Is it dangerous to teach non-OSAS?

[Jethro Bodine]

I just appreciate the IRONY of all of you non-OSAS claiming yourself solidly saved.

Once again you are showing how little you know about non-OSAS. If you understood it you'd know that it is actually the doctrine of security and assurance. That's why non-OSAS folk who are continuing in their faith aren't wondering if they are not saved. Understand?

 

[Jethro Bodine]

OSAS is not a salvation issue.What would be dangerous is not teaching that Jesus Christ is the risen Son of God.

But isn't the 'S' in OSAS the word 'saved'?

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

But isn't the 'S' in OSAS the word 'saved'?

Oh, how little we know, how little we know...

 

[Jethro Bodine]

And all this must be seen in Scripture and simply believed, because "The just shall live by faith".

Do you think non-OSAS says otherwise?

When people are genuinely saved, and immediately baptized according to the NT, they will themselves experience the power of the Holy Spirit, but they will be "babes in Christ" and will need discipling. They will have the internal witness of the Holy Spirit. They will have a love for Christian brothers and sisters. This is all God's work.

This does not conflict with non-OSAS. But did you know that there are several people in this forum who insist OSAS means you can be NONE of the above, having departed the faith, and you are still irretrievably saved?

All Christians need to be crystal clear in their minds that salvation is purely and entirely a work of God and the gift of God, and entirely because of His infinite love, grace and mercy (Tit 3:4-7).

Non-OSAS knows this. And we know this truth is applied through one's faith, not their work. But many in OSAS insist if we have to keep on believing in Christ as a condition for salvation then we are trying to earn our own salvation.

Indeed salvation is JESUS Himself since His name Yeshua means GOD OUR SALVATION. That is where the focus should be, and that will give every sinner the absolute assurance that they have been saved eternally, and are kept by the power of God.

What we see happening is that the focus has been placed on the poor sinner and whether he can keep himself saved. That is because the Gospel is not being preached in all its fullness and Scripture is not being sufficiently presented.

How is it that we get saved by believing and that is not considered 'saving oneself', but continuing to believe in order to be saved now becomes the sinful effort of trying to save oneself. How does that work? What's the difference between the faith a person has when they first believe and the continuing faith they have after that that somehow that very same faith now becomes the sinful effort of keeping oneself saved?

Let's not forget that humanism has entered into the churches.

The church is in trouble if it thinks continuing to believe in Christ is humanism.

 

[smaller]

Once again you are showing how little you know about non-OSAS.

I understand it just fine thank you. Spent several years in these camps.

If you understood it you'd know that it is actually the doctrine of security and assurance.

It's also termed 'reasonable assurance' in some camps, meaning it's still only a maybe but NEVER a certainty.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I understand it just fine thank you. Spent several years in these camps.

I suspect you either spent several years in camps that believe salvation is literally through doing righteous works, or you never understood that having the faith that saves (all by itself apart from works) is the faith that works. Faith that remains by itself is not faith. Faith justifies all by itself, but the faith that justifies (all by itself) is the faith that will then not be alone, but will be seen in the ever-increasing fruit of the Spirit. This is what the Bible says the fearful person in the church needs to hear. Not that OSAS is true.

It's also termed 'reasonable assurance' in some camps, meaning it's still only a maybe but NEVER a certainty.

The only 'maybe' in non-OSAS is if you'll continue to the very end in the faith that justifies. That's why the Bible warns us to stay in that faith. Even OSAS can't argue with this; they just think the end result of the 'maybe' of staying in the faith is kingdom reward, not salvation itself.

What few OSASer's understand is that in every second and instance the non-OSASer is in justifying faith they have salvation for all salvation is, now in this age, and will be in the age to come.

 

[JLB]

Now that you've had your morning coffee...

A brother comes to you and says "I'm not sure I'll be saved on the Day of Wrath". Is it better to say...

A. "Oh, don't worry, brother, once saved always saved!"

or

B. "The Bible helps us to discern whether or not we belong to Christ and will pass through the coming Judgment safely."​

The better answer is B.

Karl seems to have the thinking that if someone is scared about the coming Judgment that you take away those fears by saying to them 'once you are saved you are always saved'. Which is a false and misleading comfort if the person really isn't even saved to begin with.

It's easy to see that his approach is far more dangerous than my approach which would be to have the individual FIRST examine themselves, Biblically, to see if they are even in the faith to begin with. From there you take the appropriate remedy for the person's fear. I see no value in salving the conscience of a person with a OSAS doctrine who isn't even born again to begin with and who, because you told them OSAS is true, are provided no impetus to even determine whether they are or not ahead of the coming Judgment.

Karl's answer to the fear of the coming Judgment in the believer is just another stroking of the ear of the church. The Bible tells us what relieves the fear of the coming Judgment and it is not "OSAS".

B is certainly the better answer, especially in light of the final words that Jesus taught from the Sermon on the Mount.

Those whom Jesus commanded to depart from Him were genuinely surprised, as they thought they themselves were secure in their salvation.


It's interesting to note that they began to "question" Jesus's decision to banish them to the everlasting fires of hell, as if He had made a mistake in His decision.

One has to wonder if these were of the OSAS camp, by there reaction.

41 Then He will also say to those on the left hand, 'Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels: 42 for I was hungry and you gave Me no food; I was thirsty and you gave Me no drink; 43 I was a stranger and you did not take Me in, naked and you did not clothe Me, sick and in prison and you did not visit Me.' Matthew 24:41-43


Then they also will answer Him, saying, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to You?' Matthew 25:44

Jesus actually expects us to express His Righteous Life in action.

Action or works that is stimulated by The Spirit of Christ within each and every believer that is born again, and has His divine nature within.


Does this mean we are to "earn" our salvation? No.

Does this mean that the Lord expects us to obey the inner leading of the Spirit? Yes.


My sheep hear My Voice...



JLB

 

[smaller]

I suspect you either spent several years in camps that believe salvation is literally through doing righteous works, or you never understood that having the faith that saves (all by itself apart from works) is the faith that works.

Comment removed by staff

The list of uses of the position to leverage their positions is quite lengthy and would almost deserve it's own thread to unfold, but would include numerous matters that would cause a believer to wind up in hell such as:

Not adhering to the Pope or magisterium
Sin
Failure of various actions
Failure to confess and repent continually
Failure to participate in various sacerdotal systems enacted by various branches of religious theocracy
Failure to adhere to certain leaders dictates
Failure to perform any number of given ritualistic practices

etc etc etc.

Comment removed by staff.

 

[Jesse]

The manipulation of believers using non-OSAS is blatant and run amok in every last assembly where this premise is upheld along with a pile of self justifications for adequate and suitable performances and obedience measures of various sorts.

It's really just another form of internal sickness and religious muscle flexing used to dominate other people via the use of THREAT and HATRED.

Comment removed by staff

Go read John 15 and see what Jesus says about being cut off from the vine Edited by staff

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Generally I find that the position of non-OSAS appeals to internal psychopathic bents that a lot of religious people have who seem to enjoy threatening the salvation status of believers to manipulate them and to justify and enforce a myriad of weak doctrinal positions via coercive threats.

The list of uses of the position to leverage their positions is quite lengthy and would almost deserve it's own thread to unfold, but would include numerous matters that would cause a believer to wind up in hell such as:

Not adhering to the Pope or magisterium
Sin
Failure of various actions
Failure to confess and repent continually
Failure to participate in various sacerdotal systems enacted by various branches of religious theocracy
Failure to adhere to certain leaders dictates
Failure to perform any number of given ritualistic practices

etc etc etc.

The space is so full of vile manipulation and hypocrisy by the various proponents it generally just makes me ill to even open their theology boxes for close examinations quite frankly.

Surely some are going to depart from the simple truth of the Bible and end up making non-OSAS equivalent to Paul's work's that can not justify. But that hardly means they are non-OSAS. This is the simple truth of non-OSAS in the Bible:

You must continue to trust in Christ to the very end in order to be saved on the Day of Wrath.

This is what we need to tell people who are uncertain and fearful of the Day of Wrath that is coming. As JLB points out, it seems a lot of people are going to find out that the OSAS doctrine they were given to salve their consciences that made them think they were still saved will not save them on the Day of Wrath.

 

[Jesse]

Surely some are going to depart from the simple truth of the Bible and end up making non-OSAS equivalent to Paul's work's that can not justify. But that hardly means they are non-OSAS. This is the simple truth of non-OSAS in the Bible:

You must continue to trust in Christ to the very end in order to be saved on the Day of Wrath.

This is what we need to tell people who are uncertain and fearful of the Day of Wrath that is coming. As JLB points out, it seems a lot of people are going to find out that the OSAS they were given to salve their consciences will not save them on the Day of Wrath.

Yes, agree, and some people not only idolize their salvation........

they also idolize their doctrine.

 

[Jesse]

I don't think you guys who threaten other believers salvation are not saved if that is what you are claiming. Wrong headed? Sure. Nobody is perfect. Too bad that is part of what many of you expect.

My comment was not directed at anyone's salvation.

Comment removed by staff

It seems there is more going on than this simple debate. We do begin to idolize our doctrine (even if the doctrine is true or not), it becomes about the doctrine instead of God Edited by staff

 

[Jesse]

Multiple comments edited by staff


Let me pick on Rollo....have you noticed that even if he disagrees with you, a person can still see the Fruit in his posts? The love sort of leaks from his posts? I am 18 years old, I seek out people who bare Fruit - Good Fruit, because I don't have any models in my life right now, so I am paying attention. Non-believers are paying attention as well, we are the Light to the world.



Be blessed.

 

[jeff77]

This thread will be closed for moderator review. It looks like things have to turned into a debate and gotten personal.
1) Give other members the respect you would have them give to yourself. (ToS 2.4)
Address issues/ideas, not persons or personalities. Do not insult, publicly post derogatory opinions of others, post insinuation to belittle or discredit, or otherwise create a hostile environment. Present evidence for support or rebuttal during debate. Bashing the author of another view or opinion is not evidence.

 

[jeff77]

This thread has gotten way to personal.

How about we start over and state our opinions, but do not attack another people's opinions.

I will start us off by answering the OP.

"Is it dangerous to teach non-OSAS?" I don't believe it is dangerous to teach non-OSAS as long as it is not being used or confused with teaching salvation by works. Some people that believe in OSAS see the non-OSAS position as a works doctrine. I personally have never heard anyone of the Christian faith say outright that "I am saved because of all the good stuff I have done and all those times I did not sin". I have heard some people that were agnostic that said they believed that god will see that they have done more good than bad and that is what will get them to heaven.

I believe that the best thing to teach is to be a follower of Christ. To put your faith in Christ everyday and endure the trials that come your way. I believe there is effort on our part to "have faith", but also I have experienced times in my own life where my faith was weak or gone and God's will was still done in a particular thing I had going on in my life.

 

[evenifigoalone]

I'm an OSAS type, but I also believe in a healthy sense of doubt in one's views. We're human, our views are fallible, there's always going to be something we're wrong about. Being able to read up on and study other viewpoints is an important part of learning and growing.

This issue is a heavy one...there have been times I have lost sleep and lived in near terror over it. Funny thing, when the doubt got to be too much God has always been there to remind me that I belong to Him.

 

[Brother Mike]

I personally have never heard anyone of the Christian faith say outright that "I am saved because of all the good stuff I have done and all those times I did not sin". I have heard some people that were agnostic that said they believed that god will see that they have done more good than bad and that is what will get them to heaven.
.

Joh 8:29 kjva And he that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please him.

Now if the Son of God says the FAther is always with him because of his works, where does that put us?

 

[jeff77]

Joh 8:29 kjva And he that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please him.

Now if the Son of God says the FAther is always with him because of his works, where does that put us?

It puts us with the Father also, because of the Son's works.

 

[Kathi]

Multiple comments edited by staff


Let me pick on Rollo....have you noticed that even if he disagrees with you, a person can still see the Fruit in his posts? The love sort of leaks from his posts? I am 18 years old, I seek out people who bare Fruit - Good Fruit, because I don't have any models in my life right now, so I am paying attention. Non-believers are paying attention as well, we are the Light to the world.



Be blessed.

Yes,Rollo teases but I also see that he loves the Lord.

 

[Deborah13]

Joh 8:29 kjva And he that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please him.

Now if the Son of God says the FAther is always with him because of his works, where does that put us?

So you believe that Jesus Could have chosen to sin against His Father? Jesus could have chosen to do evil?