Romans Chapter 7

Yes that is what those texts teach. That is why you never hear people who hold to "OSAS Anyway" going to those texts to make their case.

Take the Matt 18 or the 2Tim 2 cases given above and let me know if you see "intent" and "forethought" going on there.

In Christ,

Bob

 

If you prefer the Romans 11 example above - for the "forethought" explanation - go ahead and use that one instead.

 

I prefer the old English legal definition of 'malice aforethought'. For me, it would have to be:

1. In full knowledge - knowing that you were kissing your salvation goodbye.

2. A decision made freely ie: no duress, undue influence or defect of reason.

3. Conduct/ attitude of heart amounting to a repudiatory breach.

 

Which of the texts are you describing?

Take a look at Matt 7 and Matt 25 and tell me how many of those guys literally said "heaven Good BYE!"

Also look at Matt 18.

on the other hand - the 3rd definition Matt gives could fit any of them.

In Christ,

Bob

 

matt said "So, Claudia, are you saying it's possible to lose your salvation if you sin after conversion? If so, what sort of sins or how many would be necessary for that to happen?"

the sin of rejecting Christ. that's what. and do go saying that if you reject Christ after you've accepted him then you havn't accepted him in the first place. that's junk. if you've accepted Him - that means you've accepted him. if you've rejected him - that doesnt mean you havn't accepted him - it means you've rejected him.

 

Mike,

I lost track of this thread and would like to ask you something. I havent read all the stuff posted on here so if Im asking something everyone already answered, I apologize. Ive been gone alot lately.

But anyway when you talked about a "sin not unto death" ...I would really like to know what that means.

I looked up the phrase on my trusty desktop Bible thingy here and only found two different phrases like that but nothing really to explain what it means, at least not that I could see anyway.

Do you have any idea what that means?

How would you know how to identify sins that are unto death and those that arent?

'Splain it to me, please?

Claudia

 

SMM "My point here is to show the attitude someone who would fall away would exhibit..."

i dont quite understand what you're saying here- could you possibly make that a little clearer?

God bless

 

Matt,

I read a couple of your posts to me, Im sorry, Ive been away some lately.

But anyway honestly I dont know what would be the sins you would have to commit to lose your salvation.

Ive always seen it like this...

Today if I have not hardened my heart towards God, then I am right with God. Today if I am surrendered to God then I am right with God.

I havent ever thought of it in terms of individual sins.

Just in terms of my willingness today to give myself to God.

Thats why the Bible says "Today if you hear His voice, harden not your heart."

Thats why Paul said "I die daily".

I think I view individual sins as the "symptom" of an illness, if you know what I mean? The illness being separation from God. Of course though sin can separate you from God too though.

Actually, if we were to take a really close look at Eve in the Garden of Eden and Adam and what process they went to to separate from God, that would be helpful. Did they sin and their sin separated them from God or did they separate from God by distrusting God and then they sinned?

Actually the reason Im thinking about this is that there is a huge debate I guess you'd call it, in our church concerning the idea of "Having a relationship with God".

On the one hand you have the one side that thinks if you sin this separates you from God, but on the other hand you have the other side that thinks it is the separation from God that cause sin. Youd be surprised at the huge difference in the outcome of both those trains of though.

One group thinks if you just cultivate your relationship with Jesus then you dont have to worry about sin... it sort of takes care of itself. But then they tend to kind of look lightly upon sin because of it.


Claudia

 

Romans 11 shows certain Jews to have fallen out of the vine of Christ - cast out for unbelief. And the warning is "NEITHER will He spare you -- for you stank only by your faith - take heed" and then "He is able to graft THEM back in AGAIN if they do not CONTINUE in UNBELIEF".

Pretty hard stuff if you are an OSASer.

Matt 7 "not everyone who SAYS Lord Lord but he who DOES the will of My Father WILL ..."

In that verse you see those who claimed salvation pointing to their lives in the church - but having fallen short on "DOING the will of the Father".

In Matt 25 we see the same thing - those who CLAIMED but did not DO as God asked them to do.

This is in reponse to that "Nothing I DO should MATTER" Post.

And these texts are pretty harsh if one is of the opinion that "nothing we DO is supposed to matter - and that IS what the Gospel is all about"

In Christ,

Bob

 

Amen to that, Bob!

Mt:7:21: Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

Mt:12:50: For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.

So if "whosoever shall do the will of my Father" are the ones Jesus claims as His "family" then whose children are those who dont? They cant be children of the Father.

Also, right after Jesus had said "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven"... He then reiterated the same thought principle by saying:

Matthew 7:24: Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock

You have to hear the sayings of Jesus and DO THEM... or else you are building your house upon the sand.

Claudia

 

No text in particular - I think what is emerging from our discussion is that Scripture is rather vague and ambiguous on this subject. So I'm positing a theory based more on jurisprudence than on any particular Scripture, but not a theory which is in conflict with Scripture.

 

The commandment came, sin revived; the law died, and the carnal mind lived.

Oh, did I get that wrong there?

 

SMM, your point is granted re Galatians, but does that mean you espouse a form of antinomianism?

 

Ellen White said that... she can be hilarious at times..."They despise the law which was the instrument that slew Paul. They cannot say with him, I die ; but they earnestly strive to live, while they cry, Death to the law!
This is virtually their testimony. The commandment came, sin revived; the law died, and the carnal mind lived. This is the order with the transgressor."
EG White, Second Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, March 8, 1870