Once Saved Always Saved?

[37818]

 

[JonC]

The way I see it, you are either saved or you are not. How can somebody be saved one day and not the next? That doesn't make sense.

 

[Centrist]

I fail to see how a person can be saved, then they turn around and commit a horrible crime, but they are still saved? Case in point, some of the Latin American gangs that claim to be saved, they have the tatts, they have the jewelry, yet they rape rob & murder. Can they really be saved? Afterwards, yes. But during?

 

[DaveXR650]

The Calvinistic perseverance of the saints as opposed to OSAS as commonly taught in Baptist churches is correct. It has always puzzled me how someone who is so big on free will that they demand by definition that it means you have to be the the deciding factor in coming to Christ - will turn around and say but once you are saved you no longer have this valued free will so that you could leave Christ.

 

[JonC]

The Calvinistic perseverance of the saints as opposed to OSAS as commonly taught in Baptist churches is correct. It has always puzzled me how someone who is so big on free will that they demand by definition that it means you have to be the the deciding factor in coming to Christ - will turn around and say but once you are saved you no longer have this valued free will so that you could leave Christ.

I get what you are saying and the uniqueness of Calvinism, but I disagree insofar as dealing with OSAS as you ate not representing that position fairly.


When it comes to experiential belief, that cannot change. So it really has nothing to do with free-will.



If you burn your hand in a fire then you know the fire is hot in a way somebody who only knows of fire theoretically cannot.

I have used a previous discussion about alpha radiation. I was taught, and believed, that it could be shielded with paper. I could be persuaded to abandon this belief.

But once I put a sample with alpha contamination in an envelope and observed it being shielded with paper I knew in a way I could never reject.


OSAS is not based on free-will but the idea that a person, once saved, is reborn.

 

[DaveXR650]

OSAS is not based on free-will but the idea that a person, once saved, is reborn.

Leighton Flowers, the man who did the video, teaches that you have a free will that God simply will not influence more than in a suggestive way which is never defined precisely. He demands in his logical scenario that to have free will a man must always be able to make a contrary choice. What I am saying is that that belief, if held, does not allow for one to logically end up where they for any reason have to continue to believe.

Your illustration, where something becomes apparent to someone because of evidence falls short of saving faith in salvation because that is more than just being convinced by the truth of the presented evidence. Unbelief in the Bible is more than not understanding the facts of the gospel, even though that is indeed a starting point.

Any Baptist, or any other denominational member, who believes in some way that salvation is wrought by the influence of the Holy Spirit and that it is impossible without such influence is perfectly logical in also believing that the same Holy Spirit can somehow keep you. You certainly don't have to be a Calvinist to believe that.

 

[DaveXR650]

As far as OSAS, it can very well be a valid belief. The problem is how do you know you are saved. OSAS, as taught by the group I am familiar with just says basically to go back to the time you first made the decision and ask yourself if you really, really believed it and were you sincere. Or they say if you ever said the prayer then don't worry about it at all because that could be sinful in itself.

Reformed theology says that if you were really saved you will persevere and you are able to evaluate whether you are following a path that indicates you are "in the faith". It would be likened to Bunyan's "Pilgrims Progress" where the journey may be rough and filled with trials but you are walking a path, not just relying on a one time decision. Since that work is beloved by many non-Calvinist Baptists yet written by a Calvinist one can see how there is a lot of overlap in these views.

I don't have anything against OSAS except as it has been perverted in some modern circles into a decisionism or an easy believism. If I am wrong on Flowers view of free will and the influence of the Holy Spirit someone please correct me as I have been looking into him and only claim to know what I have seen so far. I could be wrong.

 

[robt.k.fall]

If I am saved, I am redeemed. God does not have a return counter like Costco to get the price He paid back.

 

[JonC]

Leighton Flowers, the man who did the video, teaches that you have a free will that God simply will not influence more than in a suggestive way which is never defined precisely. He demands in his logical scenario that to have free will a man must always be able to make a contrary choice. What I am saying is that that belief, if held, does not allow for one to logically end up where they for any reason have to continue to believe.

Your illustration, where something becomes apparent to someone because of evidence falls short of saving faith in salvation because that is more than just being convinced by the truth of the presented evidence. Unbelief in the Bible is more than not understanding the facts of the gospel, even though that is indeed a starting point.

Any Baptist, or any other denominational member, who believes in some way that salvation is wrought by the influence of the Holy Spirit and that it is impossible without such influence is perfectly logical in also believing that the same Holy Spirit can somehow keep you. You certainly don't have to be a Calvinist to believe that.

You misunderstood my illustration. I did not say "evidence" but "experience" and that in the form of rebirth. I agree that evidence can be denied.

You may be correct when it comes to Free-Will Baptists and even sects within the larger Baptist title.

Your mistake is in arguing against OSAS as if only articulated within those sects (you used "OSAS as commonly used in Baptist churches" without identifying specific sects.

For example, the SBC is currently the largest Baptist sect. They affirm OSAS. But not on the grounds you present (some may, but this is not the SBC position).

 

[DaveXR650]

For example, the SBC is currently the largest Baptist sect. They affirm OSAS. But not on the grounds you present (some may, but this is not the SBC position).

I was a Southern Baptist until six months ago. I took a moment and looked up the Baptist Faith and Message 2000 (section IV) on salvation. Surprisingly, it looks very Calvinistic, even to the point of describing repentance and faith as results of being born again. Still, Southern Baptist churches are a loose association and have a lot of freedom to believe as they choose on specifics. The view of OSAS I refer to is common in many Baptist churches to the point of being a major point in books by everyone from Paul Washer to John MacArthur. My own experience as a Southern Baptist was in a reformed church with most of the elders students of Al Mohler at Southern.

OSAS in my opinion is correct with the only problem being how do you know you are saved. Is it possible or allowable to evaluate yourself and is that a means of knowing or is the feeling that you have had an experience the only allowable criteria? This is important because while you can directly observe if you have burned yourself you cannot directly observe if you are saved until the final judgement.

There are many people who have been taught a doctrine that makes the claim that OSAS applies to you if you ever said a prayer or claimed belief. Baptist churches are full of such people because that is what they have been taught. And it is very common.

 

[JonC]

I was a Southern Baptist until six months ago. I took a moment and looked up the Baptist Faith and Message 2000 (section IV) on salvation. Surprisingly, it looks very Calvinistic, even to the point of describing repentance and faith as results of being born again. Still, Southern Baptist churches are a loose association and have a lot of freedom to believe as they choose on specifics. The view of OSAS I refer to is common in many Baptist churches to the point of being a major point in books by everyone from Paul Washer to John MacArthur. My own experience as a Southern Baptist was in a reformed church with most of the elders students of Al Mohler at Southern.

OSAS in my opinion is correct with the only problem being how do you know you are saved. Is it possible or allowable to evaluate yourself and is that a means of knowing or is the feeling that you have had an experience the only allowable criteria? This is important because while you can directly observe if you have burned yourself you cannot directly observe if you are saved until the final judgement.

There are many people who have been taught a doctrine that makes the claim that OSAS applies to you if you ever said a prayer or claimed belief. Baptist churches are full of such people because that is what they have been taught. And it is very common.

Several of the early SBC president's were Calvinists, and many within the convention are.

Let's say I condemn Calvinists because the doctrine of Unconditional Election means that it is wrong to share the gospel. There are several who do just this.

I hope you would call me out on that, but this is exactly what you are doing to those who affirm OSAS. That is why I am challenging you.

I have attended SBC churches for over 50 years. Every one I have attended held OSAS as a doctrine. But none of then did so on the grounds you say they stand.

I am in no way questioning your experience, or the fact that some (even many) churches believe as you say.

I am, however, questioning your judgment in condemning a doctrine based on how some Christians hold that doctrine.

It is wrong, just as it would be wrong for me to condemn the doctrine of Unconditional Election based on how some Calvinists hold the doctrine.

 

[DaveXR650]

I am, however, questioning your judgment in condemning a doctrine based on how some Christians hold that doctrine.

Where exactly did I condemn OSAS. This thread was not started by me, had no opening thought, just a video by Flowers. You either show me where I condemned it or back off questioning my judgment.

OSAS in a proper Baptist context is always in conjunction with the idea that your salvation is always the result of at least enlightening or conviction or drawing by the Holy Spirit. Exactly how you view this in your own mind is not important. But this idea is essential because if the Holy Spirit drew you, then it makes sense that the Holy Spirit keeps you. If you were to stray, the non-Cal Baptist teaching I grew up with was that the Spirit would convict, discipline, and even kill you rather than let you stray too far.

The Calvinist view develops this further with more on how the Spirit does this and much more on how a person can deal with God in prayer and self examination and how one can use scripture to keep on track.

There is a very large group that teach that once you are saved, it is possible for there to be no change and yet the person is saved. It is in that context that I would oppose OSAS. Of course my specific beef is that such a person was not ever really saved, not that a truly save person cannot be lost. Since this thread featured a video by Flowers, who puts a premium no free will, my question was is not this a contradiction for him.
If you want to challenge me I welcome that but please stop the condescending stuff where you don't engage the specific points I made but have to make up things I didn't say.

 

[Baptizo]

When I was saved almost two years ago most of the theologians I listened to were part of the Free Grace crowd. Then I read 1 John and discovered that a heart belief, not a head belief results in a changed life by the Holy Spirit dwelling in us.

I also read the warning passages in Hebrews which seems to indicate that it is possible for someone to drift away into apostasy. Hebrews 6 is the big one that some have tried to say is a hypothetical situation but I think that is probably a stretch based on the flow of the text. Of course these were Jews who returned to sacrificing animals at the Temple before it was destroyed in 70 AD.

Also Paul rebuked the Galatians for adding works to faith and they were “cut off” from Christ. The question then becomes if one is cut off from Christ does He still intercede for that person from Heaven?

 

[37818]

When I was saved almost two years ago most of the theologians I listened to were part of the Free Grace crowd. Then I read 1 John and discovered that a heart belief, not a head belief results in a changed life by the Holy Spirit dwelling in us.

I also read the warning passages in Hebrews which seems to indicate that it is possible for someone to drift away into apostasy. Hebrews 6 is the big one that some have tried to say is a hypothetical situation but I think that is probably a stretch based on the flow of the text. Of course these were Jews who returned to sacrificing animals at the Temple before it was destroyed in 70 AD.

Also Paul rebuked the Galatians for adding works to faith and they were “cut off” from Christ. The question then becomes if one is cut off from Christ does He still intercede for that person from Heaven?

I had received Christ in the summer of 1962.

Well, there are explicit promises.
And there are explicit warnings.
The warnings do not counter the promises.

1 John 5:9-13. One can know.
See John 10:28.

 

[Marooncat79]

The Hebrews 6 passage teach that if you lose it, you can never be saved again.
You see that in the phraseology of “for it is impossible” or some variation of the wording

 

[Marooncat79]

Salvation rests upon justification

Once God has declared us right there is nothing that can take us back -just read Romans 8

it is basically a business transaction (imputation) where Christ exchanges our sinfulness for His righteousness

hence once we have been declared righteous, and found in Christ how can righteousness be unimputed? James makes the point of the reason that some sleep was because they were believers whom God called home earlier than He would have

 

[Baptizo]

See John 10:28.

I’ve listened to some Calvinists use that verse to prove that only the elect can respond to God. Someone might think they are in fellowship but it’s really a false faith and they were never really saved to begin with.

 

[37818]

New The Hebrews 6 passage teach that if you lose it, you can never be saved again.

Were does it say any were saved in said text? Hebrews 6:4-6? Hebrews 10:29.

 

[DaveXR650]

James makes the point of the reason that some sleep was because they were believers whom God called home earlier than He would have

Yes. I'm familiar with that and agree with that interpretation. But Calvinists believe that too. In Romans 8 you have in verse 4 "who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit". And again in verse 14 "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God. These are the sons of God". My question is, is it permissible to take these verses as a call to examine yourself to make sure you are doing this. I take those verses as not giving any assurance to someone who has no desire to be led by the Spirit of God. This would apply to self examination as well as church discipline. Since the "heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked" would it not be possible to deceive one's self as to the genuineness of their faith?

 

[37818]

I’ve listened to some Calvinists use that verse to prove that only the elect can respond to God. Someone might think they are in fellowship but it’s really a false faith and they were never really saved to begin with.

Well, I am not a Calvinist.
It has long been my understanding the election takes place after one's call by the hearing the gospel. Ephesians 1:12-14.