OSAS question? About repentance and stuff!! :0))

[Allan]

But when you argue "Nothing we did participates in the salvation event whereby an individual is saved - therefore nothing we might do separates us" you ARE Making the 4 point Calvinist argument -- like it or not! IF I were a 4 point Calvinist arguing against such a compromised Arminian-OSAS view I would dearly delight in holding your feet to that fire of "accountability" pointing out this glaring flaw in your otherwise Arminian arguments.

Here is your major flaw. You are under the assumption there are only two theological constructs. The vast majority of Baptist (Specifically SoutherBaptists) hold neither to the Calvinistic or Armenian Constructs.

My question to you is this concerning salvation:
Can you add ANYTHING to the finished and completed work of Jesus Christ known as atonment?? Is Christs work of atonment suffient to save or not?

If not and YOU can add (as in works) to your salvation meritorious favor as well, then Christs work was not suffient to save but an incomplete work of atonment.
So nothing you can do ADDS to the finished work of Jesus Christs atonment or better makes you any more saved than that which Christ Jesus did through the death, buial, and resurrection. We are to believe in what Jesus did and due only to His work that salvation is secured. Our works that follow are the result of salvation and NOT to add or secure that salvation.

Where the Calvinist disagrees with the Non-Cal and Arminian is they hold Faith or belief is (to them) considered a work of man that adds to salvation.
I think you are confused with regard to 4 point Calvinism - in the main a four pointer doesn't hold to limited atonment (that Christ died only for certain people and not others) but to unlimited (Christ died for all men but that atonment is applied only to those who will believe)

The Calvinist holds to unconditional salvation - Man can not even believe in order to be saved but their belief is actaully the result of their salvation.

Non-Cals and Non- Arminian (known as Biblicists) hold to what is known as conditional salvation and THAT condition is to believe or have faith. Since faith is never (in the scriptures) ascribed as a work for salvation but the condition God demands in order to be saved.

A person can choose to sin but the fact they are God children it is HE that will not allow them to wander to far away from Him - Just like an attentive parent to their children will not allow the same, for the parent in see the child start to wander will warn and even discipline them that they will not stray. Where as a child can one day come out from under their parents authority and do their own thing a Child of God NEVER comes out from under the soveriegn authority of their God they chose to follow. And God changing their very nature from one that seeks to consistantly flee from God into one that yearns to be near Him. This is done as a promise from God to one who puts their trust in Him.

 

[Allan]

The Ten Virgins all had their robes on, white robes of purity, claiming to be Christians. Five were foolish. The Lamps they carried represent the Word of God (Thy Word is a Lamp unto my Feet). But Five had no oil (Holy Spirit).

Jesus told them Depart from Me, yes that work iniquity (lawlessness) I never knew you.

Its that simple. Many Christians today make a mere profession of Christianity. With no inward change.

Is that what I have been stating OVER and OVER agian.

Once saved always changed! 2 Cor 5:15 that we from henceforth (now onward) no longer live for ourselves but for Him who died for me...

Who is able to save but God?
Who will lived as a Child of God but the saved!

 

[Allan]

your summation of verses one through 4 seems a bit out of order, but we'll work with it. Keep in mind the order of reference is very important, if you're are not careful you may give the wrong interpretation of Jesus' words.
It's interesting how you separated the above comments from the following

Actually it is not out of order but consistant with the text.
You are assuming Christ is dealing with individuals when in fact He is dealing with the church (assembly of people) as a whole. Most were only professing to be christian and is why Christ calls the Church which as an assembly, dead. As in most were never BORN again or brought into life. Notice later on it speaks of those FEW who actually are believers verses those who are only professing.

I'd be careful yet again with the "good" commentaries you decide to reference.
Whenever some one starts off a statement with "it seems to suggest.....", well they are aknowledging what the passage says, but must attempt to clearify it to their own meaning.

Commentaries are rendering of mens understanding of scripture and nothing more. However when you have the vast amount of beleivers agreeing with them the you can gather there must be some truth to them. No??

Within that first statement the writer is concerned about the salvation of "UNFAITHFUL CHRISTIONS" as he would call them. Is there a such thing?

Yepper! They are called apostates. Those who profess to be believers and then fall away or back to what they were before BECAUSE they were NEVER one of us as says the scriptures!

This persons premis to the BOL is completely flawed!

What is funny is how you try to expain away what doesn't need to be explained away. Let me ask you this...why does scripture state in one place the Lamb's Book of life (denoting all things therein belong to the Lamb and they are alive) and in another the Book of life (denoting that all thing there in pertain that which is alive).

1. 
   

   [*]If this BOL that Jesus is speaking of is not His own, but all inclusive of the World, then why address it to The Church - His body? John 3:19 Jesus say the verdict is men love darkness and will not come into the light. So why would Jesus address non believers as though they had some hope and now it gone?) Just because some one is born physically doesn't mean they are born spiritaully. By referencing Jesus' book of life that way this is what your commentary is doing.
   [*]Your commentary has a contradiction of terms that seems to be more opinionated than contextually accurate. "Unfaithful" vs "True Believers". Does the "unfaithful" not believe or not care? Should he rather made the comparison of the Faithful vs Unfaithful? There is a point to this.

   Why the church BECAUSE there were UNBELIEVERS present that were professing the Name of Christ CLAIMING to be the Church. He never addressed the non-believers as though they have no hope (that is the whole reason for writing to that church) because they DO have hope! They must REPENT. Nope, no contradiction except to what you want to believe. Their name will be blotted out of the book of life - God will take their life. God speaks about this in many different places, OT speaks of God cutting a persons life short, NT speaks in one place in particular that if a person partakes of the Lords Supper improperly, not dicerning the Lords body (partaking while unsaved because they don't know themselves what it is about)... it is for this reason many are sick or dead among you. There are others but that is enough to get my point across. Please note that these passages NEVER state they are unfaithful beleivers. Remember that at the beginning of the letter to Sardis Jesus states "...you HAD a name that you WERE alive but ARE dead. The 'things that remain' are those very things LEFT that are ABOUT to die (that little left). Jesus is speaking of the Church in its existence from the past to present date (of that time) Remember that before you (as a church) recieved, held, and repented. If therefore you will not watch (as in before) when He comes it will be like a thief. Why, because they are not watching, they could care less. There are a few left EVEN in Sardis who have not defiled their garments. Did you notice Jesus did not say IN Sardis but their were a few left EVEN in Sardis. This is important in understanding Jesus is now going to establish what this means and that being they are WALKING (in continuous fellowship) with Him and therefore they are white (unspotted). Why, because they are worthy to were it. They will not spot their garments. This is the epitome of a true believer! How do we know this because the VERY next thing Jesus states is "He that overcometh (come out of) He will clothe them in white. THEY NEVER HAD THE GARMENTS BEFORE.
   I will say this, even if you want to hold the book of life to be the Lambs book (that fine) this is not a warning but a promise to the one who turns or overcomes from where the currently are at - in rebellion to God!
   
   

   ASK YOURSELF THESE COMMON SENSE QUESTIONS:
   
   IF the BOL is just a record of people born into the world, why would Jesus be Refering to them as someone who was once clean?
   
   Or once alive?
   
   Or as those having something to "strengthen" if nothing was never there?
   
   No! It's the spiritual book concerning the lives of HIS CHURCH not the WORLD. BIG DIFFERENCE!

   1. He never refers to the individuals as being clean, not once but that the Church had (in the Past) a NAME for being true. Huge difference.
   
   2. The one to strengthen were those FEW left as well as those who would repent and become saved for the first time as TRUE believers. This is why Christ doesn't clean them or wash them up but gives them their white garments they never had before.
   
   See how context reveals?

 

[Allan]

The NT describes it in the "Forgiveness revoked" chapter of Matt 18 where the king insists that the servant WAS fully forgiven and was in a position to share the gratitude for what he had really experienced with his fellow servants. In fact that is what draws the complaint - he WAS fully forgiven and YET amazingly refused to share out of joy for what he had fully received --

His forgiveness was not revoked and you can not find that anywhere therein accerted. This servant (believer) was turned over to the tortures NOT exicutioner until he paid his dedt in full. NOT his earlier debt for that was forgiven and a King can not resend or contradict His command. But this servent was judged for what he had NOW done to his fellowservent without the same compassion shown him; would have been sentenced for THAT crime and would be released after his chastening back again.

The NT describes the return to rebellion as a "dog returnes to his own vomit".

Not true, that is the OT more specifically Proverbs.
But the saying is still true. That unless they are changed, they will always do what they have always done. Walk away from God. This is why the Change God creates in us is the very evidence OF our salvation not FOR our salvation.

It is hard to simply explain these texts away in favor of the man-made tradition known as OSAS.

Actaully it is easy to follow it if you exegete the scriptures without presuppotions and assumptions. Onces saved you are always saved BECAUSE you are always Changed.

Your silly use of man-made tradition phrase makes me laugh, when the only man-made tradition concerning salvation is that of the Catholic Church's - which is - you can lose your salvation.

 

[Allan]

Is this where you complain that "you" are getting pounded?

No Bob, there was more than your little comments on there.

Is this where you now ACCEPT the Bible doctrine on Perseverance instead of denying it as do 4 Point Calvinists???

Again your great lack in understanding of Calvinism shows itself.
Perseverence of the saints has nothing to do with what makes 4 point Calvinism.
It is what make the difference between those who hold to the Caltholic doctrince of loosing your salvation vs. true biblical teaching that salvation is absolute in Christ Jesus. Once save you are always saved because fo what God has changed for and the change He has made in you. He has made you a new creation in Christ.

Sounds now like you are in the 5 point group.

You really need to understand Calvinistic Theology.
I say again with more eanestness, You have absolutely NO understanding of Calvinstic theology and what it means.

I do not hold to Calvinism at all and by that same token nor do I hold to Arminianism either.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Allen, speaking of BB: You really need to understand Calvinistic Theology.

HP: There is no one as blind as the blind man the blind refuses to see. :smilewinkgrin:

Hey BB,keep looking up.........and smiling! !

 

[Allan]

HP: There is no one as blind as the blind man the blind refuses to see. :smilewinkgrin:

Hey BB,keep looking up.........and smiling! !

That was actually pretty funny.
It took me a minute, but it was funny :laugh:

But who is BB...

 

[Claudia_T]

what is a BOL? nevermind it must mean Book of Life

 

[Allan]

Funny thing, it took me a little bit to figure it out too.

Were I work BOL means Bill of Lading... So every time I saw it got confused. :laugh:

 

[Claudia_T]

well right after I asked what it meant I scrolled up and saw the words "Book Of Life" and I said to myself Ah Ha!!! thats gotta be it!

(Brilliant Deduction)