The problem of the statement of “never saved to begin with”

[HeIsHere]

For some reason you believe that a person cannot throw the free gift in the bin?

Galatians 5:2-4
Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you.
And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation
to keep the whole Law. You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be
justified by law; you have fallen from grace.

You cannot deny what Paul wrote to the Galatians.

You fail to understand what is written in the scripture because you have been sold,
the idea of OSAS.

You say OSAS but Paul says You have been severed from Christ.

Whom am I to believe?

If you put yourself under the law you cannot be under the grace of Christ.

Again this is not about losing salvation but disconnecting from the empowering grace so one does not fall back into a sinful lifestyle.
As well, being under the law frustrates the work of grace.

Salvation is a done deal, but living in grace of God is akin to when Paul speaks about walking in the Spirit.
These are all exhortations to live the worthy walk.

 

[mailmandan]

If this is your reasoning then nothing in the Bible is safe.

In the Parable of the Unforgiving Servant, the master represents God and the servant represents mankind.

The servant was not given some quasi-forgiveness, the master had compassion on him and forgave him. Period.

"So, even though his debt was cancelled, ultimately, he was not forgiven."

What poppycock is this?

His debt was cancelled but the master is sovereign. He can give and take away. He can revoke.

Your response is clearly a willful turning of a blind eye to scripture. This parable clashes with your sensibilities hence your absurd retelling of what Jesus was teaching in this parable.

I also do not like the outcome of this parable but I have the intellectual honesty to accept it as written.

I shudder to think what you would do the the Parable of the Lost Son.

"The human father did not have infallibly?"

"The prodigal son came back asking to be like a slave to his father?"

How would you rewrite this parable?

I don't rewrite parables. I simply read them in CONTEXT. Once again, the parable demonstrates the mercy of the Lord who is willing to forgive, but ultimately, wicked, unforgiving hearts (which do not represent those who are born of God) can expect no forgiveness. The master in the parable cancelled the debt of his wicked servant (just as our sin debt was paid in full and cancelled at the cross). You seemed to have only isolated the part of the parable that you wanted to hear and discarded the rest.

In regard to the prodigal son, again CONTEXT. All three parables in Luke 15 were in rebuke to the Pharisees and scribes who complained, saying, “This Man receives sinners and eats with them." Those who believe that salvation can be lost will use the parable of the prodigal son to prove that believers can lose their salvation by arguing that the prodigal son was spiritually alive, then spiritually died (lost his salvation) and was spiritually alive again (regained his salvation) from Luke 15:32 based on certain translations which read: ..thy brother was dead, and is alive AGAIN (KJV) ..for your brother was dead and is alive AGAIN (NKJV) ..this brother of yours was dead and is alive AGAIN (NIV)

Yet others will argue that in this parable, being made "alive AGAIN" foreshadows the "born AGAIN" experience that Jesus spoke of in John 3:3. Of course Jesus wasn't talking about being born again spiritually again and again. We are born once physically and born "again" once spiritually.

I find it interesting that certain translations of Luke 15:32 simply say your brother was dead, and is alive; he was lost, and is found (ESV); your brother was dead, but now he is alive. He was lost, but now he is found (NCV); this brother of yours was dead and has come to life; he was lost and has been found (NRS); this brother of yours was dead and has begun to live, and was lost and has been found. (NASB)

 

[studier]

When faced with the truth of people falling away from the faith, departing from the faith, etc etc…people who believe in the doctrine of the impossibility of apostasy typically says “he/she never had faith” or “he/she was never truly saved to begin with”

But….

That means it’s entirely possible for someone to believe they are saved but not be…

How comforting is that?

I wonder if these people would apply that same line of reasoning with themselves? Or are they the exception to it? I wonder how consistent they would be? If they themselves depart, would they say they were never saved?

If so, then when would they know for sure???

Are any of them absolutely, positively certain without a doubt they are saved at this very moment???

Of course they’d say yes…

But…

If any of them depart from their faith, all their OSAS friends will say...

You were never saved to begin with!!

So, according to their view, it is possible for someone to believe they are saved but not be!!!

Not only were these individuals not Christians now, but they were never Christians in the first place, despite the fact that in the past these people did everything that current devoted believers of OSAS will cite as proof of their own conversion!

It can be challenging for individuals to apply the same reasoning to themselves as they do to others. If someone who believes in OSAS were to depart from their faith, they might struggle with the question of whether they were ever truly saved themselves. This inconsistency can lead to confusion and doubt about their own salvation.

If someone departs from their faith, they may feel a loss of that assurance, leading to uncertainty about their own standing before God.

If someone who believes in OSAS were to depart from their faith, they might grapple with questions about their own salvation.

The ugly reality behind the supposed comfort of the doctrine of once saved always is It's supposed to provide believers with the assurance of salvation, but logically, it does the opposite. Those who live like faithful Christians, who sincerely (to every appearance) describe themselves as being children of God, can still fall away and thereby prove that they were never regenerated/saved at all. To be true and honest with their belief, no person who believes in OSAS would categorize anyone to be saved, as such an individual will prove their salvation to be genuine by dying to the faith.

So, how does it really work?

RE: Eternal Security

1. Cannot lose salvation.
   1. Cannot walk away.
      1. No human choice
         1. Commands have no imperatival force.
         2. Obedience optional.
   2. Can walk away but cannot refuse repentance.
      1. No human choice
         1. Commands have no imperatival force.
         2. Obedience optional.
   3. Can walk away & can refuse repentance.
      1. Saved but disciplined unto death – lose rewards.
         1. No human choice re: salvation
            1. Commands have imperatival force - only if mean lose rewards.
            2. Obedience optional re: salvation.
   4. Never saved.
      1. Human choice
         1. Never believed.
         2. Commands have imperatival force.
            1. Disobedience
            2. Obedience is not optional.
      2. God knows before granting to Christ – Doesn’t grant.
         1. God does not grant unbelievers to Christ.
      3. Cannot lose salvation – because never saved.
      4. So, cannot know if saved until the end.
2. Can lose salvation.
   1. Can and do walk away.
      1. Human choice
         1. Believe > Don’t believe.
         2. Saved > Lose salvation – because cannot lose what never had.
         3. Commands have imperatival force.
            1. Disobedience
            2. Obedience is not optional.
      2. God knows before granting to Christ – Grants
         1. God grants temporary believers to Christ.
      3. So, cannot know if saved until the end.
         1. Secure while obedient
   2. Can but do not walk away
      1. Human choice
         1. Believe > Believe.
         2. Commands have imperatival force.
            1. Obedience
            2. Obedience is not optional.
      2. God knows before granting to Christ – Grants
         1. God grants abiding believers to Christ.
      3. So, can or cannot know if saved until the end?
         1. Secure in obedience

Or???

 

[mailmandan]

is the gospel really so hard to comprehend?
((OK reads on...))

The gospel is not hard to comprehend. (Romans 1:16; 1 Corinthians 15:1-4) It's just hard for certain folks to ACCEPT and there is a reason for that. (1 Corinthians 1:18-21; 1 Corinthians 2:11-14; 2 Corinthians 4:3,4)

 

[mailmandan]

@Lamar, Heb. 10:29 Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace?

To be SANCTIFIED BY the BLOOD of the COVENANT is CLEARLY referring to someone who was SAVED, but NOW is LOST.

If someone is sanctified by the blood of the covenant, then it’s referring to Jesus’s NEW COVENANT that He shed His blood for many for the remission of sins!! (Mt. 26:28)

Yet, in all their dishonesty, to continue believing in their precious heresy of OSAS, they will be dishonest with the verse (and every other verse) and explain it away!!

They will either say 1) That’s not what it means or 2) That doesn’t apply to us, or 3) That person was never saved.

If the word 'sanctified' in Hebrews 10:29 is used to describe saved people who lost their salvation then we have a contradiction because the writer of Hebrews in verse 10 said "sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all" (Hebrews 10:10) and in verse 14, we read, "perfected for all time those who are sanctified." (Hebrews 10:14) So, in Hebrews 10:10, we clearly read ..WE have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. In Hebrews 10:14, we read - For by one offering He has perfected for all time THOSE who are sanctified. To go from sanctified back to un-sanctified would be in contradiction here.

*NOWHERE in the context does it specifically say the person who "trampled underfoot the Son of God and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant" was "saved" and/or "lost their salvation." The reference to "the blood of the covenant that sanctified him" in verse 29 "on the surface" appears to be referring to a Christian, but this overlooks the fact that the word translated "sanctified" (which is the verb form of the adjective "holy") which means "set apart," and doesn't necessarily refer to salvation.

Strong's Concordance
hagiazó: to make holy, consecrate, sanctify
Original Word: ἁγιάζω
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: hagiazó
Phonetic Spelling: (hag-ee-ad'-zo)
Definition: to make holy, consecrate, sanctify
Usage: I make holy, treat as holy, set apart as holy, sanctify, hallow, purify.

*In 1 Corinthians 7:14, Paul uses it to specifically refer to non-Christians who are "sanctified" or "set apart" by their believing spouse (and by this Paul does not mean that they are saved). A non-Christian can be "set apart" from other non-Christians without experiencing salvation as Paul explained. So, the word "sanctified" means to be "set apart." If the word "sanctified" simply meant saved, then you would have to say that the seventh day was saved (Genesis 2:3), the tabernacle was saved (Exodus 29:43), Moses saved the people after coming down off the mountain (Exodus 19:14), the priests and the Levites saved themselves (1 Chronicles 15:14), the Father saved the Son (John 10:36), the Son saved Himself (John 17:19) and many other things that do not line up with scripture.

In verse 39, the writer of Hebrews sets up the CONTRAST that makes it clear to me that he was referring to make believers/nominal Christians, not saved people: But WE are not of those who draw back to perdition, but OF THOSE who believe to the saving of the soul. Those who draw back to perdition do not believe to the saving of the soul and those who believe to the saving of the soul do not draw back to perdition.

So after considering the CONTEXT, it seems most likely that "he was sanctified" should be understood in the sense of someone who had been "set apart" or identified as a professing believer in the Hebrew Christian community of believers, but later renounces his identification with other believers, by rejecting the "knowledge of the truth" that he had received, and trampling underfoot the work and the person of Christ himself. This gives evidence that his identification with the Hebrew Christian community of believers was only superficial and that he was not a genuine believer.

They also have it IMPOSSIBLE for brethren who is a BELIEVER, to become an UNBELIEVER, and to DEPART! But once again, we have it happening!!

Hebrews 3:12 Take heed, BRETHREN, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of UNBELIEF, in DEPARTING from the living God.

Hebrews 3:8-10 says, do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion, in the day of trial in the wilderness, where your fathers tested Me, tried Me, and saw My works forty years. Therefore, I was angry with that generation, and said, 'They always go astray in their heart, and they have not known My ways.' Not descriptive of genuine believers. There is no loss of salvation here. Only a failure to receive it.

Verses 18-19 - And to whom did He swear that they would not enter His rest, but to those who did not obey? So, we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief. That explains the hardened heart. It took them in the opposite direction of God. Considered the truth for a time, then hardened heart and departing from God became their final answer.

*Jude 1:5 - Though you already know all this, I want to remind you that the Lord at one time delivered his people (the Israelites) out of Egypt, but later destroyed those who did not believe. NOT later destroyed those who stopped believing, but DID NOT BELIEVE.

Hebrews 3:14 - For we have become partakers of Christ, (demonstrative evidence) if we hold fast the beginning of our confidence steadfast to the end. Notice that this is essentially a repeat of verse 6, in which we read: but Christ was faithful as a Son over His house - whose house we are, (demonstrative evidence) if we hold fast our confidence and the boast of our hope firm until the end.

The wording is not - "and you will become partakers of Christ (future indicative) if you (future indicative) hold fast." It is rather - "you have been and now are a partaker of Christ" (demonstrative evidence) if in the future you hold fast the beginning of your confidence steadfast to the end." Holding fast is proof of genuine conversion.

The point is that not all of these Hebrews have become partakers in Christ and the only ones in the end who will be identified as truly born-again Hebrews who have partaken in Christ, will have been those who have held fast the beginning of their confidence steadfast to the end. Now what about those faltering Hebrews who depart from God, yet begin with loud confidence and profession of loyalty? But then later? Once again, holding fast is proof of genuine conversion.

 

[mailmandan]

Every person who believes in OSAS are NEVER TRULY SAVED!!! If it applies to one who is no longer a Christian, then it applies to when they WERE a Christian!! As they are now said to NEVER HAVE BEEN ONE!!

You seem to be suffering from a severe case of anti-OSAS derangement syndrome.

 

[GWH]

I think at a deeper level any person who asks for forgiveness will be forgiven.

How many times will the Lord forgive?

That would be an enormous number of times.

1 John 2:4
The one who says, “I have come to know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar,
and the truth is not in him.

Well, at the deepest level a person who genuinely repents will be forgiven (1 John 1:9).
Yes, that could be an innumerable number of times,
(depending on how bad one's cursing habit is :^).

 

[HeIsHere]

So, how does it really work?

RE: Eternal Security

1. Cannot lose salvation.
   1. Cannot walk away.
      1. No human choice
         1. Commands have no imperatival force.
         2. Obedience optional.
   2. Can walk away but cannot refuse repentance.
      1. No human choice
         1. Commands have no imperatival force.
         2. Obedience optional.
   3. Can walk away & can refuse repentance.
      1. Saved but disciplined unto death – lose rewards.
         1. No human choice re: salvation
            1. Commands have imperatival force - only if mean lose rewards.
            2. Obedience optional re: salvation.
   4. Never saved.
      1. Human choice
         1. Never believed.
         2. Commands have imperatival force.
            1. Disobedience
            2. Obedience is not optional.
      2. God knows before granting to Christ – Doesn’t grant.
         1. God does not grant unbelievers to Christ.
      3. Cannot lose salvation – because never saved.
      4. So, cannot know if saved until the end.
2. Can lose salvation.
   1. Can and do walk away.
      1. Human choice
         1. Believe > Don’t believe.
         2. Saved > Lose salvation – because cannot lose what never had.
         3. Commands have imperatival force.
            1. Disobedience
            2. Obedience is not optional.
      2. God knows before granting to Christ – Grants
         1. God grants temporary believers to Christ.
      3. So, cannot know if saved until the end.
         1. Secure while obedient
   2. Can but do not walk away
      1. Human choice
         1. Believe > Believe.
         2. Commands have imperatival force.
            1. Obedience
            2. Obedience is not optional.
      2. God knows before granting to Christ – Grants
         1. God grants abiding believers to Christ.
      3. So, can or cannot know if saved until the end?
         1. Secure in obedience

Or???

Saved is saved (spiritual)
The gift of eternal life (aionia life, quality of life) is not revocable.
God established a better covenant via the absolute and completed work of >>>> Christ Jesus

He is the all sufficient Savior.
I am not understanding why anyone who reads scripture would believe Christ Jesus is necessary by not sufficient?

 

[studier]

Saved is saved (spiritual)
The gift of eternal life (aionia life, quality of life) is not revocable.
God established a better covenant via the absolute and completed work of >>>> Christ Jesus

He is the all sufficient Savior.
I am not understanding why anyone who reads scripture would believe Christ Jesus is necessary by not sufficient?

Thanks, but some specific interaction with the points and where they're right or wrong would be more helpful than the usual overall statements believed.

I'd seriously like to know what we think commands are, how human will works or is negated, and what Scripture is presenting to us.

The OP posited the problem with "never saved". I'm game. What are the strengths and weaknesses of all views?

 

[Magenta]

I'd seriously like to know what we think commands are, how human will works or is negated, and what Scripture is presenting to us.

Commandments are God's moral will for our lives. Scripture makes pretty plain that the human will of the natural man is opposed to God's, but of course a lot of people deny this and try to say it is not so. The verses that are evidence of these points have been given again and again and again and again and again and again and again...

 

[HeIsHere]

Thanks, but some specific interaction with the points and where they're right or wrong would be more helpful than the usual overall statements believed.

I'd seriously like to know what we think commands are, how human will works or is negated, and what Scripture is presenting to us.

The OP posited the problem with "never saved". I'm game. What are the strengths and weaknesses of all views?

I know, I know but I so like my own high sounding rhetoric!!

Never saved is mostly a non-issue for me.

I am wholeheartedly against how people who believe in OSAS have used this idea of "they were never saved" to judge others salvation.

The OSAS people who employ the idea assert that a believer will definitely and by necessity lead a spirit filled,

good works life, manifest all the works of the Spirit life.

This is Lordship Salvation and then when people fail they can get on their high

perch and say "they were never saved to begin with."

Lordship salvationism (an off shot of Calvinism) are firmly entrenched in this view point, but I think there are same ole proof texts taken out of context to support it.

I guess I can go deeper into the scripture to show why I think "never saved" is not a good approach.

 

[Mem]

I'd seriously like to know what we think commands are, how human will works or is negated, and what Scripture is presenting to us.

Commands are what God wants, His will, human will is, by definition, is what man wants, hence natural man is, naturally, opposed to God. However, God, fully aware of this enmity, wills all men to come to repentance, and indeed, created man not before implementing His 'contingency' plan to restore man to/by/through His love. If anyone loses anything at all, it (and I'm confident to even say 'always') stems from an ignorance of that love.

 

[studier]

I know, I know but I so like my own high sounding rhetoric!!

Never saved is mostly a non-issue for me.

I am wholeheartedly against how people who believe in OSAS have used this idea of "they were never saved" to judge others salvation.

The OSAS people who employ the idea assert that a believer will definitely and by necessity lead a spirit filled,

good works life, manifest all the works of the Spirit life.

This is Lordship Salvation and then when people fail they can get on their high

perch and say "they were never saved to begin with."

Lordship salvationism (an off shot of Calvinism) are firmly entrenched in this view point, but I think there are same ole proof texts taken out of context to support it.

I guess I can go deeper into the scripture to show why I think "never saved" is not a good approach.

That rhetoric statement sounds like we're meeting on different threads!

I think we all know the Scriptures used for various views and I'm good taking @GWH list or any others and working on all of them.

Since we don't get many takers getting more deeply into those verses, I thought I'd just look at a snapshot of each position and see what it means for issues like human volition and the meaning of commands, etc., since these things normally come up in the debates.

I'm also sitting back and wondering if @Lamar is going to respond to @mailmandan re: Hebrews and anything else. Hebrews is one of those on the list.

 

[HeIsHere]

That rhetoric statement sounds like we're meeting on different threads!

I think we all know the Scriptures used for various views and I'm good taking @GWH list or any others and working on all of them.

Since we don't get many takers getting more deeply into those verses, I thought I'd just look at a snapshot of each position and see what it means for issues like human volition and the meaning of commands, etc., since these things normally come up in the debates.

I'm also sitting back and wondering if @Lamar is going to respond to @mailmandan re: Hebrews and anything else. Hebrews is one of those on the list.

Well the book of Hebrews is an excellent book to tackle the accusation of "never saved to begin with" since it gives the dire warnings of falling away from the faith (not losing salvation).

I think the big concept of "once saved is saved" has to be settled before digging down into specific verses on the other ideas you raised in your long list.

I always work from the big concept to the smaller details/concepts... comes from my work life I guess.