Revisiting OSAS

[Starhunter]

As the 7th Day Adventist thread was drifting off topic, I moved the OSAS discussion here.

Rick

--------------
I was watching a video by Dennis Priebe,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lA-r7XVFGs

Which I would not generally recommend because it is addressed to SDA's who know the Bible and the issues at stake in the SDA church, and if you watched it without a knowledge of those things you would get lost.

But it is interesting that the only doctrine that SDA's have been given as a church, which no other church or individual gave them, is the understanding of the final atonement, made by Christ to end the great contest between good and evil, between God and Satan.

It brings a full understanding of the issue that Satan has claimed against the government and character of God since the beginning of the rebellion, and it shows how God answers the Devil.
Not by words or a claim, but by a demonstration to angels and world, in humanity.

The Devil also has a show prepared for the world. You can read the details of that battle in our history since the Christian era, in the book "The Great Controversy" by E. White, available on line.

Some people like to say that SDA's are just following a whole lot of their own traditions, but no, all their teachings were already established by all the reformers and reformation churches. Somehow the understanding of the final atonement that God has in Christ for the world, is a culmination and collation of all truth, as well as a restoration of the image of God in humanity, the image so far as heart is concerned - a people of faith.

This subject is so great that I doubt that even SDA's understand it. I cannot grasp it at all, but I have read about it in the Bible to get the bones of it.
There are aspects of it which people in all denominations already know, and the readers here as well, including atheists, but also have not been able to get the whole of it. We sense that there is something missing, even in our Christian walk, we know that there is something powerless and slovenly about our personal walk with God. What is the missing piece the world needs if not the final atonement?

For example, some say that the ecumenical understanding of the Gospel, that Christ's sacrifice removes the sins of the world past, present and future is wrong, because it says that "if we confess our sins He is faithful and just to forgive..." making it seem like a present action of God, and not one in the past.

Yet John the Baptist declared "behold the Lamb of God which takes away the sin(s) of the world." that would have to be a statement for past, present and future would it not?

While I believe salvation is conditional upon acceptance of Christ, I do not believe that the removal of sins, as in guilt before God, is conditional, seeing that God already loved the world so much, that He gave His only Son. A plan which was made for humanity in the garden of Eden.

Paul says "while we were sinners Christ died for us" and "being reconciled by His death." So the death of Christ reconciled the world long before we came to be. And the world of old was reconciled long before Christ came, because the promise of God - the Word of salvation could not fail, so it was as good as done.

The love of God for the world, has reconciled all of humanity to God, past, present and future, and that such a term of redemption remains in place until the judgement, when those who have not accepted this salvation are faced with their own life time of rejection of the love of God, and condemned.

The red carpet to heaven is already rolled out for humanity, right from the beginning of sin, and salvation is conditional of remaining on it to the destination.

So when we confess our sins, we are confirming and accepting the provision of salvation, which is forgiveness already.

Paul says that there remains a Rest for us to enter into. The Rest is already there - it is Jesus Christ our friend and Savior. It has to be as simple as that.
That is not teaching once saved always saved, because we can leave that provision if we choose.

[RickD]

Let me ask you Starhunter...

You say unbelief or "leaving that provision" can cause us to lose salvation. So, are you saying that sin, specifically unbelief of a Christian, can cause him to lose salvation?

[Starhunter]

Confession and repentance are part of the Christian path. Without communicating honestly to God, the relationship is at stake, like any lasting relationship requires honesty, and if one persists betraying that connection they will lose it altogether.

Jesus said "If you continue in my word, you are my disciples."

But while God cannot abide sin, He is very merciful and understands our plight like no one else does or would, and He does not give up on the sinner who is lost in their own stubbornness and delusion. Even under extreme anguish and pain, our Lord spoke from the cross asking God to forgive His enemies because they did not know what they were doing.

The world is already once saved by grace, because people have life, but they certainly can lose that life and opportunity by presuming on the grace of God with sin.
If once saved always saved is true, then all the world will be saved.

[Philip]

"Whoever believes in the Son HAS eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him."

What does this verse NOT say?

It doesn't say, "whoever is able to believe unto death will, ONE DAY, HAVE eternal life. No, it says that this is something they ALREADY have obtained. And so, exactly WHAT have they obtained? Is it currently temporary/but only in the future PERMANENT eternal life - and then, ONLY IF they persevere? After all, what kind of ETERNAL life could one already possess if this could have any possibility of only being TEMPORARY - and what kind of ultimate oxymoron would temporary, yet future conditional, ETERNAL life actually be? And, would this not be a faith in Jesus PLUS one's own personal ability to persevere - WOW, how shaky would THAT be? Jesus saves, but only with adequate human ability to persevere?!!! So, Jesus saves but we must MAINTAIN exactly WHOSE salvation (JESUS' salvation!)? And if our salvation could be merely temporary, then how could Philippians 1:6 be true?, and how could we ever have faith in it? And how could we ever have such a confidence? "And I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ.

Jesus is the AUTHOR, INTIATOR and COMPLETER of HIS salvation, that HE purchased and died for! ALL WE HAVE DONE is, like blind beggars, to have gratefully accepted His graceful and merciful offer. And, so once we HAVE done so, then THAT IS our day of HIS ETERNAL salvation.

[Starhunter]

That's right Phil, the relationship is based on the promises of God, and not on our own.

And God trusts us to love Him forever, what else could a relationship work by? Suspicion? no.

We don't need to possess any eternal life in order to live forever, because it is freely and eternally given by Christ, we live by the life of God now, and in eternity. "I am the resurrection and the life."

[neo-x]

Star Hunter, I believe the OSAS camp is frowning right now, better get ready for some serious questions.

[Mallz]

I'm still not convinced OSAS is true. For example:

Matthew 10:32 Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven.
Matthew 10:33 But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.

What does it mean if Jesus denies you before His Father?

And I haven't had time to give a proper response yet SH, gimme a lil time.

[RickD]

SH wrote:
Confession and repentance are part of the Christian path. Without communicating honestly to God, the relationship is at stake, like any lasting relationship requires honesty, and if one persists betraying that connection they will lose it altogether.

So, despite God's promises throughout scripture, to keep those that are His, and the promise that at the moment one trusts in Christ for salvation, one has eternal life, despite that, God's promises and His power aren't enough to overcome our sin?

SH wrote:

Jesus said "If you continue in my word, you are my disciples."

Notice carefully what Jesus said: "...you are my disciples."
Believer and disciple are not the same. One becomes a believer, and has eternal life, the moment one trusts in Christ. One is a disciple if one follows Christ. I'll say a little more about the difference in my response to Mallz' question below.

SH wrote:

The world is already once saved by grace, because people have life, but they certainly can lose that life and opportunity by presuming on the grace of God with sin.
If once saved always saved is true, then all the world will be saved.

How does that follow from what you said? I don't understand.
The world is saved by grace? That's not what scripture says. One is saved by Grace, through faith in Christ. Only those who believe in Christ are saved.
OSAS says that all those who have trusted Christ for salvation, have eternal life. Not everyone has trusted Christ, so not everyone(all the world) will be saved. Surely you see the difference?
-----------------

Mallz wrote:

I'm still not convinced OSAS is true. For example:

Matthew 10:32 Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven.
Matthew 10:33 But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.

What does it mean if Jesus denies you before His Father?

Mallz,
Those verses in Matthew are talking about losing rewards in heaven. Not about losing salvation. Once one has eternal life, one is sealed by the Holy Spirit until the day of redemption.
But all believers will be rewarded in heaven, for all they have done in this life. In other words, rewards are based on works. Salvation is not based on works.
As believers, we have eternal life which can never be lost(if it could be lost, it never was eternal in the first place).

As followers of Christ(disciples) we are rewarded for how faithful we are to Him.
When people conflate believer, and disciple, they make scripture contradict itself. As long as we understand there's a difference, there's no contradiction in scripture.
So, Jesus denying one before God, in this instance, means those rewards will be lost.
Once I began to understand the difference between believer and disciple, I started to see what I perceived as contradictions in scripture, go away.

[B. W.]

I'm still not convinced OSAS is true. For example:

Matthew 10:32 Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven.
Matthew 10:33 But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.

What does it mean if Jesus denies you before His Father?

And I haven't had time to give a proper response yet SH, gimme a lil time.

It comes down the the word believe. In Greek and Hebrew the word translated believe/faith is rich in meaning. Think of it this way," one becomes what they believe," is a better way to put it.

Hebrew concept of believe/faith is of action - being part of and belonging to something/or someone in a covenant or family or kin fashion. It is more of a deep bond that blood is thicker than water. Another idea was that of a weaker party trusting themselves to a stronger party to join with them as party of a family or nation. Another shade of meaning ancient Hebrew had for faith was placing oneself under the care of another to learn from them ie to yoke themselves to another to learn of them, their ways and craft, etc. In all, believe/faith involved action of becoming what one believes.

Likewise the ancient Greek concept of believe is similar but involved more mental persuasion to be thoroughly convinced to join in a fellowship with another. Then there are further nuances of that further refined the meaning of the words faith and believe that emphasized mere mental ascent to agreement on a matter, to coming into a living relationship with another, or to be loyal and committed to another as one would in a Treaty. Believe and faith have a wide range of meanings in the context they are written in but the bottom line is that one becomes what they believe in which involves a change of mind and action. This change comes by being fully persuaded to surrender to one stronger and attach yourself in their care and trust.

If one believes in Santa Claus that involves mere mental ascent. Sadly, most modern folks define believe/faith in this way as simple mental agreement that has no bearing on being yoked too another and learning from them as Jesus describes in Matthew 11:28-30

Matthew 11:28-30 fits the best description of the Hebrew concept of believe and faith. Convinced to surrender yourself totally to the God and team up with him, becoming adopted son's and daughters of God assuming the responsibilities of this relationship. Again this stresses the relational aspect of faith/believe and the actions involved in that relationship.

With God, believing in Jesus involves the same concepts with the caveat of God's Grace involved - that he will never let us go. If we stray, he is the good shepherd who seeks the lost straying sheep and leads them back home. Once you are his, you remain his. When you believe that, you become what you believe and one believes in a living Lord who died in a manner that proves he will not let you go. A person with this kind of faith will change their mind about what they say and do and progressively learn what in means, how to be, and the responsibilities of being yoked together with Jesus.

If one merely mentally ascents to believing in Jesus as one believes in Santa Claus, then I would not give one iota for their salvation claims because they continue on living as though God does not exist in their personal lives. These are folks who are not saved, never saved, and a tree is know by its fruit. There is no conscience in regards to sin in their lives but only a using of God to gain their personal gets and wants is evident. However, we cannot judge folks as God can and these folks can come to their senses later and become born again and released from being a slave to their sin nature.

Personally up to this date, I have not met any person who merely mentally assented to Jesus, believed, without such belief radically changing his or her life over a period of time. I have seen them backslide, fall away for a time, feel guilty about sin, but return later on to become yoked with the Lord and learning of His ways and how to reflect his ways. However I have met people who claim to have believed in Jesus but when questioned further, they never really did. They will tell you they believed because they lived in a Christian home, or were associated with church attendance, etc, but as for knowing Jesus as real - no - they have no clue as to what this means. Such people as this, were never saved and are used as examples of Christians losing salvation.

True faith/believing helps you become what you become apart of what you believe in, if not, then that is not true faith/belief. We all face trials and testings that try our souls. We become discouraged and even disheartened during our mortal life's journey. Often some just give up in despair at loss and never reaching life's best. No matter these things, one thing is sure, he will not let us go...

"I would have lost heart, unless I had believed That I would see the goodness of the LORD In the land of the living. Wait on the LORD; Be of good courage, and He shall strengthen your heart; Wait, I say, on the LORD!" Psalms 27:13,14 NKJV

I do not teach OSAS due to the abuse of that this term causes. That idea has been corrupted. While the main idea is true, it can be used to justify living without a relationship with God and lead to an abuse of God's grace. This is evident by how many folks are becoming what they really believe in - no responsibility, no commitment, no attachment too other than too what they want and desire and justify this by attaching Jesus' name to it to get their gets (Matthew 10:32,33c)

Even the majority OSAS people admit that Titus 2:11-15 is true and do not teach laziness in faith. Rather they teach correctly that you cannot keep yourself saved by earning brownie points. They teach a changed life happens by God's grace, and it does. Amen to that. But there are a few who teach that it is okay not to do anything at all other than soak and do nothing so they become what they believe as mentioned in Revelation 3:14-22 and Revelation 3:1,2...

I rather teach to whole counsel of God on salvation and rather folks believe in what Jesus's says in John 10:11,27,28,29,30c. I trust the Lord and know he will change their life by his manner of grace that teaches us to say no to ungodliness. I rather have them trust in the Lord who will not let them go so they become yoked with him becoming what they believed in - a better reflection of Jesus - as it is written in Romans 8:28,29.

Now what Jesus said in John 10:26,27 is true to those he spoke too, the pharisees, who thought they belonged to God, but who did not. Likewise folks like that are in the church world today and mentioned in Hebrews 6 and Hebrews 10 as evidence of losing salvation. Jesus did say that there are those who do not believe as they are not his. We cannot tell very well who is and who is not. Therefore let's not confuse those that truly believe with those that do not. Time will tell because what one believes, they become more like. There are tares midst the good wheat in God's house. Just the way it is. God shakes His house on earth. Revelation chapters 3 and 4 concerns the last day state of the Church and this very shaking. It may well be upon us now.

Examine/test ourselves, 2 Co 13:4,5, and see if we are in the faith. How? simple - what are you becoming more like?

Faith in God's forgiveness granted by his grace alone is the key to release us from one plaguing sin at a time in the process of time and during the time, he will not let you go so you will become what he predestined you to become. Now that is good news!

Blessings
-
-
-

[RickD]

B. W. wrote:
I do not teach OSAS due to the abuse of that this term causes. That idea has been corrupted. While the main idea is true, it can be used to justify living without a relationship with God and lead to an abuse of God's grace. This is evident by how many folks are becoming what they really believe in - no responsibility, no commitment, no attachment too other than too what they want and desire and justify this by attaching Jesus' name to it to get their gets (Matthew 10:32,33c)

Interesting...you say the main idea of OSAS is true, but since it is abused, you don't teach it. Do you also stop teaching God's Grace, because people abuse that too?

You're one who believes in tongues. Since tongues is clearly abused, do you stop teaching that as well?



Of course people abuse OSAS. People twist, and abuse lots of biblical teachings.

[B. W.]

B. W. wrote:
I do not teach OSAS due to the abuse of that this term causes. That idea has been corrupted. While the main idea is true, it can be used to justify living without a relationship with God and lead to an abuse of God's grace. This is evident by how many folks are becoming what they really believe in - no responsibility, no commitment, no attachment too other than too what they want and desire and justify this by attaching Jesus' name to it to get their gets (Matthew 10:32,33c)

Interesting...you say the main idea of OSAS is true, but since it is abused, you don't teach it. Do you also stop teaching God's Grace, because people abuse that too?

You're one who believes in tongues. Since tongues is clearly abused, do you stop teaching that as well?



Of course people abuse OSAS. People twist, and abuse lots of biblical teachings.

No Rick, when you mention OSAS this is what usually happens

Because of this, no one will get any where. I find it pointless to go round robin on this matter. Eternal Security, yes! and that sounds much better than OSAS. At least with the phrase Eternal Security, one can be a peace maker rather than one who enjoys and you can get into a more sane discussion. So, Eternal Security, yes! So I simply avoid the OSAS label and avoid all the strife. At my age, strife is waste of time

Let me give you another example:

Agape means unconditional love. We heard that before, haven't we? However that does not explain what agape is or its affect, it is a mere definition that people can place their own conditional definition for love on and the import of Agape love of God is thus lost.

OSAS is the same. I conjours things in the mind. However, eternal security, for now has a better ring to it and permits time to be explianed. I simply avoid the phrase OSAS so when I share on Eternal Security, I don't label as once saved always saved as this helps avoid...
-
-
-

[Philip]

I can somewhat understand Bryan's reluctance, as so many distort such all-encompassing maxims, to the point of grotesquely perverting its actual meaning. But there will always be misunderstood nuances to Scriptural truths. But to not speak out about this issue would be to fail to take advantage of opportunities to correct a common misunderstanding that keeps so many Christians in bondage and fear, as believing it is possible to lose one's salvation can be a dehabilitating and all-consuming fear. Anyone believing this, who is honest in assessing their continuos potential to fall into sin, must live in great dread of this one day happening to them. Of course, what is a typical reaction by one believing this to be possible? To double down with a constant striving to ramp up their "good" works. Or else, simply live in fear and just hope they can persevere.

People must realize that it's pointless to trust Jesus to save if His ability to do so is also dependent upon us not screwing it up!

[RickD]

B. W. wrote:
I do not teach OSAS due to the abuse of that this term causes. That idea has been corrupted. While the main idea is true, it can be used to justify living without a relationship with God and lead to an abuse of God's grace. This is evident by how many folks are becoming what they really believe in - no responsibility, no commitment, no attachment too other than too what they want and desire and justify this by attaching Jesus' name to it to get their gets (Matthew 10:32,33c)

Interesting...you say the main idea of OSAS is true, but since it is abused, you don't teach it. Do you also stop teaching God's Grace, because people abuse that too?

You're one who believes in tongues. Since tongues is clearly abused, do you stop teaching that as well?



Of course people abuse OSAS. People twist, and abuse lots of biblical teachings.

No Rick, when you mention OSAS this is what usually happens

Because of this, no one will get any where. I find it pointless to go round robin on this matter. Eternal Security, yes! and that sounds much better than OSAS. At least with the phrase Eternal Security, one can be a peace maker rather than one who enjoys and you can get into a more sane discussion. So, Eternal Security, yes! So I simply avoid the OSAS label and avoid all the strife. At my age, strife is waste of time

Let me give you another example:

Agape means unconditional love. We heard that before, haven't we? However that does not explain what agape is or its affect, it is a mere definition that people can place their own conditional definition for love on and the import of Agape love of God is thus lost.

OSAS is the same. I conjours things in the mind. However, eternal security, for now has a better ring to it and permits time to be explianed. I simply avoid the phrase OSAS so when I share on Eternal Security, I don't label as once saved always saved as this helps avoid...
-
-
-

Calling it Eternal security equals no strife?

This thread is 28 pages of proof, that it doesn't matter what you call it, Eternal Security, or OSAS, it still causes disagreement. Notice the thread is called "Eternal Security". And also notice the disagreement.
http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... l+security
To me, it's simple. Call it eternal security, or call it OSAS. It's the same thing. It all comes down to whether or not one believes God's promises are reliable, and if God is able to keep those that are His, and if a believer's sinning can cause a loss of everlasting life.
But if you want to take the politically correct way by calling it eternal security, who am I to stop you?

[RickD]

PhiliptheLogical wrote:
People must realize that it's pointless to trust Jesus to save if His ability to do so is also dependent upon us not screwing it up!

Bingo! We either trust in God's promises through Christ, or we trust in our own ability not to sin. And since I know I'm a sinner, pardon me if I choose to trust God who never changes, instead of my sinful self.

[LittleHamster]

This thread is 28 pages of proof, that it doesn't matter what you call it, Eternal Security, or OSAS, it still causes disagreement. Notice the thread is called "Eternal Security". And also notice the disagreement.
http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... l+security

That would have to be my favorite thread of all time

Another crude analogy would be something like having a farmer go out and see a bunch of ants on the ground - about to be washed away by heavy rain. What can the ants do to guarantee their salvation ? Answer...nothing. All they can do is ask for salvation. Their 'works', both good and bad are useless in the eyes of the farmer. Only when they cry out "Farmer, Farmer, I have sinned against you and against god, please save me".

As in the parable of the prodigal son, they get to be saved, but not by any of their 'works'. At that monumental moment that you sincerely ask for salvation, the holy spirit is given to you - born again - permanently saved.