James 2 And OSAS

[smaller]

I was, and am, talking about the idea that a believer can be lost, and Romans 8 indeed shows otherwise. We need to look at things in the light of the New Testament believer's perspective: that of born again believers indwelt by the Spirit of God.

The Spirit of Christ was in Moses. Would you think that was 'less so' than in any of us?

When was the last time you spoke Gods Direct Words?

And I cited largely from the N.T. in the post as well.

lol

s

The balance of the teaching needs to come from the New Testament, if we are trying to figure from Scripture whether a New Testament believer can be lost.

But you may have highlighted something accurately: we do have difficulty communicating about the same subject, because our outlooks are different.

Look I used a specific example in the NEW TESTAMENT about possibly MILLIONS of 'believers' dying in UNBELIEF yet being SAVED.

And you want to pick at me because they are OLD TESTAMENT believers?

WHY?

Since when is a believer OLD OR NEW one whit different.

We have ONE GOD and ONE FAITH that we are dealing with.

The entire NEW TESTAMENT GOSPEL came directly out of the OLD TESTAMENT SCRIPTURES.

And if you are OSAS, which I think you are, why are you even bothering me on this one?

???

s

 

[smaller]

Then please show me one and prove me wrong.

If you bothered to have even read the texts you wouldn't have made the statements you did.

I don't do people's homework for them.

Keep an uninformed opinion. Matters not to me if you haven't bothered to study it.

s

In other words they don't support your position and you can 't supply any that do?

People who don't bother to study only prove their lack of interest. Keep your uninformed opinion. Not my issue.

s

 

[jeff77]

I studied my Bible a little about David. I see, that now that he sinned but did not turn away. So that was not a very good example. I can see that now.
Does anybody have a good example of what I was trying to point out?

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

And how does THAT distinction make a difference???

Again, I don't like your attitude.
Don't talk to me.

 

[farouk]

I was, and am, talking about the idea that a believer can be lost, and Romans 8 indeed shows otherwise. We need to look at things in the light of the New Testament believer's perspective: that of born again believers indwelt by the Spirit of God.

The Spirit of Christ was in Moses. Would you think that was 'less so' than in any of us?

When was the last time you spoke Gods Direct Words?

And I cited largely from the N.T. in the post as well.

lol

s

The balance of the teaching needs to come from the New Testament, if we are trying to figure from Scripture whether a New Testament believer can be lost.

But you may have highlighted something accurately: we do have difficulty communicating about the same subject, because our outlooks are different.

Look I used a specific example in the NEW TESTAMENT about possibly MILLIONS of 'believers' dying in UNBELIEF yet being SAVED.

And you want to pick at me because they are OLD TESTAMENT believers?

WHY?

Since when is a believer OLD OR NEW one whit different.

We have ONE GOD and ONE FAITH that we are dealing with.

The entire NEW TESTAMENT GOSPEL came directly out of the OLD TESTAMENT SCRIPTURES.

And if you are OSAS, which I think you are, why are you even bothering me on this one?

???

s

Well, I'm dispensational in my reading of Scripture. Especially when it comes to New Testament distinctives.

But I better leave it there.

 

[smaller]

Well, I'm dispensational in my reading of Scripture. Especially when it comes to New Testament distinctives.

But I better leave it there.

If that led you to believe there were no believers in the Old Testament, yeah. discard.

s

 

[farouk]

Well, I'm dispensational in my reading of Scripture. Especially when it comes to New Testament distinctives.

But I better leave it there.

If that led you to believe there were no believers in the Old Testament, yeah. discard.

s

There were Old Testament saints (Hebrews 11 says a lot about them) and there are believers in the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ, as revealed in the New Testament; the revelation of the Person of Christ and the facts about His death, burial and resurrection are crucial in this regard.

But I don't think we are communicating, friend.

 

[jasoncran]

david just describe el-shaddai. interesting thing about Him but that is another topic.if you are going to use the psalms for doctrine then tell me why Ezekiel contradicts that?

Do you suppose David wrote this Psalm before he committed pre-meditated adultery and murder? Of coarse I don't know. What I do know is the David was not put to death for these sins.
I think though that David would have felt very much "the shadow of death" as his baby son was dying and he knew that is was because of his sin. He cried out
asking God not to take His Spirit from him, if I remember correctly.
I see here that even though the Law called for him to die, he found grace with God because of his faith. God said David was a man after his own heart. So I see David as a believer who sinned willfully and badly but he did not reject God and God did not reject him. God loved David and knew that the creature that is man is weak and prone to sin but He saw David's heart.

Surely if God gave such grace under the time of the Law of Moses, He is faithful to us, even when we mess up and are not faithful to him. He's a good father and does not give up on us.

I think some who include works (obedience) for their salvation they are seeing sinning as rejecting God. So did David reject God when he sinned. Most will say no and they will say of coarse David was saved because he didn't reject God. Do you see how silly that sounds. It's like they are saying David could get away with that but you/I can't. But then we see the woman caught in adultery, Jesus didn't allow her to be stoned either and she didn't even know Him. So how does that answer to Ezekiel? I don't know. Do you? I suspect it's called grace and faith. Oh, but the woman didn't have faith did she? Did she learn faith in Jesus through His grace to her?

I think Psalm 23 was written by a mature David who had been through the wringer and realized that God was everything he needed to live.

Thy rod and thy staff they comfort me. It took me a long while to understand this.

God doesn't give up on us. we ask him to leave us.remember David had the option to harden his heart . he didn't.

 

[dadof10]

I'm of the conviction, based on other scripture, that this 'showing' of one's faith through what we do is primarily for our own personal benefit.

"Show me your faith apart from your works, and I by my works will show you my faith."

This seems to be saying that it's possible to "show" our faith to others. Which "other Scripture" do you mean?

These other scriptures:

"5 For this very reason, make every effort to add to your faith goodness; and to goodness, knowledge; 6 and to knowledge, self-control; and to self-control, perseverance; and to perseverance, godliness; 7 and to godliness, mutual affection; and to mutual affection, love. 8 For if you possess these qualities in increasing measure, they will keep you from being ineffective and unproductive in your knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 But whoever does not have them is nearsighted and blind, forgetting that they have been cleansed from their past sins.

10 Therefore, my brothers and sisters, make every effort to confirm your calling and election. For if you do these things, you will never stumble, 11 and you will receive a rich welcome into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ." (2 Peter 1:5-11 NIV)



"7 Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. 8 But land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned.

9 Even though we speak like this, dear friends, we are convinced of better things in your case—the things that have to do with salvation. 10 God is not unjust; he will not forget your work and the love you have shown him as you have helped his people and continue to help them. 11 We want each of you to show this same diligence to the very end, so that what you hope for may be fully realized. 12 We do not want you to become lazy, but to imitate those who through faith and patience inherit what has been promised. (Hebrews 6:7-12 NIV)



"16 God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them. 17 This is how love is made complete among us so that we will have confidence on the day of judgment: In this world we are like Jesus. 18 There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love." (1 John 4:16-18 NIV)



"17 If anyone has material possessions and sees a brother or sister in need but has no pity on them, how can the love of God be in that person? 18 Dear children, let us not love with words or speech but with actions and in truth.

19 This is how we know that we belong to the truth and how we set our hearts at rest in his presence: 20 If our hearts condemn us..." (1 John 3:17-20 NIV)

These are admonitions directed to the individual believer to be taken to heart by the believer so that they personally can find assurance of the hope they profess in their own lives...and know for themselves if they really have that assurance.

Yes, they are.

These particular verses are not given for us to hold up to others and assess their faith by, though there are passages for that, too.

Agreed, again.

I put James' teaching in the same category as these personal admonitions to make sure we have the faith that can save.

Why? James says "I will show you my faith...". When he uses Abraham as an example he prefaces it with "Do you want to be shown, you shallow man, that faith apart from works is barren?". He seems to be holding Abraham's act of obedience up as evidence of his saving faith, for all the world to see. Or at least for the "shallow man". Isn't that how you read it, or do you have another interpretation?

We recognize the presence of that faith--the faith that can save--by what it does. OSAS, even though it gives lip service to James, ultimately puts his teaching on the sidelines if necessary to validate saving faith. That's bothersome to me.

Me too. It seems inconsistent. When I run out of time or a thread is moving fast, I usually skim the posts, then go back and read them later. I missed this quote from you. I meant to comment on it.

It's when a person consciously and willing refuses to repent, that is when he has removed himself from the grace of salvation. And even then, it is the Lord who makes the determination who has truly sinned beyond reach of his grace, and who has not.

Very well put. It takes into consideration that all is Grace, that we can remove ourselves from Grace and that ultimately it is God who judges us. From your posts here, I don't think we are too far apart on this topic, and I see that now. I didn't see it when we were on the other threads, due to my pride and love of argument. I apologize.

 

[dadof10]

So, if a person dies LIVING A SINFUL LIFESTYLE, (e.g. a gay lifestyle) will that person be saved without repenting?

Who can know the heart of a person but God?
He may repent on his death bed without anyone knowing it.
So, we can never know about the OSAS issue from this example.

Excellent point. We can only hope EVERYONE repents in the end. But here's the question. Doesn't James say we can "show" our true faith by our actions? If our actions show we fall short of salvation, and we die in this state without repenting, have we lost our salvation?

See, once you admit that we CAN outwardly show our true justification, "he was never saved..." is relegated to the ash heap. where it belongs. This has always seemed like a cop-out to me.

 

[dadof10]

Try and focus, Smaller. Your contention was "Well, strange thing about the non-OSAS people. They never really believe that happens to them. Only to the other people."

That is bunk. You can try and steer the focus away from your ridiculous comment

Made no such deferral.

I pointed out the most obvious gaffe that you have no way possible to prove that God in Christ ever left you.

Does that look like deferral to you OR is that me observing the frailty of your personal guesswork on the matter?

OK, read this very carefully. Christ has NEVER LEFT US, WE LEAVE HIM. This is what you need to respond to. Quit with the straw men, your credibility is suffering.

if you want to, but THIS is what I was responding to. You don't know what you are talking about, evidenced by the FACT that you try to distract. I didn't comment on anything else you said, only this.

So, tell me which "non-OSAS people" believe losing salvation ONLY happens to others? Waiting for "named" people or an admission of ignorance....

I observed that every single person promoting non-OSAS believes themselves 'saved' at the time they are making their claims.

What's yer beef on this?

s

Whether every single one of them does or not, I can't speak to. What I do know is that I have never met a Christian who rejects OSAS and who thinks they personally can't lose their salvation, which was your contention. Quit moving the goalposts.

 

[Deborah13]

It's when a person consciously and willing refuses to repent, that is when he has removed himself from the grace of salvation.

Can a person consciously and willing refuse to change their mind? Explain that to me please?

 

[chessman]

Can a person consciously and willing refuse to change their mind? Explain that to me please?

No!
Yes!
I mean maybe

 

[Deborah13]

No!
Yes!
I mean maybe

LOL
I'm not sure about that either.

 

[francisdesales]

Only the clean of heart shall enter into heaven. NO WICKED SHALL INHERIT THE KINGDOM, Paul makes that clear like 5 times in the NT...

You are correct, no unclean thing will inherit the kingdom so....that means me, you, and joe shmo ain't goin'. So how's that suit ya'. Because there is not one living soul that is without sin and our righteousness is as filthy, bloody rags.
So what is the solution? Faith in our Lord that His righteousness is sufficient. Have your robes been washed in the blood of the Lamb? Where does the Word say there is any other way to wash your robe spotless. I think that is the criteria, robe must be spotless?

Or do you know some other solutions?

It's all about JESUS and what HE DID, it's not about US and what we do. What we do amounts to piddly compared to HIM.

You misunderstand me.

Going to heaven is dependent upon being united with Christ. I can do no good without Him. Apart from Him, I am lost. One either unites with Christ's death and resurrection and becomes divinized or one unites with the spirit of this world. You can't be united to both:

Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid. What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh. But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit 1 Cor 6:15-17a

 

[francisdesales]

Oh please stop boring me with the ignorant history story. The New Testament writers held the position. Is that early enough for 'church fathers' for you? What is in writing, in scripture?

s

Again, you ignore the facts and pretend that you didn't say what you said. No NT writer held your sect's novel invented position. No Christian wrote about it. There is nothing about individually guaranteed eternal security in Scriptures. The entire position is fabricated, for clearly, the Holy Spirit would have made it known at least ONCE in a thousand years if this was such a "pinnacle of the faith"!

God will punish the wicked, EVEN if they were ONCE righteous, the Bible makes that perfectly clear, and He holds no favoritism, even for people of your sect. Not even Paul thought he was beyond the reach of God's judgment, despite your sad attempts to claim otherwise.

I see you totally ignore history and common sense, brushing aside over a thousand years of Christian thinking. Your perogative - and your mistake. The same men who formulated the idea of Trinity and grace/nature from Scriptures did not see eternal security that your sect teaches. If that is not a big warning sign to you that your thinking is quite novel and WRONG at the basic level, I don't know what to tell you, except to remind you of the warning Peter gives regarding Paul's writings. Twisting them can lead to your destruction, Peter says...

 

[francisdesales]

It's when a person consciously and willing refuses to repent, that is when he has removed himself from the grace of salvation.

Can a person consciously and willing refuse to change their mind? Explain that to me please?

Of course. I see it here all the time... Often even in the face of logic and common sense, people will cling to a position based on emotions and stubborness. Practically every thread on the apologetic site has examples of this...

You will say I do, and I will say others do. Doesn't matter your perspective, it is being done here all the time.

Regards

 

[smaller]

OK, read this very carefully. Christ has NEVER LEFT US, WE LEAVE HIM.

Apparently not as a realilty huh?

Gotta luv circular statements though.

This is what you need to respond to. Quit with the straw men, your credibility is suffering.

Spare me the petty insults. If the above is an example of your reasoning in faith I'd suggest to go back to the drawing board.

Whether every single one of them does or not, I can't speak to. What I do know is that I have never met a Christian who rejects OSAS and who thinks they personally can't lose their salvation, which was your contention. Quit moving the goalposts.

and by all means please try to read the details. ALL of you non-OSAS adherents believe you are saved as you post against being saved.

None of you can say for any certainty that you are saved. It is as your statement above, more circular reasoning.

The most any of you can say, reasonably speaking, is that you MIGHT be saved.

and you MIGHT not be.

That is the reality of your claims.

s

 

[smaller]

Again, you ignore the facts and pretend that you didn't say what you said. No NT writer held your sect's novel invented position.

When those kinds of statements are made I say the alternate claimers don't know their text and nothing more than that.

And even if they were put up, which they have been many times in these types of exchanges, they are ignored, discounted or eradicated.

In short, not a serious discussion.

No Christian wrote about it.

Seriously laughable. Origen contemplated not only all believers factually being saved, but even the contemplation that all mankind would be saved. Of course some of the hardliners in your sect didn't take that very well.

We can continue to discuss these matters as a matter of history or we can stick to the text.

I prefer text myself.

There is nothing about individually guaranteed eternal security in Scriptures.

I've given Romans 11:25-32 as an example of unsaved enemies of the Gospel being saved as it pertained to Israel.

Maybe we can start with something real easy in that example and move on to the more interesting plethora of present tense statements of having eternal life?

Think you might be able to manage that?

The entire position is fabricated, for clearly, the Holy Spirit would have made it known at least ONCE in a thousand years if this was such a "pinnacle of the faith"!

You can continue to make that phony claim or you can deal with SCRIPTURE. I know that scripture isn't your most desired course of understanding and that you prefer baldfaced unsupported assertions of fantasy history.

God will punish the wicked,

Never said He wouldn't.

How many times are you going to bypass the baby step example I gave with Paul? Obviously specific discourse ain't in the cards for francisD.

If it were allowed to examine your particular proponents 'history' examples we would really have a ball, I'm certain.

s

 

[francisdesales]

When those kinds of statements are made I say the alternate claimers don't know their text and nothing more than that.

You can say whatever you want, but until you put your money where your mouth is, it is just hot air...

And since you don't appear serious on discussing issues, but prefer to use a number of logical fallacies in your comments, I see no point in furthering this. Red herrings, broad generalizations, poisioning the well, non sequitars, personal attacks... So when does smaller actually say anything substantial and worthy of a respectful thought from me??? You refer to one writer of Christianity from 1000 plus years as if his few verses, twisted for your own purposes, is supposed to trump everything else that Chrisitanity has to say on the subject??? Even the few verses you have managed to post between your logical fallacies and curt remarks say nothing on the subject to back up your heresy.

Do your homework and read up on the subject. What does/did Christianity believe and teach about this subject while it was still united and before thousands wanted to be their own pope, refusing to consider the wisdom of others on the matter?