O.S.A.S. (Once. Saved. Always. Saved)

I see that you are a pastor of a Baptist church. I assume, therefore, that you have graduated from a good Baptist seminary and that you have therefore completed a number of courses in soteriology and that you have participated in a number of seminars in which the pro and cons of your views on soteriology were presented in great detail. Why, then are you asking that your questions, that have already been answered in this thread, and in very great detail in other threads on this message board, be answered again here.

In the meantime, you might wish to explain to us why the doctrine of salvation is presented to us in such an encrypted form in the Bible that no one was able to understand it until John Calvin came along.

</font>[/QUOTE]For your information, Craig---I joined in this tread late in the pages---and simply wanted someone to kinda fill me in on the "cons" of OSAS.

Being, though, as how this thread is already established obviously and leaning heavily toward the slippery slope of loseing salvation---I will butt out(as a participant--but will monitor as a moderator) of the conversation----and let you boys ramble on----by the way---I didn't pick up anywhere along the way in the twelve pages---any one post that has answered my late question----have a good night, Mister Craig!!

Bro. David

 

Come on, steaver. YOU were the one that tied the passages together earlier in the thread. Ya know what? I no longer care. I'm not up for 5 more pages of this one passage, and I feel it slipping back into the type of discussion I so wanted to avoid earlier in the thread. We're at an impass on this one. So please move on and lets look at another passage. Say Matt 18:23-35? A servant of the king who was forgiven, who later had that forgiveness revoked?

 

"Forgiveness revoked"

Let's say that it is as you think. Can you apply this to the Christian life for me?

How would this play out? What if I refuse to forgive someone for say three days. Am I unsaved for those days and then if I decide to forgive the person I am then saved again?

God Bless!

 

I don't know, that's up to God. Deal with the passage please.

 

You don't know? You teach that God revokes forgiveness to Christians yet you cannot give a real life scenario!

I can deal with every passage of the bible. I can apply it to every day life. "Unforgiveness" is a sin and we are not perfect and will have times of unforgiveness in our hearts.

Do you believe the blood of Christ cannot cover this sin for the children of God?

If you understood the covenant you preach about, you would know this.... "This is the covenant I will make with them......... their sins and iniquities will I remember no more ". (Heb 10:16-17)

Is God going to forget them? Or is God going to keep them in reserve in case we hold a grudge against someone in the future?

If you can't apply the passage, then I would suggest scratching it off of your reference list for your position of children of God being sent to hell.

God Bless!

 

Craig wrote:

I didn't know that the apostle John's last name was Calvin too. Are you sure of that?

"He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.
These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and thatye may believe on the name of the Son of God."

And BTW, I don't think that he was that old when he wrote his epistle.

 

Here's a scenario for you: Matt 18:23-35.

Is this what you are saying Matt 18:23-35 is about? If not, I would prefer you to talk about Matt 18:23-35 instead.

I would suggest you not telling me what to do. You said you would/could deal with any passage. How about Matt 18:23-35?

 

I was thinking the same thing. I never read anything from Calvin, but I have read the letters of the new testament and it is quite simple to understand words such as "eternal, everlasting life, never thirst, sealed unto the day of redemption, born of God, saints, free, gift, grace, not of yourselves, imputed, etc, etc"

God Bless!

 

It is also easy to understand "till death do you part" and "what God has joined together, let no man put assunder" and "the two shall become one flesh". Such is the language of a covenant that is meant to remain intact.

 

You want me to talk about it, and I did, but you have nothing to say of it! I explained why it wouldn't be a Christian being unforgiven. I gave supporting scripture. You haven't said a word about it.

God Bless!

 

So someone (Peter and the disciples, verse 1, 21, 35) can be a servant of the king (the Father, verse 35), beg his Lord for forgiveness, have all his debts (sins/trespasses, verse 35) forgiven, and he's not a Christian?

 

Steaver wrote,

The Roman Catholic Church, all of the Orthodox Churches, the Episcopal and other Anglican Churches, the Lutheran churches, the Methodist churches, the Church of the Nazarene, the Assemblies of God, the Church of God in Christ, the Church of God Cleveland Tennessee, and most other Christian denominations teach conditional security. The major exceptions are most Baptist Churches, almost all Reformed and Presbyterian Churches, and most of the churches in the Calvary Chapel movement.

No, I am not a Roman Catholic, and neither were the Ante-Nicene Church Fathers whom it pleased God to use to establish the New Testament Canon and formalize the doctrine of the Trinity. The plain, simple, and obvious fact is that if OSAS is really taught in the Bible, SOMEONE, SOMEWHERE would have noticed that little detail—but there is no evidence that anyone did between the close of the New Testament Canon and teaching of John Calvin and his cohorts, and there is a huge amount of evidence that no one did. Indeed, the doctrine of OSAS is dependent upon a whole system of man-made theology that did not develop during the first 1500 years AFTER Christ died for our sins. If OSAS is a true doctrine (but of course it is not), the Bible was so very poorly worded that the doctrine of salvation could not be understood from the Bible without the help of John Calvin. And if that is true (and of course it is not), the Bible could not be the inspired work that it claims to because God is more than capable of inspiring Scriptures regarding salvation that can be understood without the help of John Calvin.

The Roman Catholic Church accepted as true the teachings of the Ante-Nicene Church Fathers regarding the doctrine of the Trinity, the Deity of Christ, the New Testament Canon, and every other major doctrine, including conditional security, as have the large majority of Protestant Denominations. The mere fact that the Roman Catholic Church accepted as true the teachings of the Ante-Nicene Church Fathers regarding the doctrine of the Trinity, the Deity of Christ, the New Testament Canon, and conditional security does NOT mean that these are false doctrines.

The plain, simple, and obvious fact is that if OSAS is really taught in the Bible, SOMEONE, SOMEWHERE would have noticed that little detail during the 1500 years between the close of the New Testament Canon and teaching of John Calvin and his cohorts.

 

JackRus wrote,

The plain, simple, and obvious fact is that if OSAS is really taught in the Bible, SOMEONE, SOMEWHERE would have noticed that little detail—but there is no evidence that anyone did between the close of the New Testament Canon and teaching of John Calvin and his cohorts, and there is a huge amount of evidence that no one did.

And he who once believed and was saved but who has chosen a different master no longer has the Son and consequently he no longer “hath” life.

 

Blackbird wrote,

Perhaps I should feel insulted by such a post, but I have come to expect such a thing from those who are not able to refute my data, my exegesis, or my logic. From my graduate students who occasionally disagree with me, I typically get very carefully researched rebuttals, so it makes me feel sad for those who have nothing to respond with but demeaning words and phrases.

 

To Craigbythesea

Do you believe you can loose your salvation once you get to heaven?

 

No, I do not.

 

why not?

 

If you can figure out why you can't loose your salvation once you get to heaven, you can began to understand why many believe a genuinely saved person can't loose their salvation at all.

 

I was afraid that you were going to ask that!

Your question is a very good one, but not an easy one to answer because the Bible does not specifically address that question like it does the question of apostasy of the believer while he is still alive. And indeed, this is not a subject that I have given much study or prayer to, and I am not, therefore, qualified to give you any more than the most humble and uninformed opinion that I have already given to you. No, I do not you can loose your salvation once you get to heaven. Yes, I am aware of the can of worms that this question opens for theologians.

 

The Bible expressly says, in many places, that a genuinely saved person CAN lose their salvation, and the fact that it does say this was not questioned during the period between the close of the New Testament Canon and teaching of John Calvin and his cohorts. During the 16th century, however, several new, man-made doctrines and theologies were introduced to the Church and accepted by a great many Christians. These new, man-made doctrines and theologies, once accepted, made it necessary for these people to interpret very much of the New Testament, and even the Old Testament, in a very different way than it had been interpreted before. And so it is today among most Baptists. The much larger portion of the Church, however, has stood firm and has totally rejected these theological aberrations.