once saved always saved

[Jethro Bodine]

You are not taking my message any different than what you are doing with the scriptures. The context is, once again, essential. You cautioned me and Rollo not to project our surety, just as you no longer do and I believe I implied in the context that I would die projecting what the world needs. I may have said it, i'll need to read my own post. MS!

I understand what you're saying, but my point is, the surety of your salvation--because your faith is so strong--does not mean OSAS is true. It means you have strong faith, that's all. It does not mean OSAS is true. It means YOUR salvation is sure.....because you have strong faith.

For the person who does not have strong faith, but who is still saved, nevertheless, you can not tell them that you know OSAS is true because you personally are secure in your salvation. You are sure in your salvation because you have strong faith, not because OSAS is true. THAT is what they need to hear. They need to hear you have the surety of salvation IF AND ONLY IF you have strong faith. They need to be strengthened in their faith, not comforted about a false doctrine that gives them the surety and security of their salvation in their weak faith that may fail (because it is weak) and as a result not be there for them to save them on the Day of Wrath.

 

[th1b.taylor]

And I agree. But surely you can see that just from 1 John 3:9 NASB alone it's impossible for a OSASer to even consider the argument that the habitually sinful believer is OSAS. Think about it.

I've said it often and I'll say it again, they that plan to sin were never saved. Jesus told us to watch our crops and to judge the crop, grain or people, by their fruit. These were never saved in the first place and thus, do not figure in.

 

[th1b.taylor]

I understand what you're saying, but my point is, the surety of your salvation--because your faith is so strong--does not mean OSAS is true. It means you have strong faith, that's all. It does not mean OSAS is true. It means YOUR salvation is sure.....because you have strong faith.

For the person who does not have strong faith, but who is still saved, nevertheless, you can not tell them that you know OSAS is true because you personally are secure in your salvation. You are sure in your salvation because you have strong faith, not because OSAS is true. THAT is what they need to hear. They need to hear you have the surety of salvation IF AND ONLY IF you have strong faith. They need to be strengthened in their faith, not comforted about a false doctrine that gives them the surety and security of their salvation in their weak faith that may fail (because it is weak).

Here, we need to agree to disagree because I stand firm in this position.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I've said it often and I'll say it again, they that plan to sin were never saved. Jesus told us to watch our crops and to judge the crop, grain or people, by their fruit. These were never saved in the first place and thus, do not figure in.

And again, I will say this makes Eugene's and a lot of other OSASer's argument false, that even the believer who fails and goes back to his sins is still saved.

 

[Willie T]

I understand what you're saying, but my point is, the surety of your salvation--because your faith is so strong--does not mean OSAS is true. It means you have strong faith, that's all. It does not mean OSAS is true. It means YOUR salvation is sure.....because you have strong faith. For the person who does not have strong faith, but who is still saved, nevertheless, you can not tell them that you know OSAS is true because you personally are secure in your salvation. You are sure in your salvation because you have strong faith, not because OSAS is true. THAT is what they need to hear. They need to hear you have the surety of salvation IF AND ONLY IF you have strong faith.

I like this. Although I might express what we need as being an understanding of our identities in Jesus, rather than just feeling the level of our faith is strong.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I like this. Although I might express what we need as being an understanding of our identities in Jesus, rather than just feeling the level of our faith is strong.

And I definitely agree with that.

Do you agree that the best way to measure where we're really at with God is our behavior?

 

[Willie T]

And I definitely agree with that.

Do you agree that the best way to measure where we're really at with God is our behavior?

Yeah, lke many things said here, maybe it's just a different way of wording it. (Jesus did that a lot.)

 

[Deborah13]

Justification is by faith in God's promise that your sin is forgiven through the blood of Christ. This forgiveness of sins is how your unrighteousness gets removed and Christ's righteousness gets put in it's place. We both agree that you can not remove your unrighteousness by doing righteous works of the law, or prove that you are already righteous in and of yourself by doing good works. The only way to be declared righteous in God's sight, and thus qualified for salvation, is through the forgiveness of your sins.

The way we get this forgiveness of sins is by trusting in God's promise--his word--that the blood of Christ will wipe away your sins if you trust it to do that. Thus the reason why righteousness comes by faith--faith in God's promise that Christ's blood washes away our unrighteousness that cuts us off from God and sentences us to eternal damnation.

Now, with all this said, how is looking at pornography, or rebelling against authority, for example, 'having faith' in the forgiveness God has provided you in Jesus Christ? It obviously isn't.

So what you are saying is that if one were to say 'backbite' one is not 'having faith' in the forgiveness of God,
therefore, because of lack of faith they are no longer righteous in Christ
and therefore no longer justified.
If one is not justified they will not be saved.

You just jumped out of the Father's hand. :shock Jump put, jump back in, jump out, jump back in.....

You have just proved my point of how that doctrine can be dangerous to one who is saved, made righteous by HIS righteousness, Not our own.

As a Christian, doing good works--even on purpose--is not automatically and categorically trying to earn a declaration of 'you are righteous' from God. But so many Christians think that. We seek to purposely do good works because that is what faith and trust in the forgiveness of God looks like. You show you have faith and trust in God's promise of forgiveness by doing good things.

A profound and widespread misunderstanding of what Paul said is the damnable works gospel has many, many people thinking that purposely not sinning and choosing to do right is what Paul meant by 'earning' your own declaration of righteousness. Hardly. In fact, purposely choosing to do right because God has forgiven you in Christ is the visible footprint of believing God's word that he has forgiven your sins in Christ that he expects, because that is the obedience that faith in Christ demands--not because that's the purchase price of justification, but because loving obedience is the expected and obligatory response to having been set free from the condemnation of your sins [/quote]
I believe it is the Holy Spirit, Christ working in me that CAUSES me to desire to please Him. If it weren't for that I could do things that are considered to be 'good works' but it wouldn't be with any consciousness that they are pleasing to God. Therefore, those 'good works' would not glorify God.

So, I ask again. Is looking at pornography, or rebelling against authority what faith and trust in Christ to forgive sins looks like? Of course not. The person who is doing that needs to examine if they 1) have ever trusted God to forgive their sins, or 2) stopped trusting in that somewhere along the line.

What in the world would we need forgiveness for if we never stepped out of line?
If we never did anything wrong, why would we need faith and trust in Christ to forgive sins?

This is just bizarre to me.
I believe that ALL my sin, as far as justification is concerned, has been forgiven, past, present, and FUTURE sin.
Now if it is possible for one to willingly in their heart, totally deny Christ, that He died for their sin, that He came in the flesh of a man, and that He was raised from the dead, then I believe they are no longer covered by His righteousness.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

So what you are saying is that if one were to say 'backbite' one is not 'having faith' in the forgiveness of God,
therefore, because of lack of faith they are no longer righteous in Christ
and therefore no longer justified.
If one is not justified they will not be saved.

Lol, no.

I thought you had been reading my posts all this time. If you had, and understood them, you'd know that it is not the weakness of sin that robs you of Christ's justification. It is your conscious, repeated, willful decision to be sinful, rejecting the word of God, that will eventually do that.

 

[Willie T]

And again, I will say this makes Eugene's and a lot of other OSASer's argument false, that even the believer who fails and goes back to his sins is still saved.

Now, I DO happen to think that in such a situation as you just described, "failing' and "returning to sinning" will not (again, IMHO) will not, cost you your Salvation. My stand is, and always will be, that to forfeit your Salvation, there has to be a true, heart-detaching rejection of Christ and all He stands for.

I still believe that in the middle of just fist shaking, and audibly cursing God due to some catastrophic tragedy in your life, you STILL remain "saved" and a child of God. Our maker recognizes the difference between a tantrum, and genuine rejection.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Now, I DO happen to think that in such a situation as you just described, "failing' and "returning to sinning" will not (again, IMHO) will not, cost you your Salvation. My stand is, and always will be, that to forfeit your Salvation, there has to be a true, heart-detaching rejection of Christ and all He stands for.

I still believe that in the middle of just fist shaking, and audibly cursing God due to some catastrophic tragedy in your life, you STILL remain "saved" and a child of God. Our maker recognizes the difference between a tantrum, and genuine rejection.

We are on the exact same page. Same paragraph, same sentence, in fact.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

A profound and widespread misunderstanding of what Paul said is the damnable works gospel has many, many people thinking that purposely not sinning and choosing to do right is what Paul meant by 'earning' your own declaration of righteousness. Hardly. In fact, purposely choosing to do right because God has forgiven you in Christ is the visible footprint of believing God's word that he has forgiven your sins in Christ that he expects, because that is the obedience that faith in Christ demands--not because that's the purchase price of justification, but because loving obedience is the expected and obligatory response to having been set free from the condemnation of your sins

I believe it is the Holy Spirit, Christ working in me that CAUSES me to desire to please Him. If it weren't for that I could do things that are considered to be 'good works' but it wouldn't be with any consciousness that they are pleasing to God. Therefore, those 'good works' would not glorify God.

What I'm resisting is the notion that just because a Christian reads in the Bible where it says 'do not steal' and then does not steal--because it does say that--that is somehow not a work of the Spirit in him. How ridiculous.

 

[Willie T]

BTW, I sometimes use the expression, "IMHO". My wife says I owe it to the members here to admit that usually means, "IMNSHO".

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Now if it is possible for one to willingly in their heart, totally deny Christ, that He died for their sin, that He came in the flesh of a man, and that He was raised from the dead, then I believe they are no longer covered by His righteousness.

The very thing I've been defending all along.

So, the question is not whether or not a Christian will lose the righteousness of Christ if they deny him outright. The question is whether or not it's actually possible to do that. I think Hebrews 10:26 NASB and Hebrews 10:29 NASB answer that question for us.

I honestly don't think this OSAS question can not be answered, and that's why the question persists to this day. I think it persists because so many people are simply unwilling to take the scriptures for what they plainly say.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

BTW, I sometimes use the expression, "IMHO". My wife says I owe it to the members here to admit that usually means, "IMNSHO".

Huh? Explain. I'm dense.

 

[Willie T]

I attend a Grace church, and I am very definitely considered borderline blasphemous by several members there because I cannot accept OSAS as meaning once you get wet, you cannot dry yourself off.

 

[Willie T]

Huh? Explain. I'm dense.

NS= Not So......

 

[Jethro Bodine]

NS= Not So......

I gotcha', LOL.

 

[Willie T]

I feel so abused.........

 

[Deborah13]

Here it is:

Here he quotes a scripture that says if you are born again you do not live in a lifestyle of sin. Then he turns right around and contradicts it and speaks of 'us'--other people he has seen--who have remained in the pigpen with whom God has been willing to go far with without fearing destruction.

The point is, these people he speaks of that are among 'us' can not be born again. He can't use them as an example of bad Christians still being saved--John plainly said bad 'Christians' aren't born again. That's why I said at the very least OSAS has to acknowledge that falling away and being saved can't even be in the discussion. Yet he uses his experience with fallen 'Christians' among us to somehow defend the belief that you can not sin yourself out of the kingdom.

In non-OSAS this person among 'us' who is living in a lifestyle of sin (whom John says is not born again), that doesn't mean he never was born again. It means he is not anymore. John warns earlier in chapter two that we are to be careful to hold on to that which we have received:

"24 As for you, let that abide in you which you heard from the beginning." (1 John 2:24 NASB)

The point being, just because John says the person who is living in habitual sin can not be born again it does not instantly mean he never ever was but that he did not let that which abideth in him from the beginning abide to the end.

So, what OSAS has to prove is that the fallen person among 'us' could not ever have been saved to begin with--that is after OSAS honestly abandons the doctrine that saved people can be become utterly sinful and still be saved--John says they can't become utterly sinful in the first place.




'In Other Words'.

​

And you are making the same mistake I made for many, many years. I, too, have a very dramatic salvation experience. I started out strong in faith. But that doesn't mean everybody else does too. People like you, me, and Rollo have to be careful to not project the surety of our strong faith onto others and insist they will be strong and not fail, too, because OSAS is true. We can not condescend to them. I now know they detest when we do that to them. We have to empathize with their weak faith and warn them politely and honestly that what they started out with must remain and grow for them to be saved on the Day of Wrath.



Let me say it again. OSAS says, based on this one verse by itself, that since the person who still sins habitually is not born again that they were never ever born again with. But they unrightly divide the word of God by isolating that verse from what John said earlier in the letter:

"24 As for you, let that abide in you which you heard from the beginning." (1 John 2:24 NASB)

The point being, what abides in us in the beginning won't automatically keep abiding in us as OSAS teaches. WE must LET IT keep abiding in us. The 'Christian' who is purposely looking at pornography, or rebelling against authority (for example), thinking it's okay because "OSAS" has been deceived. For them one of two things is true: 1) they were never born again to begin with, or 2) they do not have abiding in them what they had in the beginning and are no longer born again (habitual sinners aren't born again).

Please reconcile these two scriptures.

1Jn 3:9 every one who hath been begotten of God, sin he doth not, because his seed in him doth remain, and he is not able to sin, because of God he hath been begotten.
1Jn 2:1 My little children, these things I write to you, that ye may not sin: and if any one may sin, an advocate we have with the Father, Jesus Christ, a righteous one,

Now in one verse John says that one born of God DOES NOT sin.
In the other he says if WE, he includes himself, does sin WE have an advocate.

My advocate (lawyer) is the best, He NEVER loses a case.
My advocate is not craved from wood or stone. He is living and He has power to win my case.
G3875 -
one who pleads another's cause before a judge, a pleader, counsel for defense, legal assistant, an advocate http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=1Jo&c=2&t=KJV&ss=1
Before someone goes before a judge they had better have full confidence in their attorney and follow His advise.
Not only does my defense attorney give me advise He actually participates in my life. He by His Holy Spirit, and by His power to influence all things can CAUSE me to get back in line where I need to be.
Each case is different and because He is the lawyer for each individual case, how He handles each case may look very different.