OSAS origins and comparison

[PaulThomson]

Exactly what I expected from you.

Let's try this a different way. If a Christian fails to obtain eternal life in the end, is it because he was saved and failed, or because he was never saved?

By “fails to obtain eternal life in the end” do you mean “does not receive a resurrection body when Jesus returns”?

The universe continues to exist in various forms after the millennium as well, so which “end” are you referring to? The end of the times of the Gentiles? The end of the millennium. The end of the the age after the millennium? or of the age after that? or of the age after that…. ad infinitum

 

[NightTwister]

By “fails to obtain eternal life in the end” do you mean “does not receive a resurrection body when Jesus returns”?

The universe continues to exist in various forms after the millennium as well, so which “end” are you referring to? The end of the times of the Gentiles? The end of the millennium. The end of the the age after the millennium? or of the age after that? or of the age after that…. ad infinitum

Proving once again you cannot answer a simple question.

 

[PaulThomson]

Proving once again you cannot answer a simple question.

I am asking for you to clarify what your question means, so I can answer it. What do you mean by “in the end”? But you haven’t been able to answer that simple question. The problem of not answering questions seems to be yours.

 

[NightTwister]

You say we cannot know if we have eternal life. Scripture says we can. You oppose what scripture clearly says. Clear enough?

 

[rogerg]

Does anyone here in this thread actually believe that eternal security teaches that a person can live any way that they choose to, even sinning blatantly, and be guaranteed salvation?

Dave

If they have truly been saved, yes. But the real question is: How will someone who has been given a new heart, a new spirit, and a renewed mind actually choose to live? Will a true child of God genuinely desire to 'sin blatantly' as a lifestyle?
There are two kinds of sin we should distinguish between: Turning back to works for salvation: If someone abandons Christ to rely on their own merit, they prove they were never saved to begin with; and Carnal, earthly sin: where a true believer falls into carnal sin, God does not revoke their salvation. Instead, as a loving Father, He chastises His sons so they will repent and cease from it.

Look at King David. Was he saved? Absolutely. Yet he fell into blatant, horrific sins (adultery and murder). God disciplined him severely, but his salvation was never revoked or in question.
A person’s salvation is based entirely upon what Christ did, which is freely imputed to them, and not at all based upon what that person does or fails to do. If salvation depends on our ability to maintain a sinless performance, then Christ died for nothing

 

[rogerg]

aiOnios does not mean “endless". aiOnios zoE does not mean "endless life". If you are reading endless into the phrase eternal/aeonous life you are not understanding the underlying Greek text and you will misunderstand my position

You stated that aiōnios does not mean endless, and you used the self-manufactured word 'aeonous' to frame it as a temporary age (like the Bronze Age).
However, according to standard New Testament Greek lexicons (like Thayer's), the actual adjective aiōnios is defined based on context as:

• Without beginning and end, that which always has been and always will be (applied to God)
• Without beginning
• Without end, never to cease, everlasting (applied to salvation and heaven)

When paired with zōē (life) to form 'eternal life,' the Greek word explicitly means without end, never to cease, everlasting. If aiōnios only meant a temporary, finite age, then the aiōnios God (Romans 16:26) and aiōnios heaven (Matthew 25:46) would also be temporary and end.
Since leading scholarship rejects the idea that aiōnios is strictly temporary, on what lexicon or authority are you basing your 'aeonous' definition?

 

[Chester]

Dave

Dave 123 (POST 107) asked: "Does anyone here in this thread actually believe that eternal security teaches that a person can live any way that they choose to, even sinning blatantly, and be guaranteed salvation?"

Rogerg (Post 145) said: "If they have truly been saved, yes. . . . " (He goes on but his answer is indeed "yes")

I do not agree with the eternal security position, but I respect rogerg for his answer here because he is being honest to what the doctrine of OSAS implies.

 

[Chester]

Exactly what I expected from you.

Let's try this a different way. If a Christian fails to obtain eternal life in the end, is it because he was saved and failed, or because he was never saved?

I will answer this question: If a Christian fails to obtain eternal life in the end I do not need to make a judgment call on whether he was "saved" at a point in time in the past or not, of if he was never saved. What I do know is that he did not believe in Jesus when he died and thus he did not have eternal life. (By the way, I do not believe in OSAS)

For a believer in OSAS, they must make the judgment call that such a person was never saved in the first place.

 

[NightTwister]

I will answer this question: If a Christian fails to obtain eternal life in the end I do not need to make a judgment call on whether he was "saved" at a point in time in the past or not, of if he was never saved. What I do know is that he did not believe in Jesus when he died and thus he did not have eternal life. (By the way, I do not believe in OSAS)

For a believer in OSAS, they must make the judgment call that such a person was never saved in the first place.

If actually born again, after having their sin fully paid for, on what basis would God then judge them?

 

[rogerg]

Dave 123 (POST 107) asked: "Does anyone here in this thread actually believe that eternal security teaches that a person can live any way that they choose to, even sinning blatantly, and be guaranteed salvation?"

Rogerg (Post 145) said: "If they have truly been saved, yes. . . . " (He goes on but his answer is indeed "yes")

I do not agree with the eternal security position, but I respect rogerg for his answer here because he is being honest to what the doctrine of OSAS implies.

[Phl 1:6 KJV] 6 Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform [it] until the day of Jesus Christ:

 

[Chester]

If actually born again, after having their sin fully paid for, on what basis would God then judge them?

I assume you believe that one's future sins are forgiven before they are committed if one is a believer?

I do not believe that. Can you give a Scripture that clearly says that?

 

[NightTwister]

I assume you believe that one's future sins are forgiven before they are committed if one is a believer?

I do not believe that. Can you give a Scripture that clearly says that?

On what basis are your sins forgiven if not by the blood of Jesus?

 

[Chester]

On what basis are your sins forgiven if not by the blood of Jesus?

Absolutely sins are forgiven on the basis of the blood of Jesus.

I John 1:7 - If we are walking in the light . . . the blood of Jesus is continually cleansing us from each and every sin

 

[NightTwister]

Absolutely sins are forgiven on the basis of the blood of Jesus.

I John 1:7 - If we are walking in the light . . . the blood of Jesus is continually cleansing us from each and every sin

So if the blood of Jesus has cleansed us from each and every sin, on what basis would God keep us from eternal life?

 

[Bible_Locket]

@Dave 123 (POST 107) asked: "Does anyone here in this thread actually believe that eternal security teaches that a person can live any way that they choose to, even sinning blatantly, and be guaranteed salvation?"

Of course not.

However,opponents of Eternal Salvation couch their argument in that point. I.E eternal irrevocable Salvation means you can sin with impunity with no worry of Hell.

This is an argument that can only be made by unbelievers.

And those who have not read Scripture.

Granted,as God tells us, the natural man cannot understand the things of God. Because those are spiritually discerned.

And that very well can explain the failed aforementioned sin with immpunity argument.
1 John 3
4Everyone who makes a practice of sinning also practices lawlessness; sin is lawlessness.5You know that he appeared in order to take away sins, and in him there is no sin.6No one who
abides in him keeps on sinning; no one who keeps on sinning has either seen him or known him.


However,that argument,besides being an outright slander of God's words,if left uncorrected,can give others a bad impression of the faith itself.

Ephesians 2
8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.
Which can't be dismissed as a possible reason its defenders keep the false teachings alive.

Salvation in Christ is everything Jesus says it is.

1 Corinthians 2
14 The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.

The free irrevocable gift of faith and Salvation bestowed by God. Not of ourselves,so that none may boast.


The point being, Eternal Irrevocable Salvation, eternally sealed by the Holy Spirit, is God's truth.
And those who are in that grace gift do not make a habit of Sinning.

We are inferlt by Holy Spirit. What blasphemy is this that says as such,we now feel confident we can Sin in the flesh because we're always gonna be Saved?

Trust God.
Take God at his word.
Not his enemies .
Who dare tell him, he didn't die to secure our eternal seal and irrevocable Salvation for those whom he calls.
So that we then now we cannot make a habit of Sinning.
Because we know him.

And he knows us! By name.

 

[Bible_Locket]

I will answer this question: If a Christian fails to obtain eternal life in the end I do not need to make a judgment call on whether he was "saved" at a point in time in the past or not, of if he was never saved. What I do know is that he did not believe in Jesus when he died and thus he did not have eternal life. (By the way, I do not believe in OSAS)

For a believer in OSAS, they must make the judgment call that such a person was never saved in the first place.

In that hypothetical, the Bible tells us they were not.

Once God calls us into his free gift of faith through his grace,seals us with his Holy Spirit and indwells us,as new creations in him,we are irrevocably his. And no one will take us from his hand.
We do not make a habit of Sinning. Because God knows us,and we are in him.

OSAS is the propaganda vehicle atheists manufactured long ago.
In order to discredit the Gospel by saying, when a Christian is Saved from Hell forever, they can Sin all they like.

In truth,their propaganda posited an unintelligent premise.
When you're eternally Saved from the penalty of Sin you can Sin all you like.

But,they were atheists. Enemies of God. Knowing nothing of the Gospel.
Their purpose was to disparage the truth of the teachings of the very God they first insisted doesn't exist.

Those were some Mensa members right there boy!

But what isn't funny is the fact so many Christians discount Eternal Salvation thinking that atheist slander , that it allows for Sin with impunity, is valid.

Which is why those self same self identified Christians insist on holding faith in their insecurity in Christ. Believing they have to work to stay right with God.

Sadly,those atheists made an impression.

 

[dkontner]

Ephesians 1​

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,
14 Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.

 

[Kroogz]

If they have truly been saved, yes. But the real question is: How will someone who has been given a new heart, a new spirit, and a renewed mind actually choose to live? Will a true child of God genuinely desire to 'sin blatantly' as a lifestyle?
There are two kinds of sin we should distinguish between: Turning back to works for salvation: If someone abandons Christ to rely on their own merit, they prove they were never saved to begin with; and Carnal, earthly sin: where a true believer falls into carnal sin, God does not revoke their salvation. Instead, as a loving Father, He chastises His sons so they will repent and cease from it.

Look at King David. Was he saved? Absolutely. Yet he fell into blatant, horrific sins (adultery and murder). God disciplined him severely, but his salvation was never revoked or in question.
A person’s salvation is based entirely upon what Christ did, which is freely imputed to them, and not at all based upon what that person does or fails to do. If salvation depends on our ability to maintain a sinless performance, then Christ died for nothing

You calvies and the Armins/Catholics are the most contradictory believers ever.

I hope there are doctrinal believers that can see through your BS.

Because you should read and reread and reread your above post......Only the cult would believe it.

 

[Kroogz]

There are two kinds of sin we should distinguish between: Turning back to works for salvation: If someone abandons Christ to rely on their own merit, they prove they were never saved to begin with;

Just to make this statement is abandoning Christ..........Put Bible DOCTRINE and your brain to work.

You ARE RELYING ON WORKS for salvation with your above quote.......THINK.

 

[rogerg]

Just to make this statement is abandoning Christ..........Put Bible DOCTRINE and your brain to work.

You ARE RELYING ON WORKS for salvation with your above quote.......THINK.

That makes absolutely not sense. My post was the exact opposite of works. You need to learn how to read