OSAS

[RickD]

Mallz,

I'm just saying what comes to mind here. There is nothing in scripture that says for sure, that babies or children that die before they're able to choose or deny Christ, have eternal life. It's an emotional argument. We would all like to think that God in His mercy and grace, would take them to be with Him when they die.

IMO, in order for you to say that babies lose their salvation, you'd have to show from scripture that babies have eternal life. I'm not saying they do or don't have eternal life. I just don't know. But I don't see scripture saying they do.

Let's assume babies that die, do have eternal life. Does that necessarily mean that all babies, specifically the babies that make it to an age where they can choose or deny Christ, have eternal life?

Thoughts?

[Mallz]

I'm saying what comes to mind too, so lets think together ^_^

Yes, I recognize that my premise is reliant on the assumption children go to heaven. The only thing that comes to mind right now comes from 2 Samuel 12:22 And he said, “While the child was alive, I fasted and wept; for I said, ‘Who can tell whether the Lord[a] will be gracious to me, that the child may live?’ 23 But now he is dead; why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me.”
King David knew his child was in heaven.
I'd say the argument stems more from trying to decipher the nature of God than emotion, and I'll riskily put this very broad assumption out here..: Every person intrinsically thinks it's wrong for children to face damnation. It is a very emotional subject and any non-sociopath would feel something towards this topic. Personally, I think that has to do with Gods law being written on everyone's heart. The communal connection we all share. These are just my thoughts.
I think it's very reasonable to say children go to be with God. Matthew 18:2 Then Jesus called a little child to Him, set him in the midst of them, 3 and said, “Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven. 4 Therefore whoever humbles himself as this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. 5 Whoever receives one little child like this in My name receives Me.
I find the following verse very interesting... 6 Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

So we know through King David at least his child went to heaven. We know King David gets no special exception when it comes to salvation compared to every other human, so his child being saved must apply to all children. We know we must be 'converted and become as little children' in order to even enter heaven. This implies children go to heaven taken along with what else we know. This also charges us to be about a certain mindset to successfully accept the gift of salvation.

Let's assume babies that die, do have eternal life. Does that necessarily mean that all babies, specifically the babies that make it to an age where they can choose or deny Christ, have eternal life?
Awesome question.
Is everyone born with salvation, or do the babies who would end up denying Christ never die as children? This promotes total predestination. I accept and understand that God knows everything that has is and will happen. And that He places us in life in a specific time and place that would best help our souls come to Him. He knows our seemingly countless potentials and which ones we will actualize. But this is not predestination as we are given sentient minds, which free will is a part of and we are given to ourselves to walk how we choose. But I can't agree with total predestination as that goes against what we know of the character of God, such as agape, benevolence and justice (that pop to mind).

So I'm left to think that children go to heaven and everyone is born saved.

Your thoughts?

[Jac3510]

I, for one, don't think babies have eternal life. I think, rather, they are like Adam. They are innocent. If they die in that state, God will grant them eternal life simply because they have not crossed over into death. Sin, in Paul's words, has not killed them. And God is gracious like that. So babies will have eternal life (or they receive it at the moment of death). But since they don't have it, then it doesn't make sense to talk about them losing it.

[Philip]

Jac: I, for one, don't think babies have eternal life. I think, rather, they are like Adam. They are innocent. If they die in that state, God will grant them eternal life simply because they have not crossed over into death. Sin, in Paul's words, has not killed them. And God is gracious like that. So babies will have eternal life (or they receive it at the moment of death). But since they don't have it, then it doesn't make sense to talk about them losing it.

Jac, could you please flesh that answer out a bit more. Do you believe our sin nature is inherited, that we are BORN in sin?

[Jac3510]

I believe that we are born with a sin nature, but that we are not born guilty of any sin. That is, we are born in a state of innocence. It is a matter of sheer practical reality that, if we live long enough, given our sin natures, we will, in fact, sin. And so Rom 3:23 says, "For everyone sins and falls short of God's glory" (my translation). The point is that if we die in a state of innocence, there is no reason for God to condemn us to an eternal hell.

Take that a step further, I do not believe that our names are written into the Book of Life upon our salvation. Rather, I believe that they are blotted out from said book when we die in our sins. A child's name is in the Book of Life precisely because it has not been blotted out.

[melanie]

I, for one, don't think babies have eternal life. I think, rather, they are like Adam. They are innocent. If they die in that state, God will grant them eternal life simply because they have not crossed over into death. Sin, in Paul's words, has not killed them. And God is gracious like that. So babies will have eternal life (or they receive it at the moment of death). But since they don't have it, then it doesn't make sense to talk about them losing it.

I don't think they have eternal life.
So babies will have eternal life
But since they don't have it
Doesn't make sense to talk about losing it

By Gods grace we receive the gift of salvation. Everyone has a choice to reject it or embrace it. I think I get what your saying it's our sin that separates us from God, that places us outside of Gods glory, when we accept Christ as our Saviour we receive the gift of salvation. Babies and small children cannot make such an acceptance by the mere fact of inability so they haven't been granted eternity in the same light as adult sinners so to talk about it in the sense as everyone having the gift of eternity then we lose it then some gain it back isn't really warranted. But because babies and children are not blemished by sin/death in their innocence they are not subject to accepting eternity like adults. But receive it anyway?
But Jac, the means by which they are granted eternity by Gods grace, doesn't change the fact they indeed do have eternal life. Sure they haven't entered into the sin/death state but by that alone they have eternal life. They are innocent, they go to the Kingdom of Heaven because any other alternative goes outside the nature of God so therefore babies and children have eternal life.

Edit: I started writing this which took forever almost an eternity and submitted before I saw your above response, due to my small children being yes innocent but frequently demanding . You have answered my questions, and I agree. Although I have always looked at the book of life as having the names written in it that Gods knows will heed His calling. God knows who are His own. Babies and children included. I have never seen it as everyone's name being in there then blotted out at death through sin. It's an interesting take. I will think on that more. An awful lot of whiteout would be needed

[melanie]

I don't think our names are written in the book of life upon our salvation, those names were written before the foundations of the world were laid. Which brings back to God knows who are His own, regardless of how far we fall or stray. Is that not the essence of OSAS

[Jac3510]

I don't think our names are written in the book of life upon our salvation, those names were written before the foundations of the world were laid. Which brings back to God knows who are His own, regardless of how far we fall or stray. Is that not the essence of OSAS

I agree, of course. God, in my view, is not a temporal being, and the writing in/blotting out of the book is not, strictly speaking, a temporal event, as if you were now in it and at a later moment not in it. But just because we can deny temporal order, it does not follow that we deny all order. The order here is a logical order. Being written in the book precedes being blotted out from it, even if that happens from all eternity. What I am saying is that when you translate those eternal concepts into a temporal framework, their corresponding events are not "getting saved" (being written in) and "losing your salvation" (being blotted out). Rather, they are "being born" (being written in) and "dying [in sin]" (being blotted out). That view, I think, corresponds very well with the OT concept of the Book of Life. But to your point, again, from God's side of the equation, all of that is atemporal and happens eternally.

[Mallz]

I've been doing a little research to verify your claims. I see your reasoning to be fitting Jac, a couple questions and phrases from me for clarification.

1) Rev 13:8 "All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world."
Rev 3:5 The one who conquers will be clothed thus in white garments, and I will never blot his
name out of the book of life. I will confess his name before my Father and before his angels.
Our names are in the Book of Life since 'the foundation of the world', yet we are the ones who
'conquer' to be clothed in white and never be blotted out. We conquer through faith: Ephesians 2:8
-9 8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of
God, 9 not of works, lest anyone should boast.
Is this agreeable so far?

If innocence is spared because their names have not yet been blotted out, then I see three possibilities:
a) No ones name is blotted out while they are alive but wait until death to face our Lord in
judgement where all our deeds are accounted for and if we had the faith to conquer death through
our proprietor Christ we will be in the Book of Life.
b) Peoples names can be blotted out while alive and their name can be re-written and blotted back
out in the Book of Life.
c) Peoples names can be blotted out while alive, never to be re-written into the Book of Life.
Which is reasonable? If any.. I'm leaning towards A. As A encompasses B but gets rid of the
unnecessary temporal perspective and A is much more holistic scripturally. C would be true if once
damned always damned is promoted in contrast of once saved always saved. Once damned by your name
being blotted out of the Book of Life (never to be re-written), once saved by your name starting in the Book of Life. I feel I might be committing logical fallacies here, I'm not able to see them yet. I do know God is just and for justices sake we must prove to ourselves and El-Shaddai what our end is. Which is why I deny predestination as a whole. Which leads me further to think A.


2) quote "But since they don't have it" [eternal life in regards to babies],
But they are written in the Book of Life already, so they do have eternal life. Would it be when
they cross over into death from Sin, loosing their innocence, is when they don't have eternal life
any longer? I think you are affirming this but I saw contradictory statements in your replies...

And if a name is blotted out of the Book of Life, can it be re-written? If all our names are written in the Book of Life since the foundation of the world, then wouldn't it follow we all have salvation until we either loose it, or never loose it by affirming faith? And this would deny OSAS.

Those who will be saved and those who will not are already known to God. I still see OSAS being
dangerous (at least in my understanding) in regards to predestination (among others that don't quit
matter yet in this conversation until some of these fundamentals can be fleshed out).

I'm still trying to grasp OSAS on a fundamental level of reasoning. I'm not there yet. I still don't see it. I think it will become more apparent as conversation continues, however, as I'm open to being wrong about my belief you can loose salvation. After I can figure that out (if it is true), there are still problems with reconciling what that would mean with other things, such as the effects on free will vs. total predestination.

thoughts?

[melanie]

I don't think our names are written in the book of life upon our salvation, those names were written before the foundations of the world were laid. Which brings back to God knows who are His own, regardless of how far we fall or stray. Is that not the essence of OSAS

I agree, of course. God, in my view, is not a temporal being, and the writing in/blotting out of the book is not, strictly speaking, a temporal event, as if you were now in it and at a later moment not in it. But just because we can deny temporal order, it does not follow that we deny all order. The order here is a logical order. Being written in the book precedes being blotted out from it, even if that happens from all eternity. What I am saying is that when you translate those eternal concepts into a temporal framework, their corresponding events are not "getting saved" (being written in) and "losing your salvation" (being blotted out). Rather, they are "being born" (being written in) and "dying [in sin]" (being blotted out). That view, I think, corresponds very well with the OT concept of the Book of Life. But to your point, again, from God's side of the equation, all of that is atemporal and happens eternally.

Cool, I agree.
It kinda works in with my response I'm about to give to Mallz in regards to predestination vs freewill. Would like your thoughts on that

[abelcainsbrother]

I've been doing a little research to verify your claims. I see your reasoning to be fitting Jac, a couple questions and phrases from me for clarification.

1) Rev 13:8 "All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world."
Rev 3:5 The one who conquers will be clothed thus in white garments, and I will never blot his
name out of the book of life. I will confess his name before my Father and before his angels.
Our names are in the Book of Life since 'the foundation of the world', yet we are the ones who
'conquer' to be clothed in white and never be blotted out. We conquer through faith: Ephesians 2:8
-9 8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of
God, 9 not of works, lest anyone should boast.
Is this agreeable so far?

If innocence is spared because their names have not yet been blotted out, then I see three possibilities:
a) No ones name is blotted out while they are alive but wait until death to face our Lord in
judgement where all our deeds are accounted for and if we had the faith to conquer death through
our proprietor Christ we will be in the Book of Life.
b) Peoples names can be blotted out while alive and their name can be re-written and blotted back
out in the Book of Life.
c) Peoples names can be blotted out while alive, never to be re-written into the Book of Life.
Which is reasonable? If any.. I'm leaning towards A. As A encompasses B but gets rid of the
unnecessary temporal perspective and A is much more holistic scripturally. C would be true if once
damned always damned is promoted in contrast of once saved always saved. Once damned by your name
being blotted out of the Book of Life (never to be re-written), once saved by your name starting in the Book of Life. I feel I might be committing logical fallacies here, I'm not able to see them yet. I do know God is just and for justices sake we must prove to ourselves and El-Shaddai what our end is. Which is why I deny predestination as a whole. Which leads me further to think A.


2) quote "But since they don't have it" [eternal life in regards to babies],
But they are written in the Book of Life already, so they do have eternal life. Would it be when
they cross over into death from Sin, loosing their innocence, is when they don't have eternal life
any longer? I think you are affirming this but I saw contradictory statements in your replies...

And if a name is blotted out of the Book of Life, can it be re-written? If all our names are written in the Book of Life since the foundation of the world, then wouldn't it follow we all have salvation until we either loose it, or never loose it by affirming faith? And this would deny OSAS.

Those who will be saved and those who will not are already known to God. I still see OSAS being
dangerous (at least in my understanding) in regards to predestination (among others that don't quit
matter yet in this conversation until some of these fundamentals can be fleshed out).

I'm still trying to grasp OSAS on a fundamental level of reasoning. I'm not there yet. I still don't see it. I think it will become more apparent as conversation continues, however, as I'm open to being wrong about my belief you can loose salvation. After I can figure that out (if it is true), there are still problems with reconciling what that would mean with other things, such as the effects on free will vs. total predestination.

thoughts?

If you're looking for a way biblically to believe a person can lose their salvation then I don't think thinking of babies is a way to do it.If we could lose our salvation then I don't see how anybody could make it to heaven as we are not always on the mountain,we go through valleys sometimes and get lost.But first we must be saved by Jesus but eternal life means eternal life and since salvation is a gift that nobody can earn once you bring works into it you make grace of none effect.We all know we don't deserve it and can only really be amazed at God's amazing grace.

[melanie]

I've been doing a little research to verify your claims. I see your reasoning to be fitting Jac, a couple questions and phrases from me for clarification.

1) Rev 13:8 "All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world."
Rev 3:5 The one who conquers will be clothed thus in white garments, and I will never blot his
name out of the book of life. I will confess his name before my Father and before his angels.
Our names are in the Book of Life since 'the foundation of the world', yet we are the ones who
'conquer' to be clothed in white and never be blotted out. We conquer through faith: Ephesians 2:8
-9 8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of
God, 9 not of works, lest anyone should boast.
Is this agreeable so far?

If innocence is spared because their names have not yet been blotted out, then I see three possibilities:
a) No ones name is blotted out while they are alive but wait until death to face our Lord in
judgement where all our deeds are accounted for and if we had the faith to conquer death through
our proprietor Christ we will be in the Book of Life.
b) Peoples names can be blotted out while alive and their name can be re-written and blotted back
out in the Book of Life.
c) Peoples names can be blotted out while alive, never to be re-written into the Book of Life.
Which is reasonable? If any.. I'm leaning towards A. As A encompasses B but gets rid of the
unnecessary temporal perspective and A is much more holistic scripturally. C would be true if once
damned always damned is promoted in contrast of once saved always saved. Once damned by your name
being blotted out of the Book of Life (never to be re-written), once saved by your name starting in the Book of Life. I feel I might be committing logical fallacies here, I'm not able to see them yet. I do know God is just and for justices sake we must prove to ourselves and El-Shaddai what our end is. Which is why I deny predestination as a whole. Which leads me further to think A.


2) quote "But since they don't have it" [eternal life in regards to babies],
But they are written in the Book of Life already, so they do have eternal life. Would it be when
they cross over into death from Sin, loosing their innocence, is when they don't have eternal life
any longer? I think you are affirming this but I saw contradictory statements in your replies...

And if a name is blotted out of the Book of Life, can it be re-written? If all our names are written in the Book of Life since the foundation of the world, then wouldn't it follow we all have salvation until we either loose it, or never loose it by affirming faith? And this would deny OSAS.

Those who will be saved and those who will not are already known to God. I still see OSAS being
dangerous (at least in my understanding) in regards to predestination (among others that don't quit
matter yet in this conversation until some of these fundamentals can be fleshed out).

I'm still trying to grasp OSAS on a fundamental level of reasoning. I'm not there yet. I still don't see it. I think it will become more apparent as conversation continues, however, as I'm open to being wrong about my belief you can loose salvation. After I can figure that out (if it is true), there are still problems with reconciling what that would mean with other things, such as the effects on free will vs. total predestination.

thoughts?

I think it's both Mallz. It has been seen through Calvinism and Arminianism that it has to be one or the other. Total predestination or freewill but I think they work hand in hand, it doesn't and shouldn't be one or the other. God has not predestinated those who will be saved on the premise that he sat back and thought okay Bob, Jill and Joe will through my omnipotence be saved and Jack, John and Kate will not. So those names were or were not put into the book of life. We are not puppets playing a scripted role that God puppeteers. That's not love. We have freewill. But God has complete foreknowledge. He can't not.
God created time, He is outside it, not subject to it, like everything it is subject to Him. There is no pre, post or present with God. It's hard for us so limited by time to see around this, our very existence is rooted in it but it's not the same for God . He doesn't look forward or backwards He is everywhere, in all things at all time, our freewill, the choices we make, everything we will choose to do in the future is known by God, before time existed for us or existed at all, God does not have that barrier. To say God knows everything means EVERYTHING. He has not predestined who will choose to love Him by favouritism or unfair advantage to those that choose not to but because He knows and knew already. Our freewill choices are already known to God, they were always known to Him because God has no barrier of time. He knows who are his own because He knows those that will choose to love Him. He wants us all to love Him like He loves us but we are given freedom, without freedom there is no love.
We have free will but our choice to love Him was known to God outside of the barrier of time.
He already knows who are His own.
God is not surprised, or thrown off guard.
OSAS is not limited by our free will but rather because of the result of our free will and first and foremost Gods grace.
He knows, He knows everything. He knows those of us who walk in His light and no matter how many times we stumble, how tremendously and ungracefully we fall away from Him, we always find His light again, and He lights the lantern for us to find Him again because He already knows those of us that choose to love Him.
I have until very recently not believed in OSAS because I know how close I came to sabotaging the most precious gift I had ever held. I was walking a very fine line. There is an old saying 'when you know better, you do better' well I knew better and did poorly. I am not going to go into it, but I screwed up badly to the point of losing my salvation, this lead me to think, hang on, I knew God, loved Him, but fell into darkness, if I nearly lost my salvation then it's possible. But God pulled me out and set me straight. I was missing the point. God already knew my potential, already knew that once He intervened and showed me His love and mercy that I would surrender myself to His purpose in a way I had never done previously. He bothered with such a sinner because He already knew that it would ignite a love in me for Him that encompasses everything that I am.
I wasn't once saved always saved because I thought I was, or because it's some Christian right to claim so, God see's beyond what we can fathom, it's once saved always saved because God knows all, see's all and has foreknowledge to those that want and choose to love Him, and He will intervene for that good purpose.

[Mallz]

If you're looking for a way biblically to believe a person can lose their salvation then I don't think thinking of babies is a way to do it.

I don't see scripture in anyway promoting OSAS, in fact I see quit the opposite. And I see OSAS going against natural theology in relation to sentient beings(...us) and against divine revelation. Babies (or really innocence in general) is only one part of the pie and where I decided to start on this discussion (may not have been the best place). And I think discussing innocence in relation to OSAS is fundamentally necessary as humanity is born into existence written in the book of life, regardless of their sin nature, and some (supposedly many) will be blotted out, loosing salvation they were created with. We are born with a sinful nature and none can come to God on his own terms. We are saved through grace, through faith or innocence it seems.

If we could lose our salvation then I don't see how anybody could make it to heaven...

...why? If we can gain it back...?

[Mallz]

God created time, He is outside it, not subject to it, like everything it is subject to Him.

Most definitely. And I agree with what you are saying Melanie. I appreciate your sound response, but I don't see it answering any of my questions

I don't believe predestination = Gods middle knowledge. God has natural, free and middle knowledge all the while we have self-determined wills.

My problem is that if OSAS is true, I see the middle knowledge being replaced by predestination. So I need a reconciliation between OSAS and predestination. But this explanation I feel would be better after I'm convinced through reason and divine revelation OSAS is true. Which of course I'm currently not.

So, there are two avenues I would like to know for me to accept OSAS, if anyone is up to it.

1) Through reason does OSAS work?
2) Through scripture is OSAS taught?

[RickD]

If we could lose our salvation then I don't see how anybody could make it to heaven...

Mallz wrote:
..why? If we can gain it back...?

Think about your response Mallz. Eternal life is an unmerited gift. There's no way to "gain" an unmerited gift.