Once saved always saved (OSAS) debunked

[Everlasting-Grace]

Feel free to look up a Greek lexicon because the words eats is in the aorist tense. That means if someone continues to eat the bread from heaven then they will live forever.

This is what aorist tense means:
an unqualified past tense of a verb without reference to duration or completion of the action.

John 6:51
51I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”

I know what aorist tense means

It means you eat and you continue to eat until it completes its job. which would be a person who comes to faith and is saved.

That could take days weeks or even years.. But once it has completed its workd. It is completed..

It does not need to be continually ate. because it completed its action. The words of eternal life have been enacted on.

But I also know reality

If we need to keep eating, then we will still hunger and still thirst and still die.. The promise is nullified..

the gospel message of the cross is the words.. You either believe them or you do not

whoever believes is not condemned

whoever does not believe is condemned already.

no place does it say they may have stopped believing and returned to condemned. It says they were condemned already

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

"God be merciful, a sinner" that was his prayer and Jesus says he went home justified.

I will trust Jesus word on this over Everlasting-Grace

I can say God be merciful to me a sinner until I am blue in the face

If I have not repented. I am not saved

If I say it not in true saving faiht, but just as words.

I am not saved

no wonder you think salvation can be lost. You do not understand how a person comes to faith.

 

[EDENgate]

Read Ephesians 2 and notice all the times it says "in Christ" or "in the Lord." We have life if we remain in Him; otherwise, we don't.

The popular myth of regeneration says when we're born again we're "zapped" and are changed into an immortal being and it can never be reversed. But if that's case, why do we still sin? Why would we still need Christ?

If we remain in Christ we have life; we don't have life of ourselves. It's like being in a lifeboat (Christ) in the middle of the ocean; so long as we remain in the boat we're safe. If we go jump out and try to swim on our our own we've lost our safety and will perish.

One sin or one momentary lapse of faith won't disqualify you. It has to be a conscious, willful, and ongoing decision on our part to abandon Christ. God is patient, not wanting any to perish. He'll bend over backward to bring us back, but if we persist in rebellion we will sign our own death sentence.

"For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins," Hebrews 10:26

I have read Ephesians. For me the context of those identities, in Christ, refers to the redeemed.
And in no way implies we have to strive to retain our status as such. This due to what is written in Ephesians 2 and Romans 11.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Runningman said:
Feel free to look up a Greek lexicon because the words eats is in the aorist tense. That means if someone continues to eat the bread from heaven then they will live forever.

This is what aorist tense means:
an unqualified past tense of a verb without reference to duration or completion of the action.

John 6:51
51I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”

I know what aorist tense means

It means you eat and you continue to eat until it completes its job. which would be a person who comes to faith and is saved.

You are both in error.

The aorist tense is basically equivalent to our past tense. It is a point in time action, usually in the past, not continuous action.

That could take days weeks or even years.. But once it has completed its workd. It is completed..

Saving faith is instantaneous. WHEN a person trusts in the work of Christ, they ARE saved.

 

[Runningman]

I know what aorist tense means

It means you eat and you continue to eat until it completes its job. which would be a person who comes to faith and is saved.

When they come to faith they are saved in the sense they are justified by faith in Christ and the work He has done if they continue in the faith.

That could take days weeks or even years.. But once it has completed its workd. It is completed..

Or it could take a lifetime of continual believing. There’s no reference to a completion with aorist tense. They must continue believing in order to never be hungry again. The true bread from heaven is Jesus Christ and whoever eats that bread will never hunger again, hence eternal life. It’s contrasted with manna because it’s just bread that temporarily satisfies hunger, but still ultimately leads to death even if they ate it everyday.

It does not need to be continually ate. because it completed its action. The words of eternal life have been enacted on.

It needs to be continually ate indefinitely. The requirement for eternal life is continually believing all over the New Testament. If unbelief enters the heart, such as in the case in Hebrews 3:12-14, then they no longer share in Christ.

Hebrews 3:12-14
12See to it, brothers, that none of you has a wicked heart of unbelief that turns away from the living God.
13But exhort one another daily, as long as it is called today, so that none of you may be hardened by sin’s deceitfulness.
14We have come to share in Christ if we hold firmly to the end the assurance we had at first.

But I also know reality

If we need to keep eating, then we will still hunger and still thirst and still die.. The promise is nullified..

That’s for normal bread with carbs.

the gospel message of the cross is the words.. You either believe them or you do not

True and like in the Parable of the Sower, Matthew 13:1-23, people can fall away from what they believed through apostasy.

"But since they have no root, they last only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, they quickly fall away. The seed falling among the thorns refers to someone who hears the word, but the worries of this life and the deceitfulness of wealth choke the word, making it unfruitful."

whoever believes is not condemned.

whoever does not believe is condemned already.

They parable of the sower shows that people can come to not believe.

no place does it say they may have stopped believing and returned to condemned. It says they were condemned already

I strongly urge you to do a deep study of Hebrews. Take your time on this book, months if necessary and be thorough. It's filled with great promises, but also with many warnings. Here's one of those warning:

Hebrews 10:35-39
35So do not throw away your confidence; it holds a great reward. 36You need to persevere, so that after you have done the will of God, you will receive what He has promised.
37For, “In just a little while, He who is coming will come and will not delay.
38But My righteous one will live by faith;
and if he shrinks back,
I will take no pleasure in him.”
39But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who have faith and preserve their souls.

 

[Runningman]

Runningman said:
Feel free to look up a Greek lexicon because the words eats is in the aorist tense. That means if someone continues to eat the bread from heaven then they will live forever.

This is what aorist tense means:
an unqualified past tense of a verb without reference to duration or completion of the action.

John 6:51
51I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”

You are both in error.

The aorist tense is basically equivalent to our past tense. It is a point in time action, usually in the past, not continuous action.


Saving faith is instantaneous. WHEN a person trusts in the work of Christ, they ARE saved.

Every source I've looked at disproves what you just said and I wouldn't have talked about aorist unless I was confident. I'm not going to debate universally agreed upon Greek grammar.

This is what aorist tense means:
an unqualified past tense of a verb without reference to duration or completion of the action.

 

[ResidentAlien]

I have read Ephesians. For me the context of those identities, in Christ, refers to the redeemed.
And in no way implies we have to strive to retain our status as such. This due to what is written in Ephesians 2 and Romans 11.

Okay

 

[EDENgate]

I guess I don't understand this insistence some pursue against our secure eternal salvation. Jesus said of all the father gives him he shall lose none. And he also said of us that no one shall take us from his hand.

Eternal Life,salvation.

How do we contradict Jesus and say that isn't true?

 

[Magenta]

I guess I don't understand this insistence some pursue against our secure eternal salvation. Jesus said of
all the father gives him he shall lose none. And he also said of us that no one shall take us from his hand.

Eternal Life,salvation.

How do we contradict Jesus and say that isn't true?

They believe they must rely on themselves to maintain the irrevocable gifts of God.

 

[XavierJesusLovesIndia]

No one is saved because they said a 30 second sinners prayer

Hi EG. Under your OSAS theory, they would be. Why? Because you claim once one receives the Holy Spirit, you never lose Him.

Can you reconcile these two verses? "no one can say, “Jesus is Lord,” except by the Holy Spirit." (1 Cor 12:3) with the verse quoted earlier:

Mat 7:21 "Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of My Father in heaven."

So how can they both be true? The correct answer is to distinguish justification from salvation. When we receive Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, and repent, the Holy Spirit comes to dwell in us. But after that, we must persevere to the end, without losing the Holy Spirit, to be saved, according to: "But he that shall persevere to the end, he shall be saved." (Mat 24:13). The Thief on the Cross confessed Jesus as Lord, and confessed that he was a sinner. So he received the Holy Spirit, and because he died right way, went to Heaven. Thus David prayed: "And do not take Your Holy Spirit from me." (Psa 51:11)

Also, 1 Jn 4:15 says: "Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God." So, if it is true that once God dwells in you by His Spirit, after that you can never lose Him, then all who confess Jesus Christ as the Son of God, per the OSAS theory, are already saved for all eternity. Otherwise, if you disagree, how do you interpret the verse?

Some questions to you:

1. If it was not possible to lose the Holy Spirit after receiving Him, why would David, or rather the Holy Spirit Himself, inspire King David to pray like that? As we all know, King David had the Holy Spirit from his youth. But after he sinned gravely against the Lord, and Uriah, by adultery, murder etc, he knew he could lose the Holy Spirit. So he prayed like that.

2. Can you explain why Jesus didn't say: "He that is saved, he shall persevere to the end". Isn't that what you believe?

3. Finally, can you show us any verse that teaches, as you seem to believe, that not only is OSAS true, but allegedly believing OSAS is necessary for salvation? I don't think there is any such verse, but if you can show me, I'm all ears.

Now, here is a verse that shows OSAS could not be necessary for salvation, otherwise Apostle Paul was not saved, which is absurd. 1 Cor 9:27: "But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway." The Greek word here is ἀδόκιμος (adokimos). The same word used in Rom 1:28.

Your thoughts on this verse?

God Bless.

 

[ZNP]

I guess I don't understand this insistence some pursue against our secure eternal salvation. Jesus said of all the father gives him he shall lose none. And he also said of us that no one shall take us from his hand.

Eternal Life,salvation.

How do we contradict Jesus and say that isn't true?

I was raised on this teaching and have subscribed to it for the last 40 years. But there is a very dark side to this. Go to these mega church pastors and they all teach this but they have a very different slant than what I was taught.

My understanding was that we have the assurance of eternal salvation as a helmet to protect us from Satan's attacks as we pursue the Lord and seek first the kingdom.

I have seen a very different slant is from people sitting in a bar, going to a football game, living in fornication, even having abortions and using this to say they are saved because years ago they prayed. Not only so but they give the impression that this is the sum total of the Christian life, once you are saved you are always saved, and then they return to their sinful life and have very little to do with the Lord.

If the people that subscribed to this spoke on the two verses in John they always quote about 1/4,000th of the time I would not have any issue with it. That is probably how much I quote those verses. But that is not what I see so many places. Those two verses are repeated every day like some kind of mantra while the other 7,000+ verses of the New Testament are ignored, dismissed, explained away, etc.

So what I have seen is a very distorted, warped view of the Bible. This is part of the apostasy, you take the verses you like, you get rid of the verses you don't like.

For example, about 1/4th of the verses in the Bible talk about the end times, the day of the Lord, the coming judgement, hell, the redemption of our body, glorification, etc. Do pastors and preachers spend 1/4th of their messages on this?

For example, I was asked about what I meant by salvation. So I brought up many of the New Testament verses on salvation that covered many different aspects of this topic and discussed each verse. The response from one person was that almost all of those verses don't matter, the only one that mattered was the one that was referring to justification by faith from sin.

So I don't reject any verse in the Bible, what I reject is doctrines of man that focus on one verse to the exclusion of others.

The other thing I have seen is they keep trying to tell me what I believe, to put me in some box they have. It is as though they cannot hear, they cannot see, and it is impossible to have fellowship with them.

 

[XavierJesusLovesIndia]

See here another verse/passage where the Lord Jesus Christ Himself teaches us we must persevere till death in doing what He has commanded us; then, we will be blessed, otherwise we can be condemned.

Luk 12

"42And the Lord said, Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his lord shall make ruler over his household, to give them their portion of meat in due season? 43Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing. 44Of a truth I say unto you, that he will make him ruler over all that he hath. 45But and if that servant say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; and shall begin to beat the menservants and maidens, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken; 46The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers."

 

[EDENgate]

I was raised on this teaching and have subscribed to it for the last 40 years. But there is a very dark side to this. Go to these mega church pastors and they all teach this but they have a very different slant than what I was taught.

My understanding was that we have the assurance of eternal salvation as a helmet to protect us from Satan's attacks as we pursue the Lord and seek first the kingdom.

I have seen a very different slant is from people sitting in a bar, going to a football game, living in fornication, even having abortions and using this to say they are saved because years ago they prayed. Not only so but they give the impression that this is the sum total of the Christian life, once you are saved you are always saved, and then they return to their sinful life and have very little to do with the Lord.

If the people that subscribed to this spoke on the two verses in John they always quote about 1/4,000th of the time I would not have any issue with it. That is probably how much I quote those verses. But that is not what I see so many places. Those two verses are repeated every day like some kind of mantra while the other 7,000+ verses of the New Testament are ignored, dismissed, explained away, etc.

So what I have seen is a very distorted, warped view of the Bible. This is part of the apostasy, you take the verses you like, you get rid of the verses you don't like.

For example, about 1/4th of the verses in the Bible talk about the end times, the day of the Lord, the coming judgement, hell, the redemption of our body, glorification, etc. Do pastors and preachers spend 1/4th of their messages on this?

For example, I was asked about what I meant by salvation. So I brought up many of the New Testament verses on salvation that covered many different aspects of this topic and discussed each verse. The response from one person was that almost all of those verses don't matter, the only one that mattered was the one that was referring to justification by faith from sin.

So I don't reject any verse in the Bible, what I reject is doctrines of man that focus on one verse to the exclusion of others.

The other thing I have seen is they keep trying to tell me what I believe, to put me in some box they have. It is as though they cannot hear, they cannot see, and it is impossible to have fellowship with them.

Except we're told those who are in Christ don't do those things you describe. And if they do they're not saved at all because Christ isn't in them.

That makes them different than us.

 

[EDENgate]

They believe they must rely on themselves to maintain the irrevocable gifts of God.

Thanks. That's the message I was reading in their posts also.

 

[ZNP]

Except we're told those who are in Christ don't do those things you describe. And if they do they're not saved at all because Christ isn't in them.

That makes them different than us.

Which is why I feel this doctrine is toxic. People who do not know the scripture, who do not read the Bible are told that they will be saved if they simply pray this prayer. To get rid of the person they pray and then from then on tell people they have prayed.

I'm not arguing against preaching the gospel, I am not arguing against praying with people, I'm not arguing against any verse in the Bible. What I am against is using this doctrine to facilitate apostasy.

Where I was raised we went through the Bible verse by verse and book by book. So, like I said when we got to John we went over those two verses. But we also read Matthew, and Mark, and Luke and Acts, and all the epistles, and Revelation. We live by every word of God, not by 2/7,000 verses.

 

[ZNP]

Thanks. That's the message I was reading in their posts also.

Oh, can you point me to the post?

Look at the first post in this thread, he quotes John 10:28 and says he agrees with the OSAS interpretation.

Everyone on this thread, to my knowledge, agrees with that verse. However, the entire debate is from OSAS accusing the others of not agreeing with that verse while they ignore all the other verses he listed as verses that give us a fuller view of what salvation is.

 

[EDENgate]

I was raised on this teaching and have subscribed to it for the last 40 years. But there is a very dark side to this. Go to these mega church pastors and they all teach this but they have a very different slant than what I was taught.

My understanding was that we have the assurance of eternal salvation as a helmet to protect us from Satan's attacks as we pursue the Lord and seek first the kingdom.

I have seen a very different slant is from people sitting in a bar, going to a football game, living in fornication, even having abortions and using this to say they are saved because years ago they prayed. Not only so but they give the impression that this is the sum total of the Christian life, once you are saved you are always saved, and then they return to their sinful life and have very little to do with the Lord.

If the people that subscribed to this spoke on the two verses in John they always quote about 1/4,000th of the time I would not have any issue with it. That is probably how much I quote those verses. But that is not what I see so many places. Those two verses are repeated every day like some kind of mantra while the other 7,000+ verses of the New Testament are ignored, dismissed, explained away, etc.

So what I have seen is a very distorted, warped view of the Bible. This is part of the apostasy, you take the verses you like, you get rid of the verses you don't like.

For example, about 1/4th of the verses in the Bible talk about the end times, the day of the Lord, the coming judgement, hell, the redemption of our body, glorification, etc. Do pastors and preachers spend 1/4th of their messages on this?

For example, I was asked about what I meant by salvation. So I brought up many of the New Testament verses on salvation that covered many different aspects of this topic and discussed each verse. The response from one person was that almost all of those verses don't matter, the only one that mattered was the one that was referring to justification by faith from sin.

So I don't reject any verse in the Bible, what I reject is doctrines of man that focus on one verse to the exclusion of others.

The other thing I have seen is they keep trying to tell me what I believe, to put me in some box they have. It is as though they cannot hear, they cannot see, and it is impossible to have fellowship with them.

Well, for me eternal salvation means exactly that.
And the transformation that occurs when we are reborn in Christ makes us a different person than the natural one who God said can't understand the things of his spirit.

So for me, people who still sin up a storm and call themselves Christian haven't changed at all. Which means Jesus hasn't changed them with his holy spirit.

And I think it is a shame that those people are the example some use to insist salvation isn't all that Jesus said it is.

I don't know why I would ever let myself believe Jesus would die to insure a covenant that is only temporary. And died for something we can lose by our bad behaviors so to return to exactly where we started from.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Every source I've looked at disproves what you just said and I wouldn't have talked about aorist unless I was confident. I'm not going to debate universally agreed upon Greek grammar.

You didn't name your sources, so there's that. I will. Greek Grammar: Beyond the Basics, by Danial Wallace, a HIGHLY respected Greek scholar.

This is what aorist tense means:
an unqualified past tense of a verb without reference to duration or completion of the action.

So I'm right. What do you think "without reference to "duration" (time) or completion of the action" means? It means time ISN'T an issue, so your claim about "continuous action" is false.

Anyway, back to Wallace: The aorist tense presents an occurrence in summary, viewed as a whole from the outside, without regard for the internal make-up of the occurrence. This contrasts with the present and imperfect, which portray the action as an ongoing process. It may be helpful to think of the aorist as taking a snapshot of the action while the imperfect (like the present) takes a motto picture portraying the action as it unfolds. pp554-555.

In the indicative, the aorist ususually indicates past time with reference to the time of speaking. Aorist participles usually suggest antecedent time to that of the main verb (ie: past time in a relative sense). p.555

 

[FreeGrace2]

See here another verse/passage where the Lord Jesus Christ Himself teaches us we must persevere till death in doing what He has commanded us; then, we will be blessed, otherwise we can be condemned.

Then explain how John 5:24 doesn't say that believers possess eternal life and then explain how John 10:28 doesn't say that recipients of eternal life shall NEVER perish.

Every verse you think teaches loss of salvation is refuted by these 2 verses.

So I look forward to your 'explanations'.

 

[ZNP]

This is a useless doctrine

1. They will tell you that once you are saved you are always saved. However, if you return to a life of sin they will then say you were never really saved. So what is the point?

2. They will tell you that once you are saved you are always saved. However, they will admit that some people will be saved but so as through fire and will suffer loss.

OK so what does that mean? Well they say it means you won't reign with Christ.

Seems like an important point to let people know.

It means you won't eat from the hidden manna, you won't have a new name written on a stone, you won't be pillars in the house of God, you won't get the crown of life, and your name may be blotted out of the book of life.

Whoa, your name could be blotted out from the book of life? That is what Jesus said, but they say that Jesus was speaking figuratively and wouldn't do what He said He would do? You still want to trust these people with your eternal salvation?

Well what about where Jesus said that if we do not forgive others as He has forgiven us then neither will the Father in heaven forgive us. Oh, don't worry about that, He is just talking about fellowship on earth, not eternal salvation! Do they even care about fellowship with God or do they just care about their useless doctrine?