OSAS and future sins?

[Frogman]

Let us have context of Matt. 23.12 so that we can see that these scripture is not speaking in reference to anyone's eternal salvation:

Matthew 23:1  ¶Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,
2  Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:
3  All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
4  For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.
5  But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments,
6  And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues,
7  And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi.
8  But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.
9  And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
10  Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.
11  But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.
12  And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.

This is speaking directly to those who are among you (you being the family of God); vs. 12 cannot stand alone and cannot be made to say that by self humiliation one wins position as child of God. It teaches in context that those among the children of God who would be great must be servant and then vs 12 says: And whoseover shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.

No mention of changing themselves from children of wrath to children of God.

God Bless
Bro. Dallas

I will give you, for the sake of argument, the statement concerning fruits of Protestantism, for what that is worth.

 

[Frogman]

Concerning licentiousness:

GRACE LEADS TO A GODLY LIFE
I once met a young man, a minister of another order, who told me how he had labored day and night to get young people to join his church. He had been successful; they had more than fifty additions. "But," said he, "I do not know what to do with them now. I was troubled as to how to get them into the church but now my troubles are greater than ever. Some want to dance, some use profane language, some visit the salon, some sit at the card table, and but few of them will attend the prayer meeting and many are absent from the regular services."
He asked me if I could give him my advice in such cases. I told him that in my opinion he had built of wood, hay and stubble. These young people know nothing of grace. They still love sin better than they love righteousness. Said I, "You have done the converting and have made a failure, for you could not change the heart." I told him that we (Primitive Baptists) only wished to receive those into our churches who already gave us evidence of a change of heart which is done for them by grace. Such love righteousness better than sin and seldom bring reproach upon the cause.
I wish this young man could have been with us in our meeting at Eagle Creek, Ohio, in April, and witnessed the godly devotion of some young in years whose hearts have been circumcised by the Spirit of God. Dear young soldiers, go on in this way and prove by your lives that grace leads to a godly life and not a sinful one.
---Elder William H. Crouse
Zion's Advocate, 1903.

 

[Ray Berrian]

Sometimes I think the Lord in His glorious Self could come down and tell you the truth, and you would still try to explain it to Him.

If all are chastised, the saved and lost, then if a lost person were to drop dead before repentance, he would go to Hell, and the term 'bastard' would stick. The Christian would enter Heaven; the unsaved man would have to walk through the gates of destruction.

Your spurious books in the apocrypha have confused you, perhaps beyond your rehabilitation to the truth of the Book of Hebrews chapter twelve. We will see.

 

[thessalonian]

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
Sometimes I think the Lord in His glorious Self could come down and tell you the truth, and you would still try to explain it to Him.

If all are chastised, the saved and lost, then if a lost person were to drop dead before repentance, he would go to Hell, and the term 'bastard' would stick. The Christian would enter Heaven; the unsaved man would have to walk through the gates of destruction.

Your spurious books in the apocrypha have confused you, perhaps beyond your rehabilitation to the truth of the Book of Hebrews chapter twelve. We will see.

The only thing I reject is the spurious false interprutations based on personal opinion of your mind that you have superimposed on God. This is a waste of time Ray. I could explain what I mean a hundred times and you would twist and contort it and think you have disproven it based on the false traditions that are the framework of what you believe the Bible says. Pentecostals would believe differently as would Lutherans and Presbyterians. Yet all would claim this is exactly what the Bible says. I pray that God lifts the viel from you.


Blessings.

 

[thessalonian]

"Your spurious books in the apocrypha have confused you, perhaps beyond your rehabilitation to the truth of the Book of Hebrews chapter twelve. We will see."

By the way Ray, the funny thing is that according to you I don't have to come to the truth because I am ALREADY SAVED. Jesus is my Lord and Savior. I REPENT OF ALL OF MY SINS PRAISE THE LORD. Every single one. So by your method of determining who is saved I am there buddy. (of course I don't go along with that). So what difference does it make if I come to the truth. In other words your doctrine of OSAS and future sins being forgiven nullifies the word of God! You believe a lie.

I'll keep placing my trust in Jesus knowing that if I turn and look back I will turn in to a pillar of salt so to speak. Keep your eyes fixed on him, the serpant on the pole raised high to cure us of our sin. Not just cover it with dung. Praise him!

Blessings

PS: I say this not to mock God but to expose the lie of OSAS for what it truly is.

 

[Ray Berrian]

thessalonian,

You said, 'I could explain what I mean a hundred times and you would twist and contort it...'

On the contrary, with no hurt intended, you do very well at twisting and contorting Scripture without any Catholic or Protestant help. Please, understand that I do understand what you are saying. Therein is the problem.

Your little witness about accepting Christ and confessing all your sins--here I was getting happy thinking that at least you believed this much of the Gospel, and then you dropped the bomb on me.

Denials, denials, denials hardly exegete Scripture or add to your hermaneutical skills.

What verses do you want to discuss now?

 

[thessalonian]

God bless you Ray.

 

[thessalonian]

Correction

"Not just cover it with dung."

should read:

Not just snow covered dung.

 

[thessalonian]

Hey Ray,

Do you belong to the United Church of Christ. Is that where you were a pastor?

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by thessalonian:
Hey Ray,

Do you belong to the United Church of Christ. Is that where you were a pastor?

When a person has nothing of value left to say, no rebuttal, no defense left, his only recours is to call people names. Not a very good defense Thessalonian, and all who read this board can see it. I also notice that you refuse to answer any of my posts.
DHK

 

[thessalonian]

Originally posted by DHK:

Originally posted by thessalonian:
Hey Ray,

Do you belong to the United Church of Christ. Is that where you were a pastor?

W
hen a person has nothing of value left to say, no rebuttal, no defense left, his only recours is to call people names. Not a very good defense Thessalonian, and all who read this board can see it. I also notice that you refuse to answer any of my posts.
DHK [/QUOTE

Ya right. Me nothing to say. Funny.

Call people names? Where did I do that?

No DHK,
I don't answer your posts because I have long ago come to the conclusion that I have also come to with Ray and everyone can see it. It's a waste of time. Your infallible Popes unto yourselves. sigh.


DHK are you a Baptist? OOOPS called you a name. Sorry.

God bless you DHK.

[ September 16, 2003, 04:29 PM: Message edited by: thessalonian ]

 

[DHK]

You rightly designate me as a Baptist, Thessalonian. That's not name calling. What is name-calling, is when you call me "a pope unto myself." Face it. You hold to many ungodly, unscriptural doctrines that have arisen out of traditions held by ungodly men. We hold to the Scriptures alone as our fnal authority in all things. That is the basic difference. Your doctrines such as: the assumption of Mary, purgatory, doctrines that are currently being discussed in other threads: replacement theology, and in this thread, OSAS, (or the denial thereof), are all unbiblical. I can support my position with Scripture. When I do, you call me or Ray, or others names. If not names, it is derogatory speech--"working within your framework of your false traditions." No Baptist works within a framework of tradition. That is the most ironic statement I have ever heard coming from a Catholic. Who works within a framework of tradition, but a Catholic. Get real with your accusations. I support my positions with the Bible. If you can refute them, then do so, but do it with Scripture. You cannot defend the assumption of Mary with Scripture, nor any other of your heretical doctrines.
DHK

 

[thessalonian]

Originally posted by DHK:
You rightly designate me as a Baptist, Thessalonian. That's not name calling. What is name-calling, is when you call me "a pope unto myself." Face it. You hold to many ungodly, unscriptural doctrines that have arisen out of traditions held by ungodly men. We hold to the Scriptures alone as our fnal authority in all things. That is the basic difference. Your doctrines such as: the assumption of Mary, purgatory, doctrines that are currently being discussed in other threads: replacement theology, and in this thread, OSAS, (or the denial thereof), are all unbiblical. I can support my position with Scripture. When I do, you call me or Ray, or others names. If not names, it is derogatory speech--"working within your framework of your false traditions." No Baptist works within a framework of tradition. That is the most ironic statement I have ever heard coming from a Catholic. Who works within a framework of tradition, but a Catholic. Get real with your accusations. I support my positions with the Bible. If you can refute them, then do so, but do it with Scripture. You cannot defend the assumption of Mary with Scripture, nor any other of your heretical doctrines.
DHK

I have refuted your doctrines and supported mine over and over and you just never get. Ark of the New Covenant, it's there plain as day to the Catholic with eyes to see and ears to hear. But the SS believer wanders about aimlessly in the much of scriptures with no authority, hoping from Church to Church like a ship without a rudder. (just a week or so ago I hear that like 60%of Protestants have changed churches in the last year. I cannot remove the scales from your eyes. I will prya.

God bless.

 

[Ray Berrian]

thessalonian,

According to my view of eternal security I'm surprised that you did not think I was a pastor of the First Church of Satan. Why the sudden interest in my denominational background? Why would you like to know this?

I can tell you that I graduated from an evangelical Bible College with a B.S. in theology in the northeastern part of our country; from an evangelical seminary with a Bachelor of Divinity from the northeastern part of our nation, and lastly an evangelical seminary in the deep south with the Th.D. degree. Incidentally, I graduated Summa Cum Laude; the Lord alone be praised for the opportunity to study for His honor and glory. To Him be all the praise!

 

[Ray Berrian]

thessalonian,

You said, ' . . . just never get. Ark of the New Covenant, it's there plain as day to the
Catholic with eyes to see and ears to hear.'

Ray is saying, 'For the Law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. [John 1:17] It's time to move into the concepts of the new and better covenant; [Hebrews 8:6] It is my understanding that the 'Ark of the Covenant' was either lost or destroyed in 70 A.D.

Christ is now our 'mercy-seat' and He is not housed in the Temple or the confining space of the Ark of the Covenant, but at the right hand of God in Heaven. [Hebrews 1:3] We do not need the Aaronic Priesthood or any other because every sinner and Christian has direct access to Jesus Christ. Our Lord has said, 'Come unto Me, all ye who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.'

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by thessalonian:
I have refuted your doctrines and supported mine over and over and you just never get. Ark of the New Covenant, it's there plain as day to the Catholic with eyes to see and ears to hear. But the SS believer wanders about aimlessly in the much of scriptures with no authority, hoping from Church to Church like a ship without a rudder. (just a week or so ago I hear that like 60%of Protestants have changed churches in the last year. I cannot remove the scales from your eyes. I will prya.

God bless.

It is not that I "just never get it" Thessalonian. I refuse to accept invalid justification for unbiblical doctrines. I refuse circular argumentation, Scripture taken out of context, appeals made to authorities and placed as greater than the Bible. I refuse to bow my knee to an ungodly man-made institution and its man-made doctrines such as the Catholic Church. You would be better off praying for your own spiritual welfare than mine, though the gesture is appreciated.

The Ark is Christ. What has that to do with what I have posted? What has wandering protestants got to do with what I have posted. There are just as many wandering Catholics as there are Protestants. Today in Canada it was a great majority of Catholics that shot down the Bill in parliament upholding the traditional definition of a one man/one woman marriage. Our Catholic Prime Minister, and outspoken finance minister, (also Catholic), were both in favor of gay marriages, as were many of their Catholic followers.

If you are talking of church faithfulness and the discussion is between you and I, I have been a member of this church since 1973, 30 years ago, when of my own accord I joined. Now what are you saying about hopping from church to church like a ship without a rudder?? In the past 30 years how many churches have you been a member of?
DHK

 

[thessalonian]

Originally posted by DHK:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by thessalonian:
I have refuted your doctrines and supported mine over and over and you just never get. Ark of the New Covenant, it's there plain as day to the Catholic with eyes to see and ears to hear. But the SS believer wanders about aimlessly in the much of scriptures with no authority, hoping from Church to Church like a ship without a rudder. (just a week or so ago I hear that like 60%of Protestants have changed churches in the last year. I cannot remove the scales from your eyes. I will prya.

God bless.

It is not that I "just never get it" Thessalonian. I refuse to accept invalid justification for unbiblical doctrines. I refuse circular argumentation, Scripture taken out of context, appeals made to authorities and placed as greater than the Bible. I refuse to bow my knee to an ungodly man-made institution and its man-made doctrines such as the Catholic Church. You would be better off praying for your own spiritual welfare than mine, though the gesture is appreciated.

The Ark is Christ. What has that to do with what I have posted? What has wandering protestants got to do with what I have posted. There are just as many wandering Catholics as there are Protestants. Today in Canada it was a great majority of Catholics that shot down the Bill in parliament upholding the traditional definition of a one man/one woman marriage. Our Catholic Prime Minister, and outspoken finance minister, (also Catholic), were both in favor of gay marriages, as were many of their Catholic followers.

If you are talking of church faithfulness and the discussion is between you and I, I have been a member of this church since 1973, 30 years ago, when of my own accord I joined. Now what are you saying about hopping from church to church like a ship without a rudder?? In the past 30 years how many churches have you been a member of?
DHK </font>[/QUOTE]How many have I been a member of? 1. The Holy Roman Catholic Church. If I move to Austrailia it is the same Church. It's teachings are the same. Like I said a Pope unto yourself. It is an adjective by declaration of the creator of the words (me). I am not calling you Pope but saying that is how you behave. By the way my stats were a bit high. It was 60% over three years. Glad you have found a home DHK but I wasn't talking about you specifically.

I know of small town Churches that change from Presbyterian to Methodist to Baptist based on what kind of a pastor they can get.


God bless.

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by thessalonian:
How many have I been a member of? 1. The Holy Roman Catholic Church. If I move to Austrailia it is the same Church. It's teachings are the same. Like I said a Pope unto yourself. It is an adjective by declaration of the creator of the words (me). I am not calling you Pope but saying that is how you behave. By the way my stats were a bit high. It was 60% over three years. Glad you have found a home DHK but I wasn't talking about you specifically.

I know of small town Churches that change from Presbyterian to Methodist to Baptist based on what kind of a pastor they can get.

And as were discussing in the other thread on the Catholic church's authority, there are so many different kinds of Catholic Churches. You just don't want to admit it. Wherever the culture changes the iguana of the church changes, and even their beliefs. Much of the time the details of the catechism don't even matter. They are ignored. The church practices a type of syncretism.
DHK

 

[thessalonian]

Originally posted by DHK:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by thessalonian:
How many have I been a member of? 1. The Holy Roman Catholic Church. If I move to Austrailia it is the same Church. It's teachings are the same. Like I said a Pope unto yourself. It is an adjective by declaration of the creator of the words (me). I am not calling you Pope but saying that is how you behave. By the way my stats were a bit high. It was 60% over three years. Glad you have found a home DHK but I wasn't talking about you specifically.

I know of small town Churches that change from Presbyterian to Methodist to Baptist based on what kind of a pastor they can get.

And as were discussing in the other thread on the Catholic church's authority, there are so many different kinds of Catholic Churches. You just don't want to admit it. Wherever the culture changes the iguana of the church changes, and even their beliefs. Much of the time the details of the catechism don't even matter. They are ignored. The church practices a type of syncretism.
DHK </font>[/QUOTE]Wrong! I have gone to dozens of Catholic Churches in my life and have not seen a single significant difference in the Mass that caused me to consider it invalid. I have only once heard doctrinal error from the pulpit (this was not in a sermon,though many of the sermons have been mushy and didn't get in to the meat of the faith). I have also been to many Protestant Churches and there has been significant doctrinal difference in the sermons even within one Church coming from different speakers along with considerable bickering about doctrine in my wifes old non-denom Church. You are simply dillusional on these points. Publically I only know a few priests in my area who openly contradict Church teaching (though they claim they don't).

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by thessalonian:
Wrong! I have gone to dozens of Catholic Churches in my life and have not seen a single significant difference in the Mass that caused me to consider it invalid. I have only once heard doctrinal error from the pulpit (this was not in a sermon,though many of the sermons have been mushy and didn't get in to the meat of the faith). I have also been to many Protestant Churches and there has been significant doctrinal difference in the sermons even within one Church coming from different speakers along with considerable bickering about doctrine in my wifes old non-denom Church. You are simply dillusional on these points. Publically I only know a few priests in my area who openly contradict Church teaching (though they claim they don't).

Why don't you study the backgrounds and the beliefs of the cardinals in waiting to become the next pope. Why are some conservative and some liberal? Why do they hold different and varying beliefs from each other? If they were all the same in belief there would be no problem in choice would there? But there is. Do some study on it. If you have such differences in your top leadership, imagine what differences there are from the head downward.
DHK