can we loose salvation ......

[DHK]

Right. However, General Baptists and Free Will Baptists also reference the Bible to come to their conclusions.

What standard of biblical interpretation can we apply to determine who is correct: the OSAS Baptist, or the Free Will Baptist?

CA

There are some that are not going to like my answer but here it is.
1. Sola Scriptura is the answer. Again, all that means is that the Bible is the final authority, and we search the Scriptures diligently until we are convinced that we have the answer. Normally God gives peace at that time.
Many revert back to this line of reasoning:
The Church Fathers say this, and therefore I believe. It doesn't matter what they say; it matters what the Bible says.

2. Concerning OSAS, I will simply say that anyone that believes that they can lose their salvation does not fully understand what salvation is all about. The doctrine of soteriology is a wonderful doctrine. Once understood properly one could never come to the conclusion that they can lose their salvation.

 

[Zenas]

Zenas,

The only one that works is #1 since all others require you to work for it! That is not a license to do anything you want, but is a total invitation to rest in the Lord as He did it all.

There is nothing you can add to the deal. If you do add any good work you are insulting Him and His completed work. He did not die for your sins but rose from the dead to give you ETERNAL life!

He paid for the sins of the entire world (that pretty much would be ALL for ALL times even for the OT guys). Now if this is true does it make sense to keep asking for forgiveness of already forgiven sins? Sort of like saying the rosary and babbling the same stuff over and over again at some point He just might think you are completely nuts. Should we keep short accounts?

The devil likes them because he keeps you worrying about yourself and not telling our friends about the Good News.

Later,

John

In light of this answer, would you please give your views on 1 John 1:8-10 and James 5:15.

 

[Zenas]

There are some that are not going to like my answer but here it is.
1. Sola Scriptura is the answer. Again, all that means is that the Bible is the final authority, and we search the Scriptures diligently until we are convinced that we have the answer. Normally God gives peace at that time.
Many revert back to this line of reasoning:
The Church Fathers say this, and therefore I believe. It doesn't matter what they say; it matters what the Bible says.

2. Concerning OSAS, I will simply say that anyone that believes that they can lose their salvation does not fully understand what salvation is all about. The doctrine of soteriology is a wonderful doctrine. Once understood properly one could never come to the conclusion that they can lose their salvation.

In the law when a statute or contract is ambiguous, the parties will look to cases from the past to see how that or similar ambiguous language was interpreted in the courts. Likewise, when scripture is susceptible to more than one interpretation, it is appropriate to seek outside assistance and the Church Fathers are quite helpful. Obviously, it would be wrong to believe the Church Fathers if they are in conflict with plainly worded scripture. But in matters like the subject of this thread (OSAS), it is clear that there are at least two very opposite views.

Interestingly, the doctrine of OSAS was not an issue among the Church Fathers. Everyone just assumed you could fall from grace (and it wasn't too hard to do) until after the Reformation. So I wonder how could they get it wrong for 1500 years and then discover this radical new doctrine in the same scripture that had been around since the 1st Century?

 

[jniles]

In light of this answer, would you please give your views on 1 John 1:8-10 and James 5:15.

Zenas we must not read mail or a letters written to someone else and take it as our own. The nine General epistles Hebrews through Revelation are not our mail. The letters of Paul are and they are the only ones where all doctrine for the church is found for today. If we were living on earth after the rapture and before the His return to set up the Kingdom the letters of Paul would not be for us. But the General epistles would be our mail. They can teach us lots but they must square with Paul's teaching for them to apply to the church, today before the rapture. Those books really teach one must not fall away they must endure to the end and never accept the mark of the beast. Those people don't have the gift of faith + nothing but rather they like all economies before the Church age must also do a work, in this case hang on and endure where in the Garden it was not eat, under the law it was offer sacrifices. But in our economy of faith + nothing it is ALL done for us by the FINISHED work of Christ on and after the cross when He conquered death and gave it to you ETERNALLY.

In any event 1 John 1: 9 is still preaching to the lost and always has been. It has been debated for many years. In fact 1 John 1: 8-10, although not written to you, must still be squared in context and with itself. That would be found in 1 John 5: 1 that all who believe Jesus is the Messiah have been born of God and therefore they also love His Child. The final conclusion for the context is stated in 1 John 5: 18 that everyone born of God does not sin . . . And that is because the One that lives inside you, your spirit the one that has eternal life along with the indwelling Holy Spirit cannot sin regardless of what you do in and with your flesh body. You are sealed to the day of redemption so quit fighting it or rest in it. You can drag Him through your sins but you cannot loose Him and 1 John is telling you so right here.

As far as James is concerned read the first verse of the letter and answer the question, is this letter addressed to me? Again you cannot just pluck verses from here and there and say they apply to you when they have no bearing on the situation, especially when taken by themselves and totally out of context. Take this passage James 5 and start with verse 13, better still start at the beginning. And by the way remember to have your olive oil.

Later,

John the Blabtist

 

[Zenas]

Zenas we must not read mail or a letters written to someone else and take it as our own. The nine General epistles Hebrews through Revelation are not our mail. The letters of Paul are and they are the only ones where all doctrine for the church is found for today. If we were living on earth after the rapture and before the His return to set up the Kingdom the letters of Paul would not be for us. But the General epistles would be our mail. They can teach us lots but they must square with Paul's teaching for them to apply to the church, today before the rapture. Those books really teach one must not fall away they must endure to the end and never accept the mark of the beast. Those people don't have the gift of faith + nothing but rather they like all economies before the Church age must also do a work, in this case hang on and endure where in the Garden it was not eat, under the law it was offer sacrifices. But in our economy of faith + nothing it is ALL done for us by the FINISHED work of Christ on and after the cross when He conquered death and gave it to you ETERNALLY.

Well, jniles, I have to say that got my attention. Are you really saying the Pauline epistles are the only scripture that is controlling of the Church today? That everything else is interesting and perhaps useful, but not meant for us and therefore not controlling? I have seen people relegate the O.T. to something like "useful history" but never the Gospels, the Acts and the General Epistles. Anyway, thanks for responding to my request for your views. I must say that, unlike some, you were not the least bit evasive.

 

[DHK]

Interestingly, the doctrine of OSAS was not an issue among the Church Fathers. Everyone just assumed you could fall from grace (and it wasn't too hard to do) until after the Reformation. So I wonder how could they get it wrong for 1500 years and then discover this radical new doctrine in the same scripture that had been around since the 1st Century?

It was not an issue among the early church fathers, because no one believed that there was the remotest possibility that eternal life could suddenly become temporary life. Words have meanings. The early believers knew what these words; these promises meant.

 

[BobRyan]

Zenas we must not read mail or a letters written to someone else and take it as our own. The nine General epistles Hebrews through Revelation are not our mail.

And then neither is the Gospel of Luke??

How about the words of Paul? "ALL scripture is given by inspiration from God AND IS profitable for doctrine" -- is that also not for us? How many books in your Bible?

How about the fact that Paul writes his letters TO a specific church - do we delete them as well?

Seems like a very odd way to try to protect OSAS.

in any case you still have Matt 18 -- "forgiveness revoked"
John 15:1-5 "being removed from the vine of Christ and burned up"
Rom 11 "Removed from the olive tree - due to unbelief"

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

I agree, Christ will never forsake us, but whose to say we will not forsake and turn our back on our relationship with Christ tomorrow or 5 years from now?

Just b/c I no longer agree with OSAS doesn’t mean that I believe one morning I’ll wake-up and Christ will have forsaken me…He’ll never forsake me,

True - the issue is not that the free will God has might lead Him to innexplicably forsake His Own faithful trusting saints. The issue is the warnings that HE GIVES about OUR turning away from salvation -

in other words taking a hard look at the "real" test cases that OSAS must survive to "be Biblically correct"

As was pointed out on page 1 -

However to "TEST" OSAS you need a text that actually addresses points like the following -

1. Can you have your forgiveness revoked? (Matt 18)
2. After being joined to Christ can you be "severed from Christ"? (Gal 5)
3. After entering into salvation and under grace can you "Fall from Grace"? (Gal 5)
4. After being united to Christ in the VINE of Christ - can you be "cut off", spiritual die, and then burn? (John 15:1-7)
5. After being joined to the body of Christ by faith - can you be removed for "unbelief" just like the unbelieving Jews? (Rom 11)
6. Once God has removed someone from the body of Christ - from union with Christ -- can he "restore them once again if they do not continue in UNBELIEF"? (Rom 11)

In otherwords IF go to texts that explicitly deal with these subjects and they teach an OSAS friendly view that "no such thing can possibly happen" THEN you have actual Bible support for OSAS.

Seems like a good exercise for the unbiased objective reader.

 

[Agnus_Dei]

True - the issue is not that the free will God has might lead Him to innexplicably forsake His Own faithful trusting saints. The issue is the warnings that HE GIVES about OUR turning away from salvation -

in other words taking a hard look at the "real" test cases that OSAS must survive to "be Biblically correct"

BobRyan, like my parents, some people have a misunderstanding of what we mean when we say we don’t believe in the OSAS doctrine…It’s not about God forsaking us, it’s about us deciding to forsake Him. Every new day of our lives, until we taste death, we have a choice…continue to follow God and His commandments or simply choose not to. That’s why Paul says that we must run the good race and that we each have to work-out our own salvation.

This is why Theosis in the Orthodox Church is so important, as Christians we are attacked more severely by the devil and his minions than a lost soul. OSAS puts one in a false sense of security, making one believe that there’s nothing they themselves can do to lose salvation. Most (not all) people that adhere to OSAS have problems with sin themselves and have never been trained how to combat sin (their answer is: don’t worry about it, you’re forgiven…as the sin eats away at their soul…to the point where they’re not sure if they’re saved or not anymore)…this is why I believe this…as a former Baptist, our preacher would say that on many occasions he would visit the elderly in the hospital waiting to die, and the number one question to him was…am I saved, I’m worried that I’m not truly saved. Years and years of OSAS and at the last moment they start to flinch. I’d say they were indeed saved!

I’d also say this too that most (not all) OSASer’s have a shallow understanding of Biblical Salvation as taught by the Church anyway.

InXC
-

 

[BobRyan]

Those are some good points to think about - thanks for sharing.

At the core - the problem with OSAS is that God is giving warning after warning after warning in scripture to protect the saints against falling away - those who view God's warnings as "meaningless because nobody can actually fall away if they are really born-again" are not benefitted by that portion of scripture that their doctrine tells them to ignore.

that is the real danger.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[DeafPosttrib]

BobRyan,

That's true. I can easy see so many warnings in the Bible throughout from Genesis to Revelation.

It is more than just 'believed', 'confess-Romans 10:9,10 & 13(many Baptists use this for soul winning). Salvation is required for being commit our life to Christ with faith and obedience till death.

Rev. 3:5 says, "He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment, and I WILL(future tense) not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I WILL(future tense) his name before my Father, and before his angels."

This verse is not hard to read. Christ promises us, IF anyone who overcoming the world in the lifetime by the death, then Christ will not removed person's name from the book of life.

In other word, Christ warns us, if we FAIL to overcome the world by the time we die, our names might be removed away from the book of life. Then, what's happen? Cast away into the lake of fire - Rev. 20:14-15.

Word, 'overcome' means, to victory, fight, endure.

Once, we believed and accepted Christ, then we are begin the race(Matt. 7:13-14), start with wide road, like as we climbing up to the highest peak of the hill or mountian, as the road become more difficult and narrow. Many of us easy give up and turn away from the race, and at the end of our life, we will not be saved - Matt. 10:22; & Matt 24:13.

We must fight against sins, world, and Satan in our life. If we give up on them, let them overcome upon us, then, we will not be a overcomer at the end, then our name might be removed from the book of life, cast away in the lake of fire.

That what Christ actual saying according Rev. 3:5.

Sorry to saying it. Do not argue with me. Argue with Christ of Rev. 3:5.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

[BobRyan]

Amen DP!

1 Cor 9 "I buffet my body and make it my slave LEST after preaching the gospel to others I MYSELF should be disqualified" -

How instructive for those who will look past their doctrinal bias telling them to water it down or ignore it.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[jniles]

Well, jniles, I have to say that got my attention. Are you really saying the Pauline epistles are the only scripture that is controlling of the Church today? That everything else is interesting and perhaps useful, but not meant for us and therefore not controlling? I have seen people relegate the O.T. to something like "useful history" but never the Gospels, the Acts and the General Epistles. Anyway, thanks for responding to my request for your views. I must say that, unlike some, you were not the least bit evasive.

Zenas, Please don't mistake what I said.

I did not say we can ignore and scripture or that it is not useful. As all scripture is profitable for doctrine, teaching, reproof etc. But not all is addressed to us.

When you read where God says take some gopher wood and build an ark, it's probably not a good idea to ask God "What's gopher wood? . . . . . And oh, by the way, while You are at it, what is an ark?" That scripture was not to you but certainly for your diligent study and how it fits into the overall scheme of things. One must always rightly divide the Word of God as Paul told Timothy and us too in II Tim 2: 15.

Later,

John

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Zenas: Interestingly, the doctrine of OSAS was not an issue among the Church Fathers. Everyone just assumed you could fall from grace (and it wasn't too hard to do) until after the Reformation. So I wonder how could they get it wrong for 1500 years and then discover this radical new doctrine in the same scripture that had been around since the 1st Century?

DHK: It was not an issue among the early church fathers, because no one believed that there was the remotest possibility that eternal life could suddenly become temporary life. Words have meanings. The early believers knew what these words; these promises meant.

HP: First, I believe Zenas has a very valid point. The logic DHK tries to employ in rebuttal is simply an attempt to employ a logical fallacy, arguing from silence. Such fallacy adds no validity to DHK’s position in the least, and as a matter of fact emphasizes how weak his position on OSAS in reality must in fact be.

 

[DHK]

HP: First, I believe Zenas has a very valid point. The logic DHK tries to employ in rebuttal is simply an attempt to employ a logical fallacy, arguing from silence. Such fallacy adds no validity to DHK’s position in the least, and as a matter of fact emphasizes how weak his position on OSAS in reality must in fact be.

My point is as valid as Zenas. His was an argument from silence as well, an assumption; not a fact. His opinion that the ECF didn't believe in OSAS does't make it true.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK: My point is as valid as Zenas. His was an argument from silence as well, an assumption; not a fact. His opinion that the ECF didn't believe in OSAS does't make it true.

HP: I would disagree. I believe history shows clearly the advent of OSAS as well as the notion of original sin far subsequent to the early Church or the writings of the early Christian fathers. Whenever an idea has not been established as a clear doctrine held or sanctioned by the Church, including the ECF,s I would basically find it wise to conclude it is not truth and not established by Scripture.

I believe it is entirely possible to trace the roots of OSAS to the same individual responsible for the false notion of original sin, i.e., to Augustine, the father of the doctrine of original sin. He was the introducer of many ideas foreign to the early Church and biblical writ.

 

[dcorbett]

IF that were possible (and it's not) then Jesus would have to die on the cross again.

IT IS FINISHED...

Amen! Grace is what we don't deserve, but God gives it to us.

 

[dcorbett]

When you are saved, the Holy Spirit comes to dwell in you. Can you kick him out? Nope. Even when you turn your back, He still whispers in your ear....."what are you doing?"

Trust me, I walked out of God's will for over 20 years, but I knew in my heart I was saved, I just had to make the choice to go back and live in His will.

Debbie Mc

 

[DHK]

HP: I would disagree. I believe history shows clearly the advent of OSAS as well as the notion of original sin far subsequent to the early Church or the writings of the early Christian fathers. Whenever an idea has not been established as a clear doctrine held or sanctioned by the Church, including the ECF,s I would basically find it wise to conclude it is not truth and not established by Scripture.

I believe it is entirely possible to trace the roots of OSAS to the same individual responsible for the false notion of original sin, i.e., to Augustine, the father of the doctrine of original sin. He was the introducer of many ideas foreign to the early Church and biblical writ.

To which individual do you trace it?
I can trace it to Moses, to all the prophets, to Jesus, to all the Apostles Isn't that far enough back? I think that at least 6000 years back should be good enough.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK: To which individual do you trace it?
I can trace it to Moses, to all the prophets, to Jesus, to all the Apostles Isn't that far enough back? I think that at least 6000 years back should be good enough.

HP: Ahhh yes. It is those illusive penumbral presuppositions that the Calvinist seems to be so adept at pulling out from under the pages or lying hidden between the lines. :smilewinkgrin: