The Case for Eternal Security

[BarneyFife]

What a despicable post! Show me in any of my posts on this forum where I said that it's all good for a born again believer to go out and start molesting children and smoking crack etc.. You have an extreme view of OSAS that I do not hold to. I actually prefer to use the terms eternal security of the believer or preservation of the saints because of such radical, extreme views that people like you attach to OSAS. There is nothing comical about your sarcasm or your slander. You should have asked me what my views are in regard to OSAS before you jumped to conclusions with your false accusations which were unwarranted.

Hi, Dan! Long time no see!

Believe me when I say, DC's sole purpose for being here is to serve as the Howard Stern of CyB. He loves nothing better than to see anyone who doesn't belong to his "Whole Counsel Of God" (yeah, I know it's in the Bible) Lone Ranger religious club well-disgusted. If it seems like I'm being too harsh, then let me just say that once in a great while he (likely) accidentally says something insightful. I've never seen such a bad-faith participant since I started here, and that's no exaggeration. His bigotry and hubris know virtually no bounds. I have no idea how he gets away with his shenanigans. That I'm so comfortable saying all this is quite surreal, actually.

 

[Lambano]

 

[BarneyFife]

Well said.

I try, but you know...

(But you liked it )

 

[mailmandan]

No, the OSAS peoples don't say that in so many words.... although I'm hearing a few actually are.

But what they DO says is that once someone gets born again they can never ever lose their salvation causing many to stumble because they think they can go back to sinful living and it's all good because after all they are being falsely taught that it's impossible to lose their salvation

Your boy gnarly Charlie Stanley which the OSAS peoples claim to be an icon of the OSAS doctrine, a leading authority on eternal security literally claimed one can live in sin and even forsake their faith altogether and still be saved!

In his book, Eternal Security, Stanley says

"Even if a believer for all practical purposes becomes an unbeliever, his salvation is not in jeopardy” (Chapter 10, p. 93)

“Christ will not deny an unbelieving Christian his or her salvation because to do so would be to deny Himself” (p. 94).

“Believers who lose or abandon their faith will retain their salvation, for God remains faithful” (p. 94)

You claim to be a part of the OSAS community so own it!

It's not slander when it's true.

Maybe you should quit identifying as a OSAS or eternal security proponent and embrace the whole counsel of God instead View attachment 63460Hey you are the one going around claiming to be a proponent of this doctrine, so you are stuck with their teachings

Maybe you should stop jumping to conclusions and painting ALL Christians in the OSAS camp as promoting a license to sin. I know numerous folks in the OSAS camp, who do not promote that extreme view. I believe in OSAS from the perspective of eternal security of the believer, preservation of the saints and that is only IF one is truly saved to begin with. I believe in eternal security of the believer, but I don't believe in eternal presumption.

There are genuine Christians and there are "nominal" or pseudo Christians. There are genuine believers, and there are make believers. You do not infallibly know the hearts of all men. Only God does so you need to stop painting everyone who believes in eternal security of the believer with a broad brush of embracing your extreme, radical view of OSAS then automatically judging and condemning them as promoting immorality.

 

[Dan Clarkston]

His bigotry and hubris know virtually no bounds

Yeah yeah we know... those who aren't members of the SDA social club are "bigots"

 

[Gottservant]

If you break the key in the lock, while the door is unlocked: you can hate the Door all you want, but it won't change the fact that the door is unlocked.

Fortunately no one is so foolish as to have the Devil board the door up, simply because they've been hated for using it - at least, as far as someone who has known God is concerned.

Knowledge makes it very hard to deny something, that is already and finally inevitable (selah).

 

[Dan Clarkston]

If you break the key in the lock, while the door is unlocked: you can hate the Door all you want, but it won't change the fact that the door is unlocked.

Fortunately no one is so foolish as to have the Devil board the door up, simply because they've been hated for using it - at least, as far as someone who has known God is concerned.

Knowledge makes it very hard to deny something, that is already and finally inevitable (selah).

In other words... how much wood could a wood chuck chuck IF a wood chuck could chuck wood?

 

[BarneyFife]

Yeah yeah we know... those who aren't members of the SDA social club are "bigots" View attachment 63497

No, even—and I'd go so far as to say especially—Adventists who commonly exhibit bigotry are safely deemed "bigots."

That's probably quite confusing to you, I'd imagine.

.

 

[Dan Clarkston]

That's probably quite confusing to you, I'd imagine.

God is not the author of confusion so I'll leave you SDA peoples... to your confusion.

 

[St. SteVen]

God is not the author of confusion so I'll leave you SDA peoples... to your confusion.

Who are you to talk? - LOL

[

 

[Dan Clarkston]

Who are you to talk? - LOL

Who are you to talk? - LOL

God is not the author of confusion and the SDA people definitely be a confused bunch

 

[St. SteVen]

This is typically discussed under the derogatory term OSAS (once saved always saved)
So, I wanted to present the topic under positive terms.

To me, the comparison is between
Eternal Security and Eternal Insecurity. (my own derogatory term)

Those who oppose OSAS (Eternal Security) usually don't realize what they are throwing away.

My position on the subject is as follows. (which I have posted many times on the forum)

We cannot by an act of our own will undo what only God could do in the first place.
Even in the case of Reprobation, it is God's choice, not ours. And his aim is to return the lost sheep to the fold.
He is, after all, the Good Shepherd. - St. SteVen

See the OP for more info.

[

 

[Behold]

Even in the case of Reprobation,

[

"the case of Reprobation" is a false religious concept that tries to eliminate man's Free will and present God as a hateful unmerciful God who chooses to not allow some sinners a choice to trust in Christ.
This theology is a "doctrine of devils', created by one.

 

[St. SteVen]

"the case of Reprobation" is a false religious concept that tries to eliminate man's Free will and present God as a hateful unmerciful God who chooses to not allow some sinners a choice to trust in Christ.
This theology is a "doctrine of devils', created by one.

Seems biblical to me.

Romans 1:28 KJV
And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge,
God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

[

 

[St. SteVen]

This theology is a "doctrine of devils'

Interesting that whatever doesn't agree with your doctrinal opinions is somehow a "doctrine of devils'.

[

 

[Behold]

God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

Pauls teaching on the reprobate mind, is not the same as the teaching of reprobation.
A reprobate mind is a mind that has no way back to God's Grace......its a "seared conscience".
Its a place where right and wrong dont exist in this person......there is only....>"what feels good and what i want to do next".
No sense of morality.
"there is no right or wrong, there is only the pursuit of whatever feels good".

Whereas the "doctrive of depravity" is related to Calvinism- Hyper Calvinism, and is the Cross denying theology that states that before some are born they are chosen to not be able to trust in Christ. THey pre-chosen to God to Hell.
So, not only does this not fit your "universalism".........it also denies the Cross of Christ.

 

[Behold]

Interesting that whatever doesn't agree with your doctrinal opinions is somehow a "doctrine of devils'.

[

A "doctrine of devils" is defined in that "bible" that you told us you "read once".

(KJV) = Hebrews 13:9 is where you find this phrase "doctrines of Devils"..
= Which expains why your theology is ignorant, regarding the understanding of Salvation and Damnation, along with the word of God itself.
You read the bible all the way through "once" and now you are on this forum trying to pretend you are an authority on the scriptures.

That is a fool's game you are playing with yourself.

Now a "doctrine of devils". is recoginzed by its oppostion to The Cross of Christ, according to how God has presented this as His Grace and New Covenant.

Calvinism, and Universalism, and many other "isms", are an assault against The Cross of Christ, as these "doctrines of devils" try to redefine Salvation, based on some heretics teaching that is a false Gospel.

Galatians 1:8

Listen, whom but a DEVIL is going to try to change how God offers Salvation?
See that?
That has to be a "doctrine of devils" as its the DEVIL who wants to interfere wtih the Truth regarding Salvation, so that people remain lost, and on their way to Hell.

People like you, never looked deep enough, and that is why you became mind owned by one of these "doctrines of devils".

See, you didnt decide one day that "everyone is saved".........
No.
You were taught this, by a LIAR... a Heretic...........and what you never did was find out where this teaching originated, and by Whom.
And then you find out all about THEM....and that is how you could have prevented yourself from becoming a tool of the dark side. @St. SteVen
What you did, is you found a false gospel that matches your carnal point of view perfectly, and that is why you embraced it.

 

[St. SteVen]

The Case for Eternal Security​

This is typically discussed under the derogatory term OSAS (once saved always saved)
So, I wanted to present the topic under positive terms.
To me, the comparison is between Eternal Security and Eternal Insecurity. (my own derogatory term)

Those who oppose OSAS (Eternal Security) usually don't realize what they are throwing away.

My position on the subject is as follows. (which I have posted many times on the forum)

We cannot by an act of our own will undo what only God could do in the first place.
Even in the case of Reprobation, it is God's choice, not ours. And his aim is to return the lost sheep to the fold.
He is, after all, the Good Shepherd. - St. SteVen

I found this list of seven principles online that I thought was pretty good. Source link at the bottom of the page.
There are other presentations available with a lot more items.

Return to post #1 for seven proofs.

 

[Behold]

The Case for Eternal Security​

The "case" for Eternal Security is found as Jesus Himself.

Jesus is "Eternal life" so there is the "Eternal security".

So, who has eternal security? = Its everyone who dies with Christ in them, having been born again before they died.

 

[St. SteVen]

So, who has eternal security? = Its everyone who dies with Christ in them, having been born again before they died.

So, only Protestant evangelical Christians will be saved?
That's convenient. - LOL