever and ever and ever and ever and ever, etc. Eternal life is talking about life for the age. Eternal has come to mean something in modern-day language that it has not always meant. Aionios is the Greek word and a better way of understanding the word is age-lasting.
This life is for a specific period of time.
So no these Christians will not have eternal life. However they are eternally saved without question. Ephesians 2:8-9 and Acts 16:30-31 tell us this. There are no escape clauses here. So either Paul didn't give them the whole truth or these verses mean what they say.
I don't think Paul held out on these folks.
Eph. 2:8 is the most convincing because the Greek verb is perfect. Meaning the event has been "completed" in the past (which is yet another shot to your theology) and it never has to be repeated. The results of this action carry out into the present and will carry out into the future.
That's EXACTLY right. However you are defining eternal differently than Scripture does. Aionios doesn't mean forever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever, ect. It means age-lasting. It is a Greek adjective that modifies the Greek noun aion, which means age. It is a set period of time that has a beginning and an end.
Age-lasting life is life that will have a beginning and an end. Eternal salvation in the sense of the endless ages should really be talked about in terms of everlasting life. That is life that has a beginning, but will never end.
But in closing there are simply too many contradictions that you place on Scripture that I am unwiling to accept. You make the perfect works of redemption by God Himself incomplete and imperfect. I am unwilling to do that. God doesn't need my filthy works He simply just needs me to believe in what He has done on my behalf, because I was incapable of acting on my behalf.
See the biggest problem with your views is that Jesus dying was simply not needed. If we are able to act in a way that is pleasing to God then Jesus didn't need to die.
I always love it when works-based salvation folks quote Scripture, because it ALWAYS shows them their error. And once again Bob has given us Scripture that either places a contradiction with Paul himself or his views on what this Scripture means is incorret.
Now here we have a text of Scripture that says salvation is not something that is already possessed. It is something that can be had out in the future IF these readers "persevere."
This simply does not "harmonize," as mman would say, with Eph. 2:8-9 and Acts 16:30-31 (there are more, but if there be just ONE contradiction that is enough). Paul said these folks "have been saved" It's a "completed" event. It was OVER for these folks.
So how can Paul tell one set of people that they already had salvation and then tell another set of people that salvation is not a present reality, but something that will be attained in the end if certain criteria are made.
Simply it does not. The ONLY possible answer is that Paul is not talking about the same thing.
There is so much more that could be said on this contradiction, but enough has been said to show the folly of believing in a works-based salvation plan.
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
For the brave OSAS believer who is willing to look at the many ways scripture debunks OSAS -- I give the following
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=1041638#post1041638
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=1041638#post1041638
Thankfully.
Hardly. You have no support for your statement. You merely state your opinion and hope people will buy it. Unforunately there are probably lots that do
, to their own demise I'm afraid.:laugh: Good one!
Not a "hard question," but an irrelevant one. And I'm not avoiding it. There's simply nothing to answer, because you entire question is based in fallacy. The verse that you quote doesn't say anything about burning in hell forever.
That is a presupposition that "you" place onto the text. So there is no need for me to respond to your presuppositions. Is there? I don't think so. Now if you want to deal with what Scripture actually says (not what man has to say about it or how man has translated it, but what's ACTUALLY there) then that's a whole other can of worms.
Ed Edwards
<img src=/Ed.gif>
BobRyan said:
In each case you appear to confuse the following:
1. That which we do to get saved (nothing) - Jesus Saves
2. that which we, the saved do (all on that page) - with
the help of Jesus
Lacy Evans
New Member
BobRyan said:
According to your doctrine, what is the reason that God is not allowed to purge his children by chastening them, before they face filial judgement at the JSOC?
DeafPosttrib
New Member
Lacy,
You quoted Hebrews 12:4-11 has do nothing with the 'proof' of purgatory or millennial exclusion doctrine. This passage deals talking about being chastening us WHILE we are still alive, not beyond after our death.
In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!
You quoted Hebrews 12:4-11 has do nothing with the 'proof' of purgatory or millennial exclusion doctrine. This passage deals talking about being chastening us WHILE we are still alive, not beyond after our death.
In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!
Lacy Evans
New Member
DeafPosttrib said:
A little proof?
Bob, I have read this several times and I don't see your question and Mman's question as one in the same point.
Your question....... "Question:
HOW can it be WORSE? Worse to live with Christ forever than burn in hell forever??"
mman's question......."Here is my question, If OSAS were true, how could it ever be possible for someone who has escaped the defilements through the knowledge of our LORD and SAVIOR Jesus Christ to be better off having never known the way of righteousness?"
I'm not seeing the same question nor the same point.
God Bless! :thumbs:
Ed Edwards
<img src=/Ed.gif>
Lacy Evans
New Member
A little proof?
oohhhh! Why didn't I see it before?:BangHead:
Lacy