Outer Darkness: a possible destiny for the saved

[Eternally Grateful]

Key difference between Once Saved Always Saved and Perseverance of the Saints:

Perseverance of the saints is the logical conclusion from Calvinist doctrine.

But it is illogical

it states a saved person will persevere.. Which is contrary to their doctrine. which says God does all the work

The elect have been elected by no choice of their own.
They have been delivered from their sin by a predetermined limited number of the chosen by God.
Gods grace is irresistible, therefore they will live believe in God, their belief and repentance is Gods gift that cannot be refused.
They will persevere in faith as their faith is not their own but a gift given by God only to those chosen by God before they were created.

Since God controls every thought and every action, they will never completely loose their faith in God, thus they cannot be lost.

OSAS, teaches man has free will ability to resist God. But once one is saved God seals their fate by indwelling them with the gift of the Holy Spirit, which is promised to those who believe, Ephesians 1:13.

This promise seals or guarantees them eternal life regardless of how much sin they commit. As sin does not play any part in salvation as there is nothing man can do whether good works or works of the flesh that can cause him to be seperated from the living God in a salvific sense.
God will keep His promise and man plays no part as this promise has no requirements attached.

Therefore OSAS proponents can become atheists die in unbelief and still be saved.

No. this is not true.

John says a person who rejects christ has never been saved..1. They were never of us (1 john 2) and they are condemned already (john 3)


so before you try to explain some things. I would study a little more about what they believe and what they say

 

[ScottA]

As I have already explained to you, Paul teaches us the "old man of sin" is put to death when we are born again, Romans 6:1-17. Read it three times.

You are not hearing the Spirit, nor even being honest.

Other than Christ, who do you know that died in the flesh and rose again the third day?

But no, the "likeness" Paul spoke of was to include walking forty days (spiritually a lifetime) after that death before we too fully ascend having left behind our old body of flesh. As the flesh (body) returns to the dust, and the spirit (body) returns to God who gave it. There is much more that can be said, but it needs to begin there.

 

[bdavidc]

Search the scriptures and see for yourself - NO PROPHET EVER COMES FROM GALILEE!! Where does it say that?? It doesn’t! You are just deluded and making things up!!

Your example really just shows what I’ve been saying. In John 7:52, it was the Pharisees who claimed that no prophet comes from Galilee. Scripture records what they said, but that doesn't mean what they said was true. In fact, Jonah came from Gath-hepher (2 Kings 14:25), which was in the territory of Zebulun (Joshua 19:13), in the region later known as Galilee.

Let’s get back to Jude 12, since that’s what we were talking about. Jude calls these men "twice dead, plucked up by the roots," but he never says they were born again and then lost their spiritual life. That’s what you are reading into the text, not what Jude says.

In fact, Jude 19 describes these same men as "sensual, having not the Spirit." And Romans 8:9 tells us, "Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his."

I’ve already shown this from Scripture, but you still haven’t answered my main question.

WHERE DOES JUDE SAY THESE MEN WERE ONCE BORN AGAIN AND THEN LOST THEIR SALVATION?

I’m not asking for your opinion about what "twice dead" means. I’m asking you to show me where the Bible actually teaches what you’re saying.

There’s a difference between what the Bible says and what people assume it means. That’s why we need to look at the whole passage in context.

 

[MostlyConfused]

As I have already explained to you, Paul teaches us the "old man of sin" is put to death when we are born again, Romans 6:1-17. Read it three times.

You cannot be born again and still be in your sins, which is what the old man of sin is.
Its impossible to be both at the same time.
The "old man" is the former life that was lived in sin.

You are claiming that John and Peter and Paul being apostles do not sin, while at the same time arguing they while in their fleshly bodies are still the "old man of sin".
You are repeatedly contradicting yourself.

Ephesians 4:22,
- that ye put off concerning the  former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts

the old man is the former way of life characterized by sinful desires and conduct.


The bible never teaches the "old man" is the physical body of man.
It is the former life before one is born again.
Romans 6:1-7,
- knowing this that our old man is crucified with Jesus that the body of sin might be destroyed that henceforth we should not serve sin

Paul connects the old man with Christs crucifixion and the born again Christian's freedom from slavery to sin.


Correct, and John includes himself as a sinner, 1John 1:1-10.

Christ didn't sin, that does not mean born again christians never sin.
Paul tells Christians they are to live as Christ live to emulate Christ.
Philippians 2:5,
- Let this  mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus

1Corinthians 11:1,
- be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ

Since we must emulate Christ.
Christ could have sinned, therefore the born again must also resist temptation.
The saved can sin and sometimes do. Fall short, But the saved no longer make sinful living their lifestyle.
That is what the old man was. Born again put that sinful living to death, thus the old man has been put to death,

This is what John is treaching not that born again christians never sin.
1John 3:9,
- whoever is born of God(born again) does not commit sin, for His seed remaineth in him and he cannot sin, because he is born of God

John does not mean a Christian is incapable of sinning as you teach.
1John 1:1-10 proves this interpretation is wrongly dividing the word.

The distinction you need to learn is - does not commit sin/ cannot sin is referring to his way of life, his daily practice of resisting sinful desires. His heart does not desire to live in sin anymore.
John contrasts this with the children of the devil who live for sin, they do not resist temptation.
The essential distinction is between committing a sin and practicing sin as a way of life.

1John 3:10,
- in this the children of God are manifest and the children of the devil, whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother

ScottA, put these passages together:
1John 1:8-10 - Christians must acknowledge their sins rather than deny them.
1John 2:1 - christians should not sin, but Jesus is their advocate if they do.
1John 3:6-10 - those born of God must not live a life characterized by practicing willful unrestrained sin.
Romans 6:1-14 - christians must not allow sin to reign over them.

I already have Sir.

Key word you keep overlooking is  our
John includes himself among those who need forgiveness of sins.
You do err when you teach the born again are incapable of sinning.
The apostles sinned, John says so and Peter is an example, Galatians:2:12-14.

Matthew 22:29

Something’s wrong here. I thought to answer earlier but had to go to my torturer, the dentist.
You do the same sort of thing Scott does. Both of you seem to think there is no true and total victory over sin in this life because that is impossible for men to do. You present it as that more of your total “lifestyle“ changes a lot, and that is true, because we don’t commit the more heinous outward sins we used to. Im not sure exactly how Scott presents it…more of a - the body sins but the spirit doesn’t.
Neither one is being set free, unless you think the only limited freedom now is freedom from any and all penalty, which is a crock. We will all be judged by how we treated others and judged others and whether we had any humility in that.

But Jesus came, lived in a tent just like ours, having to depend solely on God AS a human man. He did so to FREE us, not so that we would still be imprisoned and tortured by our outer man captor.
Both you have something very wrong or “free indeed” doesn’t really mean free indeed.
“Some improvement” at times is not free indeed.

 

[MostlyConfused]

Your example really just shows what I’ve been saying. In John 7:52, it was the Pharisees who claimed that no prophet comes from Galilee. Scripture records what they said, but that doesn't mean what they said was true.

Now turn that mirror around and look in it. Then you will perhaps see the point I was making.

 

[ScottA]

ScottA you contradict yourself with what you teach,

Above statement by you is Biblically correct.
Now you contradict your own teaching,

Both cannot be true.
Your teaching is inconsistent.
You are confused.

Not only are both true, that is the very state of existence of those born again of the spirit of God, alive and remaining, walking as with the right foot on the sea and the left upon the land, fully equipped to continue the good works of Christ...and greater works than these. Although many do not know or acknowledge it, and worse, some hinder and squelch the Spirit.

 

[ScottA]

Stop rewriting Scripture to fit your interpretations.

I did not asked you to take orders from me. I asked you

You are a liar.

 

[MostlyConfused]

Not only are both true, that is the very state of existence of those born again of the spirit of God, alive and remaining, walking as with the right foot on the sea and the left upon the land, fully equipped to continue the good works of Christ...and greater works than these. Although many do not know or acknowledge it, and worse, some hinder and squelch the Spirit.

Now you’re just sounding like Lizbeth. You’re trying to fit it all to explain why you can’t never be completely free from sin. All these machinations are useless.

 

[bdavidc]

Calling Jesus Lord does not constitute being saved.

With such little understanding and knowledge--you should not be commenting at all, but by commandment of God, as it is written, you should "keep silent in church."

You agreed with me, and when I stated that merely calling Jesus "Lord" does not show that anyone has been saved, you replied, "Calling Jesus Lord does not mean that one is saved." That is quite correct.

He said, "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven." ~ Matthew 7:21And subsequently, "I never knew you; go away from me, you who practice wickedness." Matthew 7:23

That is exactly what I'm trying to say: just because someone is referred to as a servant or addresses Jesus as 'Lord' does not imply that they are genuinely saved. Just like you, many are so confused they just don't know what they are saying. Rather than responding to what I had said, you told me that I had "little understanding" and that I should "keep silent in church". Has the Bible ever stated that a man should remain silent just because someone disagrees with him online? No

You are quoting Scripture without providing the relevant context; in 1 Corinthians 14 Paul gives instructions regarding order in the church, and at times people who are speaking in tongues or prophets are told to be silent, with verses 34 to 35 dealing specifically with women speaking in the assembly.

The fact that it states nothing like "If Scott thinks that David does not understand Scripture, then David has to stop commenting."

If I am incorrect, then you should refer to Scripture to show this. Personal attacks don't serve to prove your interpretation; since we have both accepted that addressing Jesus as 'Lord' does not prove one is saved, you have still not responded to the point I was making regarding Matthew 25.

 

[ScottA]

Now you’re just sounding like Lizbeth. You’re trying to fit it all to explain why you can’t never be completely free from sin. All these machinations are useless.

What the scriptures call a "mystery", you call "useless"...for lack of understanding.

 

[bdavidc]

You are a liar.

Calling me a liar doesn't make me one. If I have lied, then show everyone exactly what I said that was false.
I asked you to stop changing what Scripture says to fit your interpretation. I also asked you to explain how Paul's words "I myself" in 1 Corinthians 9:27 could possibly refer to someone other than Paul.
Instead of answering, you call me a liar.

Scripture says, "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good" (1 Thessalonians 5:21).
And Paul wrote, "Wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour" (Ephesians 4:25).
So let's deal with the truth. WHAT EXACTLY DID I SAY THAT WAS A LIE?

If you cannot identify a false statement, then stop making personal accusations and answer the Scriptures I have presented.

 

[Titus]

Jonah?

Yes you are correct,
John 7:52,
No prophet was expected to come from Galilee was the thinking of the Pharisees according to some mens interpretation.
Not no prophet ever came out of Galilee.

Thanks for calling me out on this.
I overlooked Jonah, so I was wrong. I used this verse out of context to answer the question:

Search the scriptures and see for yourself - NO PROPHET EVER COMES FROM GALILEE!! Where does it say that?? It doesn’t! You are just deluded and making things up!!

I thought no prophet ever lived was from Galilee except Jesus.
I've been mistaken on this belief.
Now I know better and I thank you marks for blessing me with scriptural knowledge on this matter.
I also apologize for believing and teaching err on this subject.

What the Bible really teaches,
Jonah the prophet was from Galilee,
2Kings 14:25,
- He restored the coast of Israel from the entering of Hamath unto the sea of the plain, according to the word of the LORD God of Israel which he spake by the hand of his servant  Jonah
the son of Amittai, the prophet, which was of  Gathepher

Gathepher is a town in Galilee.
Jesus was born in Bethlehem but grew up in Nazareth, in Galilee.

Jonah?

Amen!!!

 

[Titus]

You are not hearing the Spirit, nor even being honest

Your responses have no scripture.
Not going to discuss Bible with you if you give no Bible answers.

I am being honest.
Also no more ad hominem or I'm not responding.

 

[Titus]

be WAYYY more honest in your reading.

No Bible in your rebuke of my teaching.
I will no longer discuss Bible with you if you have no Bible in your response.
Also no more ad hominem.
If you want discussion with me.

 

[Titus]

No. this is not true.
John says a person who rejects christ has never been saved..1. They were never of us (1 john 2) and they are condemned already (john 3)
so before you try to explain some things. I would study a little more about what they believe and what they say

It is true.
OSAS teaches one can become an unbeliever and still be saved. Salvation according to this doctrine has nothing to do with the works of the saved.
Otherwise salvation is based on what man does not on what Christ alone did.

Not believing Jesus' word is according to Jesus not believing in Him.
John 8:31,
- then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on Him, if ye continue in My word then ye are My disciples indeed

ET, you believe as you've told me multiple times. Obeying Jesus' commandments from His word has no relationship with ones salvation.
1John 3:23-24,
- and this is His commandment that we should believe on the name of His Son Jesus Christ and love one another as He gave us commandment

OSAS is a doctrine of mental belief once and zero effort like obeying Gods commandments to be saved or to stay saved.

 

[marks]

Yes you are correct,
John 7:52,
No prophet was expected to come from Galilee was the thinking of the Pharisees according to some mens interpretation.
Not no prophet ever came out of Galilee.

Thanks for calling me out on this.
I overlooked Jonah, so I was wrong. I used this verse out of context to answer the question:

I thought no prophet ever lived was from Galilee except Jesus.
I've been mistaken on this belief.
Now I know better and I thank you marks for blessing me with scriptural knowledge on this matter.
I also apologize for believing and teaching err on this subject.

What the Bible really teaches,
Jonah the prophet was from Galilee,
2Kings 14:25,
- He restored the coast of Israel from the entering of Hamath unto the sea of the plain, according to the word of the LORD God of Israel which he spake by the hand of his servant  Jonah
the son of Amittai, the prophet, which was of  Gathepher

Gathepher is a town in Galilee.
Jesus was born in Bethlehem but grew up in Nazareth, in Galilee.

Amen!!!

Well, not even the Jewish leaders remembered this . . .

Much love!

 

[marks]

OSAS teaches one can become an unbeliever and still be saved.

What I know of OSAS is that the idea is no one who is born again stops believing.

So far as I see in the Bible rebirth is forever.

Much love!

 

[Eternally Grateful]

It is true.
OSAS teaches one can become an unbeliever and still be saved.

No OSAS does not.. Now one faction of those who teach osas may say this. but it would probably be the licentious crowd. which is just as lost as the legalistic croud.

Salvation according to this doctrine has nothing to do with the works of the saved.
Otherwise salvation is based on what man does not on what Christ alone did.

Yes which is legalism

Not believing Jesus' word is according to Jesus not believing in Him.
John 8:31,
- then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on Him, if ye continue in My word then ye are My disciples indeed

ET, you believe as you've told me multiple times. Obeying Jesus' commandments from His word has no relationship with ones salvation.
1John 3:23-24,
- and this is His commandment that we should believe on the name of His Son Jesus Christ and love one another as He gave us commandment

OSAS is a doctrine of mental belief once and zero effort like obeying Gods commandments to be saved or to stay saved.

No it is not

Dude you have no idea what your talking about.

you need to stop.

 

[marks]

OSAS is a doctrine of mental belief once and zero effort like obeying Gods commandments to be saved or to stay saved.

No, OSAS describes the doctrine that when we come to faith we are permanently changed by God, to be His forever children. Nothing about some "mental belief" and zero effort. We spend our entire lives in our endeavor to live up to our calling.

Much love!

 

[bdavidc]

Now turn that mirror around and look in it. Then you will perhaps see the point I was making.

Turning the mirror around doesn't change what Scripture says.

If you believe I'm making the same mistake, then show me where I've taken Scripture out of context. I'm willing to be corrected by God's Word.

But you still haven't answered my question about Jude 12.

You claim that "twice dead" means these men were once born again and then lost their salvation. Yet Jude 19 describes them as "sensual, having not the Spirit."

And Romans 8:9 says, "Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his."

WHERE DOES JUDE SAY THESE MEN WERE EVER BORN AGAIN?

I'm not asking you to agree with me. I'm asking you to show me from Scripture where your interpretation comes from.

A clever response doesn't establish biblical truth. Scripture does.