James 2 And OSAS

[smaller]

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

Your attempt to establish theological positions on the basis of your subjective version of history isn't going to work.

We can agree to 'deal with scripture' as our mutual basis of discourse or not.

Obviously some people like their subjective fantasies of history rather than scripture.

That is kinda how a lot of believers derived that maybe it was better for us to take our Gospel from the horses mouth aka THE SOLA'S rather than the 'subjective posers' who claim history for themselves.

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.

Of course you do not really want to deal with text alone. That much is obvious. That is why some people don't belong in a theology apologetics forum.

Red herrings, broad generalizations, poisioning the well, non sequitars, personal attacks...

Do you really want me to 're-list' ALL the specific examples I gave and then employ the very things you are whining about me supposedly doing?

Obviously you don't care for specific examples, specific discourse and using SCRIPTURE as our mutual measures.

Petty fd, very very petty.

So when does smaller actually say anything substantial and worthy of a respectful thought from me???

I have specifically countered FROM SCRIPTURE, every complaint you bring up and you conveniently bypass every example.

So what else is new?

We're not going to have an historical argument here because your version of history is not only entirely bogus but not allowed to be discussed.

So if you want a discussion here you're going to have to deal with scripture and put away fantasy history.

s

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I studied my Bible a little about David. I see, that now that he sinned but did not turn away.

It's going to be impossible for me to keep up with all these posts, but I spotted this and you are right on. There's a big, big difference between weakness within the faith, and outright rejecting the faith.

And let me add that the Promised Land signified the blessings of God, not salvation itself. Obedience was/is the condition for entering into and enjoying the benefits of the gospel. The Israelites were the legitimate people of God long before they entered into the Promises found in the Land of Promise.

 

[JLB]

Nevertheless the solid foundation of God stands, having this seal: "The Lord knows those who are His," and, "Let everyone who names the name of Christ depart from iniquity."

 

[smaller]

Citing this exchange as an example of what happens when people get their theological back against a wall:

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.

And of course that was merely one of many that could be drawn from inclusive of the NEW TESTATMENT WRITERS.

FrancisD wants to discount 'thee' only 'true' historical fathers we have to draw from and 'replace' them with his subjective view of history.

Ranting on and on about how NOT ONE, not once, NO writer, NO Christian, wrote about it,

and when one HISTORICAL EXAMPLE FROM his own SECT is trotted out, then whining ONLY ONE!

Serious discussion? Only if we take a rewrite from subjective history.

Stick to the scriptures and GODS LIVING WORD, they will NOT lead astray francisD.

Why would we want to take 'dead men's history' when we have this, even from the pen of Peter no less:

1 Peter 1:23
Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.


s

 

[dadof10]

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?

Do you mean against all evidence to the contrary? Do you mean have a closed mind? Yes. Now, what are you getting at, Deb?

 

[dadof10]

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.

:biglol This would be funny even without the admonishment against "circular reasoning". Which is it, Smaller? Do we believe we are saved or do we not know?

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

What does any of this have to do with your contention that we "non-OSAS" people think ONLY others can lose their salvation, and we can't?

Distraction.

 

[francisdesales]

Your attempt to establish theological positions on the basis of your subjective version of history isn't going to work.

But YOUR heretical subjective version of "theology" will work???

I'm supposed to do YOUR homework to prove your outrageous claim, and now, you deny the need for anyone to back up your claim...

Spare me. If you can't support your claim of this "foundation" you speak of, just let it go. Move on. The more you argue about it, the more silly you look...

 

[smaller]

What does any of this have to do with your contention that we "non-OSAS" people think ONLY others can lose their salvation, and we can't?

Exactly zero of you take your own factual position when discussing against OSAS.

You all 'think' you are saved when you make those arguments.

Difficult for you to grasp?

The reality is that in the non-OSAS adherents, they are NOT saved, period.

The only thing they can muster is that they might be by their own understandings.

Now, tell me the truth that you factually have if you can:

You are not saved. You MIGHT be saved.

Is this true or not?

I insist on speaking with people honestly, and honestly you are not saved.

s

 

[smaller]

But YOUR heretical subjective version of "theology" will work???

I am satisfied using scripture.

Are you?

Obviously that measure doesn't compute for francisD.

s

 

[francisdesales]

Apparently not as a realilty huh?

Gotta luv circular statements though.

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.

:biglol This would be funny even without the admonishment against "circular reasoning". Which is it, Smaller? Do we believe we are saved or do we not know?

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

What does any of this have to do with your contention that we "non-OSAS" people think ONLY others can lose their salvation, and we can't?

Distraction.

Yup. You got it... That's his mode of operation. He even attacks people who AGREE with him...

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

But YOUR heretical subjective version of "theology" will work???

I am satisfied using scripture.

Are you?

Obviously that measure doesn't compute for francisD.

s

Your twisted interpretation of Scripture is NOT the same thing as Scripture

Why do you think Peter warned people about being DESTROYED by reading and incorrectly interpreting Paul's Scriptures???

 

[smaller]

Your twisted interpretation of Scripture is NOT the same thing as Scripture

I am satisfied with using scripture.

R U?

Why do you think Peter warned people about being DESTROYED by reading and incorrectly interpreting Paul's Scriptures???

They wrested the scriptures to their OWN destruction.

Hey, that's what U DO!

go figure.

2 Peter 3:16
As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

Why you guys try so hard to eternally torture or eradicate yourself is pretty strange isn't it?

lol

s

 

[smaller]

Since there appears to be soooo many here who don't have a basic understanding of 'tense' applications in the scriptures, I'd like to present some 'pro-OSAS' texts and then the 'mandatory changes' that would have to be made in order to eliminate OSAS. Will do them one at a time so those who haven't read them can savor them a bit:

John 6:37
All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.

Suggested [re-writes:]

-I MIGHT CAST THEM OUT IF I FEEL LIKE IT.
-THEY SHALL COME AND THEY MIGHT CAST THEMSELVES OUT.
-I WILL CAST OUT ALL (NON [INSERT YOUR FAVORITE DENOMINATION] MEMBERS)

-

 

[francisdesales]

And of course that was merely one of many that could be drawn from inclusive of the NEW TESTATMENT WRITERS.

I never agreed that Paul teaches OSAS. He doesn't - unless you think Paul contradicts himself over and over again. Nor does anyone else in the NT. Nor does anyone else who read and taught the NT in the immediately following one thousand years. But this is "foundational" and taught for "thousands of years"????

Who is living in the fantasy world? Isn't it clear that this "foundational teaching", about whether a believer can become an unbeliever/fall away, would have been discussed?

It is. Over and over. It is in virtually every book of the NT. The OT is clear about it, as well. Numerous Church Fathers write about it (despite your sect's idea that Christianity began in the first century, took a haitus, and then came back in 1522...). People who have been freed from sin can RETURN to being enslaved by sin and can be judged unworthy for heaven, since they have separated themselves from Christ.

Now, if you can twist some Scriptures, based upon your preconceived notions embedded within you by your sect, good for you. What is clear is that no one agreed with your take on this subject for one thousand years. Even Paul himself disagrees with your INTERPRETATION of several verses.

FrancisD wants to discount 'thee' only 'true' historical fathers we have to draw from and 'replace' them with his subjective view of history.

Yea, do your homework and show me where?

Ranting on and on about how NOT ONE, not once, NO writer, NO Christian, wrote about it,

Truth hurts, so now s must speak of "ranting" when someone asks for proof of YOUR claim.

You made the claim. I ask for proof and I am the one whining...

Despite the fact that it IS true, no writer of Christianity speaks in such a way. Augustine? Jerome? Irenaeus? Thomas Aquainas? How about people who HEARD Paul preach? First century. How about the Didache or Ignatius of Antioch. How about Clement of Rome? Does HE write to the Corinthians, the same Corinthians who Paul wrote to (the same Corinthians who Paul said NO ONE who does ... shall enter the kingdom - NO ONE, including "saved" individuals), and talk about "eternal security, guaranteed, no matter what you did"? Hardly, he takes "saved Christians" to task for causing dissent, saying they are in danger of being lost.

That's a powerful witness to how Christians perceived Paul and what he taught. What others taught. If you can't see that, well...

But don't make such outrageously false claims about how "foundational" your newbie teaching is.

 

[smaller]

Since there appears to be soooo many here who don't have a basic understanding of 'tense' applications in the scriptures, I'd like to present some 'pro-OSAS' texts and then the 'mandatory changes' that would have to be made in order to eliminate OSAS. Will do them one at a time so those who haven't read them can savor them a bit:

John 5:24
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath (a) everlasting life, and shall not (b) come into condemnation; but is passed (c) from death unto life.

Suggested mandatory [re-writes]:

(a)
MIGHT HAVE
COULD HAVE
HATH/HATH NOT/DEPENDS ON THE MOMENT

(b)
MAY
MIGHT

(c)
MIGHT PASS
MAY PASS
WILL MAYBE PASS
COULD MAYBE PASS

-

 

[francisdesales]

Since there appears to be soooo many here who don't have a basic understanding of 'tense' applications in the scriptures, I'd like to present some 'pro-OSAS' texts and then the 'mandatory changes' that would have to be made in order to eliminate OSAS. Will do them one at a time so those who haven't read them can savor them a bit:

John 6:37
All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.

Suggested [re-writes:]

-I MIGHT CAST THEM OUT IF I FEEL LIKE IT.
-THEY SHALL COME AND THEY MIGHT CAST THEMSELVES OUT.
-I WILL CAST OUT ALL (NON [INSERT YOUR FAVORITE DENOMINATION] MEMBERS)

-

Yawn.

First, thanks for the colors. They are so pretty.

Too bad the entertainment stopped there.

This Scripture has been addressed numerous times here. And the problem is the PRESUMPTION that YOU are one of the called.

It doesn't say ALL who come to Christ, it says all GIVEN BY THE FATHER.

Now, if you believe otherwise, consider John 6:66. Disciples of Christ, followers of Christ. What did they do???

It should be clear that just because one follows Christ does NOT mean they will CONTINUE to follow Christ OR that the Father gave the individual to Christ. You can claim this for yourself all you want, but subjective self-satisfaction doesn't make it so.

 

[francisdesales]

Since there appears to be soooo many here who don't have a basic understanding of 'tense' applications in the scriptures, I'd like to present some 'pro-OSAS' texts and then the 'mandatory changes' that would have to be made in order to eliminate OSAS. Will do them one at a time so those who haven't read them can savor them a bit:

John 5:24
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath (a) everlasting life, and shall not (b) come into condemnation; but is passed (c) from death unto life.

Suggested mandatory [re-writes]:

(a)
MIGHT HAVE
COULD HAVE
HATH/HATH NOT/DEPENDS ON THE MOMENT

(b)
MAY
MIGHT

(c)
MIGHT PASS
MAY PASS
WILL MAYBE PASS
COULD MAYBE PASS

-

Scripture often interprets Scripture.

This can be simply explained by the same author.

1 John 5:12.

Those who REMAIN in Christ have life. Those who do not have no life.

So remain in Christ. You cannot remain in Christ and be united to sin simultaneously. 1 Cor 6:15-16. Paul.

 

[francisdesales]

Your twisted interpretation of Scripture is NOT the same thing as Scripture

I am satisfied with using scripture.

R U?

Why do you think Peter warned people about being DESTROYED by reading and incorrectly interpreting Paul's Scriptures???

They wrested the scriptures to their OWN destruction.

Hey, that's what U DO!

go figure.

2 Peter 3:16
As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

Why you guys try so hard to eternally torture or eradicate yourself is pretty strange isn't it?

lol

s

Uh, yea, whatever. The fact remains, people can misinterpret Scriptures. Just because you can read doesn't mean you understand them.

 

[smaller]

I never agreed that Paul teaches OSAS. He doesn't - unless you think Paul contradicts himself over and over again.

Paul used the present-permanent tense of salvation many times, here for examples:

Ephesians 1:
3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:

4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.

7 In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;

11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:

13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,

All of those applications are DONE DEAL tense unless we apply RE-WRITES.

And this little exercise can be continued on many many pages of the scriptures in the New Testament as an example of DONE DEAL tense.

You do understand 'tense' I take it?

Nor does anyone else in the NT. Nor does anyone else who read and taught the NT in the immediately following one thousand years. But this is "foundational" and taught for "thousands of years"????

If that is the claim you are making I'd strongly suggest that the readers were not paying very close attention or their views of history are a bit jaded.

Who is living in the fantasy world? Isn't it clear that this "foundational teaching", about whether a believer can become an unbeliever/fall away, would have been discussed?

I've never said that any believer couldn't be blinded again. No doubt about that at all.

But that does not mean Christ abandons any of them. Fallen warriors of faith are quite common as I'm sure you could look to your own 'tribe' to see.

Are you so willing to cast them into eternal torture in fire and ELIMINATE TENSE above in order to do so? Because that is what you 'have' to do in order to get there.

Falling in this present life does NOT automatically equate to eternal torture in fire or eternal death.

I gave an example earlier in this thread about MOSES dying because of UNBELIEF.

Are you saying Moses isn't saved? How about Aaron, the High Priest? He died in unbelief. Not saved you say?

How about those turned over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh?

1 Corinthians 5:5
To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

It is. Over and over.

Only by droning on and on about it and eliminating the superabundance of present/solid tense applications.

It is in virtually every book of the NT.

Uh, no. You only think you see what you see. There is as a fact not one single named believer who is shown to be lost and headed to the infamous Lake. Not ONE SINGLE EXAMPLE of what you think is in virtually very book of the N.T. even exists as a fact applied to a believer.

Not one.

1 John 5:13
These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.

Can such be attacked and FALL in this present life? Assuredly! Does that mean God is going to eternally burn them for falling to our enemies?

Never!

That idea is quite utterly non-existing. Even the 'unsaved' have more heart than that.

The OT is clear about it, as well.

Cite them. Show me where any person of Israel is said to be going to burn alive forever and ever.

Just come up with one named example of a person of Israel in the entire Old Testament for this supposed FACT.

go fish....for your oh so sure example and find ONE named person of Israel who is going to burn alive forever and ever and ever.

You will hunt and peck the rest of your life and not find one such example.

Numerous Church Fathers write about it (despite your sect's idea that Christianity began in the first century, took a haitus, and then came back in 1522...). People who have been freed from sin can RETURN to being enslaved by sin and can be judged unworthy for heaven, since they have separated themselves from Christ.

As stated prior I'm still not interested in your subjective version of history.

If you wanna talk text and theology, fine.

Now, if you can twist some Scriptures, based upon your preconceived notions embedded within you by your sect, good for you.

I gave a nice stretch of Ephesians above with PRESENT PERMANENT tense applications.

Go eliminate every last one of them just there if you can.

What is clear is that no one agreed with your take on this subject for one thousand years. Even Paul himself disagrees with your INTERPRETATION of several verses.

I've conceded the fact many times now that believers can fall in this present. That does not equate to eternal torture in fire, period.

The FIRST observation I made about 'falling' is that NO BELIEVER is alone in that matter and that there are DEMONIC FORCES involved within the believers mind and heart that brings those things about. Of course you have bypassed this 'factual observation' numerous times in this thread as well, preferring only to see the FALLEN believer and NEVER the blinding capturing party that is NOT the believer.

In fact I doubt you even have a clue yet about 'this fact' or you would have stepped up to the plate on the 'fact' of it.

So rather than continue to make baldfaced nonsensical subjective unproven indeterminate historical arguments..

just deal with the WORD and we'll get along just fine.

s

 

[smaller]

Your twisted interpretation of Scripture is NOT the same thing as Scripture

I am satisfied with using scripture.

R U?

Why do you think Peter warned people about being DESTROYED by reading and incorrectly interpreting Paul's Scriptures???

They wrested the scriptures to their OWN destruction.

Hey, that's what U DO!

go figure.

2 Peter 3:16
As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

Why you guys try so hard to eternally torture or eradicate yourself is pretty strange isn't it?

lol

s

Uh, yea, whatever. The fact remains, people can misinterpret Scriptures. Just because you can read doesn't mean you understand them.

The 'fact' is FD, you are not saved.

You MIGHT be saved. And that is from your own testimony.

Here then is your testimony of faith:

"I AM NOT SAVED."

Sorry to pull the blanket off you.

s