Once saved always saved (OSAS) debunked

[Chester]

As I've already explained, but you refuse to hear, is I agree no one can snatch His sheep from His hand—if indeed they're His sheep. However, a person can willingly turn their back on the Lord and forfeit any benefit they may have had previously. This is the only way a person can lose their salvation.

You quote verses like John 10:28 because it supports what you want to believe. But you you ignore the rest of scripture at your own peril. You've been fed false doctrine so long you can't comprehend that it can be any other way.

JOHN 10:28 KJV "And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any [man] pluck them out of my hand."

John 10:28 does not in any way support the doctrine of "eternal security". It says that the sheep (them) are given eternal life and they will never perish. The promise is clearly to the sheep. It is not a promise to those who are not sheep.

If you are not a sheep, you do not have eternal life and you will perish. Who is a sheep? The previous verse (27) says: "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: " Sheep are those who are hearing Jesus' voice and are following Him. If you are not hearing His voice and following Him you are not a sheep and the promise of verse 28 does not apply to you.

The verse does not talk about the possibility or even the "how" of becoming a sheep or of no longer being a sheep.

The verse is a powerful promise and blessing to all who are sheep: to those hearing his voice and following Him.

 

[ResidentAlien]

Everyone wants to sit around and pray and plead for revival. OSAS has made people so lazy and complacent they wouldn't know a revival if it walked up and hit them over the head.

 

[phil36]

Everyone wants to sit around and pray and plead for revival. OSAS has made people so lazy and complacent they wouldn't know a revival if it walked up and hit them over the head.

Is this true?

 

[ResidentAlien]

Go learn from the parable of the talents:

"So take the talent from him and give it to him who has the ten talents. For to everyone who has will more be given, and he will have an abundance. But from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. And cast the worthless servant into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth."—Matthew 25:28-30

But wait, I thought God never took anything from someone once it had been given. Not only that, he was cast into outer darkness.

 

[Evmur]

Evmur, you're missing the forest for the trees—as are all the rest.

You don't admit it but you are preaching works for salvation. You say we can't earn salvation by works but then say it must be maintained by works.

You are also preaching obedience to the law has necessary to salvation because the law is inseparable from sin, you can only discover sin by applying the law.

It is incredibly subtle which why it so easily wins over the mind. It's foolish Galatians all over again.

 

[Icedaisey]

Is this true?

No.
Some strong anti-OSAS people think what is meant by OSAS is that a person can claim to believe in Jesus and then go on acting as they did before. Sinning up a storm certain they'll see Heaven. Of course that's not true. But the idea has been postulated for years against the doctrine of eternal salvation in order to dismiss its capacity to truly fully and eternally save.

In fact the opposite is true. Scripture tells us those who are in Christ do not make a habit of sinning. And those who do make that habit of sinning are not in Christ and have never known him. 1 John 3.

Therefore, they cannot lose what they never had.


Everything the Bible tells us happens when we receive Christ would be invalidated if we could do something to lose our salvation. First of course, God would have to be a liar. Because Salvation is a gift of God. And God's gifts are irrevocable. Romans 11:29.

 

[AandW]

Where does this Idea of Once Saved Always Saved come from?

I am familiar with it to the point what Scripture offered up, OSAS will interpret that Verse to benefit their Viewpoints.

I can even see and understand what they're claiming and find truths within the Concept.

But, the fact there's a [Ready Made] response to improve the Viewpoint of OSAS from every angle a Verse can represent, alerts me to why such a [Defense of a Doctrine], that is Sound and True, would require and even be needed to begin with?

 

[Evmur]

Evmur, go read Hebrews and then report back. On some things you have great understanding but on others you need some help.

How about Hebrews 10
He hath by a single offering sanctified for all time all who come to Him by faith.

The message of Hebrews is don't go back to the law and ordinances which never saved anyone. If you turn away from the cross as God's only solution to sin and then sin there is no further sacrifice, The offerings of animals by priests, the altar is gone.

And there is no damnation in those darksome warnings. folks read it in there but it is speaking about PHYSICAL death which is the requirement of the law. I have read Hebrews many, many times the more so because they are unique to other scriptures, and alien to the thought of Paul. I DO accept Hebrews as scripture, I was saved when God quickened Jesus Christ the same Yesterday and today and forever. But I don't believe Hebrews is apostolic.

The closest Paul gets to it is in Corinthians when he warns false teachers that if they build upon the foundation he had laid with wood and stubble their works would be burned up they would be SAVED but as through fire.

There in Corinth you have that notable sinner, a blatant and deliberate sinner whom Paul commanded should be given over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh that his spirit may be SAVED. He was subsequently forgiven. Now if there were the slightest chance that he could be damned it would have been a dereliction on Paul's part not to warn him of it.

Paul does not do so.

 

[Evmur]

Everyone wants to sit around and pray and plead for revival. OSAS has made people so lazy and complacent they wouldn't know a revival if it walked up and hit them over the head.

It did not make Bunyan or Whitefield or Spurgeon lazy.

It is the stop go sin/remorse, guilt and doubt doctrine you are preaching that acts as a choc to the wheels of revival. Like the baals of old shuffling back and forth, saved/lost saved/lost, flogging each other along.

People do not come BOLDLY to the throne of grace to find help in time of need, they are afraid God might beat them. And they will not stand up to the devil either because they are half afraid they may one day end up back in his clutches.

Their eyes are upon self instead of upon Christ, the Good Shepherd who never lost a sheep yet.

 

[Runningman]

This is a classic example. What will it take for you to understand what "unfit for the kingdom of God means?"

If I said you are unfit for military service, what would that mean? It means your out, we can't use you, go away. Now, if a person repents and changes his or her ways, then they might be able to become fit for service, as we saw with Mark in the book of Acts. But what this verse shows is that a person can look back, become unfit to the point that the Lord has no use for them.

I can more or less agree with that, actually, but we're discussing your OP about losing salvation or not obtaining salvation.

I don't think Luke 9:62 is about salvation because that isn't what the context is about. I firmly believe it's about being unfit to be a missionary or an evangelist.

Jesus needed people ready right then and right now to go preach. Out of all of those present, according to the KJV, only 70 were sent on His mission. Some Bible versions say 72.

There are verses that are about salvation. It's plain and clear the grounds for salvation are believing in God's Son. Being unfit for missionary work, for whatever reason, doesn't result in losing salvation.

 

[Evmur]

Who are they Evmur, are they saved in Christ? Or some other way? and what does WIDER MERCY mean?

You keep saying these things but never explain what it is you are trying to say.

I have explained it on different threads. I mean that more folks will be saved than just the church only. I explained on this thread which you read how that those who are judged by their deeds who correspond to the righteous sheeps of Matt. 25 cannot possibly be the church since the church will have been raptured 1, 000 years previous.

There will be a new earth as well as a new heaven ... Somebody is going to inherit the earth.

 

[Aaron56]

We are talking about the salvation of going to heaven.

Within the virgin and servant parables, neither the virgins nor the servant operate in the economy of heaven: the virgins do not receive the oil that corresponds to the Holy Spirit and the servant hides his gift in the world. These are unbelievers (There are no “non-believers” in the scriptures, but that is another teaching). The gift of eternal life is given to all, but only some receive it. In the case of the servant, this is like one who was given the discerning of spirits but uses it in the world like a soothsayer or a tarot card reader. There is only loss when the gifts are used for worldly gain.

Now, if one were talking about the salvation from the pursuit of the enemy, yes, that can be lost by entering again into sin. But that, as well, is another teaching.

 

[Nehemiah6]

JOHN 10:28 KJV "And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any [man] pluck them out of my hand."John 10:28 does not in any way support the doctrine of "eternal security". It says that the sheep (them) are given eternal life and they will never perish. The promise is clearly to the sheep. It is not a promise to those who are not sheep.

Why are you contradicting yourself instead of frankly admitting that the Bible clearly teaches the eternal security of the believer? Believers are sheep, and since the promise is to sheep, this should be the end of the discussion. Who said anything about the goats or the wolves?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Everyone wants to sit around and pray and plead for revival. OSAS has made people so lazy and complacent they wouldn't know a revival if it walked up and hit them over the head.

Once again you just prove you have utterly no idea what OSAS teaches or anything about them

You can ignore me all you want my friend. I will continue t expose you for the fraud you are.

 

[phil36]

No.
Some strong anti-OSAS people think what is meant by OSAS is that a person can claim to believe in Jesus and then go on acting as they did before. Sinning up a storm certain they'll see Heaven. Of course that's not true. But the idea has been postulated for years against the doctrine of eternal salvation in order to dismiss its capacity to truly fully and eternally save.

In fact the opposite is true. Scripture tells us those who are in Christ do not make a habit of sinning. And those who do make that habit of sinning are not in Christ and have never known him. 1 John 3.

Therefore, they cannot lose what they never had.


Everything the Bible tells us happens when we receive Christ would be invalidated if we could do something to lose our salvation. First of course, God would have to be a liar. Because Salvation is a gift of God. And God's gifts are irrevocable. Romans 11:29.

Hi icedaisy, thanks for the post. what I meant was where the claims resident made in his post true. That is that christians who believe in eternal security are lazy, complacent and wouldn't know revival if it hit them over the head.. What is his proof that this a true statement. As yet he has not given any.

I know what OSAS is. The saints will indeed persevere until the end of the age. Good Post though.. We will have to wait and see what evidence resident provides for his claims.

 

[phil36]

I have explained it on different threads. I mean that more folks will be saved than just the church only. I explained on this thread which you read how that those who are judged by their deeds who correspond to the righteous sheeps of Matt. 25 cannot possibly be the church since the church will have been raptured 1, 000 years previous.

There will be a new earth as well as a new heaven ... Somebody is going to inherit the earth.

dispensational ism. Well i should say that very lightly as you have taken a dispensational itheme and added your 'wider merxy' theory into the mix.

In the parable the sheep are Christians.

 

[Icedaisey]

Hi icedaisy, thanks for the post. what I meant was where the claims resident made in his post true. That is that christians who believe in eternal security are lazy, complacent and wouldn't know revival if it hit them over the head.. What is his proof that this a true statement. As yet he has not given any.

I know what OSAS is. The saints will indeed persevere until the end of the age. Good Post though.. We will have to wait and see what evidence resident provides for his claims.

Yes, I saw their remarks.
How does someone reach someone who sees "OSAS" that way?
Hopefully, by expounding on what eternal irrevocable Salvation is, again.
Though they may not be about that.

That's why I hope my explanation , along with others here, at least insures truth will outweigh falsity and insults against the church.

In the event a new Christian or others looking for answers are among us, it is better there be many posts reporting the truth rather than letting falsehood stand unopposed.

 

[Evmur]

dispensational ism. Well i should say that very lightly as you have taken a dispensational itheme and added your 'wider merxy' theory into the mix.

In the parable the sheep are Christians.

Well you say covenants I say dispy, I am not hyper. The wording of Matthew 25 makes your theory of the sheeps untenable. But you are right it is a little off topic.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Yes, I saw their remarks.
How does someone reach someone who sees "OSAS" that way?
Hopefully, by expounding on what eternal irrevocable Salvation is, again.
Though they may not be about that.

That's why I hope my explanation , along with others here, at least insures truth will outweigh falsity and insults against the church.

In the event a new Christian or others looking for answers are among us, it is better there be many posts reporting the truth rather than letting falsehood stand unopposed.

Sadly I doubt we can reach them. Like the pharisee, they lash out. Because in order to tru;ly see what we see, they would be exposed to what they actually believe

God will have to break their pride

 

[phil36]

Well you say covenants I say dispy, I am not hyper. The wording of Matthew 25 makes your theory of the sheeps untenable. But you are right it is a little off topic.

I still think you are confused about what classic dispensationalist have said about the sheep. No one will be saved by 'good deeds'. only faith in Christ.. As Christ says "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me". and that includes Jewish people. This is why I keep asking you how the sheep are saved.

If you are saying that dispensationalists believe that the sheep are not saved by grace, through faith, in Christ alone then ultimately it would be what we call a cult it is diminishing the central christian message. Although I have to admit I don't hear many dispensationalist say this. That is why I keep asking you. We don't hear dispensationalist say there is a ''wider mercy'' but we do hear liberals proclaim this message. But the we do hear dispensationalists say the sheep are saved by faith. for they with the Jews go into the 1000 year millenial reign (according to dispensationalism).

And it bears relevance to this topic, because in essence your are saying that one can indeed be saved by their own deeds the corollary of this is that they through their bad deeds also loose merit, therefore will be one of the goats..

But on saying that that there are three camps in dispensational theology.

1)classical dispensatioanlism (Theres not many holding to this now, from Darby 1830's to around the 50's)

2)revised dispensationalism (from the 50's to mid 80's)

3)Progressive dispensationalism (from mid 80's)


The two prevalent streams of dispensationalism today are the revised and progressive.

Classic dispensationalism holds the view that you have espoused that there is an earthly destiny and a heavenly destiny. the latter two do not hold this view and are more inline with what Christians have always believed., they assert that all believers share the same destiny on a new restored earth and this is what scripture actually teaches.

Again, no matter what eschatological viewpoint you have there is still only one gospel and one way for salvation.. it is not ''wider mercy'' nor by 'good deeds' which gain merit (Roman Catholacism). It is by grace, through faith, in Christ.

In all honesty Evmur I think you do not have a true understanding of what classical dispensationalists where saying. That is why I said you have taken classic dispensationalism and mixed in your own ''wider mercy'' theory. There is only one way.