The Doctrine of OSAS

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Dodo_David

Melmacian in human guise
Jul 13, 2013
1,048
63
0
Who besides God has the ability to look at the human heart?

Nobody that I know of.

If you can't look at a person's heart, then how can you be certain whether or not a person still has saving faith?

I am not advocating OSAS. I am not denying it.

I consider this issue to be a mystery that God alone knows the answer to.

Would it harm us to treat this issue as a mystery that mere mortals cannot solve on this side of eternity?

In order to err on the side of caution, wouldn't it be best for each of us to simply say, "I do not know"?

Is there something in the psyche of modern Western humans that prevents them from admitting that they cannot solve every mystery?
 

veteran

New Member
Aug 6, 2010
6,509
212
0
Southeast USA
Rach said:
Firstly, thanks for taking the time to reply...and if I did indeed miss those passages before, then I appreciate you repeating them for me.
Your very welcome.
Rach said:
Firstly, thanks for taking the time to reply...and if I did indeed miss those passages before, then I appreciate you repeating them for me.

Now...as to these 1 John passages. I'm afraid I cannot see how the link to the assurance eternal salvation, or the lack of it. Bear with me a minute:

If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth. But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. (1 John 1:6-10)

This is not a warning that we can loose our salvation...this is talking about people who claim to be saved, but clearly are not. Note the comparisons....those who SAY they are Christians, but have no or bad fruit, clearly are not. Where as those who ARE saved, walk in the light. Consider these other passages that talk about being in darkness. They are talking of those who are NOT saved.
I hear a lot of preachers tell a believer they are "saved" when they believe on Jesus and are baptized in His Name. And the preachers on the OSAS doctrines especially say that to new believers.

So how is it you say those that have believed and been baptized are not saved? Aren't you yourself admitting to a condition for Salvation when you say that, which of course is the opposite of the OSAS doctrines?
 

musterion

New Member
Aug 4, 2013
215
5
0
Prentis said:
I am sorry if you took offense Rach, and I concede this: I might not of been clear on the fact that OSAS leads many to despise the cross, but I do believe that you can doctrinally hold the OSAS view and accept the cross presented you and it's suffering.
Once again you're unclear. Are you saying those who believe in OSAS despise the cross, or are somehow prone to do so? If so, on what evidence do you make this assertion?
Dodo_David said:
If you can't look at a person's heart, then how can you be certain whether or not a person still has saving faith?

You can't, but those who believe they have the liberty and authority to judge others on the perceived presence or absence of "good works" in their lives do exactly this. Coincidentally, these are the same people who tend to despise OSAS as of the devil. Make of that what you will, but it's a fact.

Is there something in the psyche of modern Western humans that prevents them from admitting that they cannot solve every mystery?

But this matter isn't a mystery. The NT teaches both conditional salvation and eternally secure salvation, yet does not contradict itself in doing so. This is the fourth option I referenced above, which I hold to as God's truth.
 

Rach1370

New Member
Apr 17, 2010
1,801
107
0
44
Australia
veteran said:
Your very welcome.


I hear a lot of preachers tell a believer they are "saved" when they believe on Jesus and are baptized in His Name. And the preachers on the OSAS doctrines especially say that to new believers.

So how is it you say those that have believed and been baptized are not saved? Aren't you yourself admitting to a condition for Salvation when you say that, which of course is the opposite of the OSAS doctrines?
Okay....as Dodo has been saying...only God truly knows a persons heart, and whether it has been regenerated or not. A pastor works on what people tell him. If a person tells him he "accepts Christ as Saviour and believes" then...not being God, the pastor has to believe him. On years of aquaintence the pastor might determine the truth behind such claim based on the 'fruit' this person is growing and showing.
So just because a Pastor tells a person 'they are saved' does not actually make it so. And I find it very, very hard to believe that you don't know (personally or have heard of) many people who are in the Church who claim to follow Jesus, but just don't grow 'good' fruit. We know from all Paul's warnings, Christ's as well, that these people are in the Church. Why? Good question...some becuase they like the culture, some because they want to belong somewhere, some because they grew up there and all their friends and family are there...and some because they are wolves. How many 'pastors' have you seen who talks the talk perfectly, but are clearly in it for the fame, money or followers? They exist, and they are not reborn into Christ.

For 'true' belief, one must 'believe' of course. But here we're talking about faith...having faith in Jesus as Lord and Saviour. Paul tells us that having a true, redeeming faith in Christ is a gift itself: Eph 2:8-10.
God touches our hearts, giving us believing faith and regenerating us....new birth. And this new birth leads to repentence...true repentence and a desire to walk in sanctification. Sadly....many people who call on Jesus' name, do not have this change at the heart level. They may say they do, but they do not.

Also....I sort of feel I should point out....you really didn't reply to my answer on the 1 John passage. Because biblically there is no reason to suppose it's talking about 'losing' our salvation...as I laid it all out. And I also feel the need to say, as I didn't in my previous post, that you said you feel the passage to be the 'harmonizing' verse that I was asking for. The passages that make both 'warning' and 'assurance' verses mesh together. Even if I think that the 1 John passage spoke of being able to lose our salvation, it in no way addresses how we go on to ignore, or supersede all the verses that speak of assurance. And it's that point right there that can make, or break this discussion.

Prentis said:
I am sorry if you took offense Rach, and I concede this: I might not of been clear on the fact that OSAS leads many to despise the cross, but I do believe that you can doctrinally hold the OSAS view and accept the cross presented you and it's suffering.

If that is your case, that is good. But then I'm speaking to you on a doctrinal basis: while OSAS might not have led you to hold back from God, what is it teaching others when we present it as truth? How is our doctrine leading others who might not have had the same revelation of God as us, of his love, his nature, and might not be so moved as us to be crucified with him? How many gladly take on a free eternal salvation that is offered them selfishly, for their own safety? Meanwhile, Christ speaking to the disciples says 'whoever will follow me must take up his own cross', if we omit this from our teaching, how can we expect to make true disciples. True doctrine needs to work for anyone who believes after hearing, whether he has experienced anything of God or not.

We could, on the first day, preach of OSAS, and then the next day about taking up our own cross. But how many would, after believing they have received a free salvation, come back the second day to hear the message of the cross? If we take the example of the ten lepers, probably one out of ten.

This is why we must preach Christ crucified. We must die with him also, and it is imperative that we preach this truth along with the gospel, because it is indeed the gospel, it is an inseparable part of it.
I agree that correct doctrine is very, very important...thats why we're debating here. But the question is, isn't it, which IS the correct doctrine. Because correct doctrine needs to mesh perfectly...in one accord with all of scripture, with one intent...to glorify God as maker, redeemer...as everything.

My point is...I think you perhaps misunderstand the guts behind OSAS...because taught biblically, it is not in danger of making people 'ignore the message of taking up our crosses'.

I have never heard, even once, that following Jesus is going to be easy, fluffy and empty of suffering. Which is good, as my life would have made a lie of such preaching. There are enough verses in scripture to make it plain that loving and following Jesus will not just require us to 'take up our crosses', but force us to. And yet, despite that, we take the load with joy...because we have (presently) and will have (in glory) something so much better then whatever we are suffering through now.

I do understand your concern for harmonize the verses you consider of 'assurance' and those you consider 'warnings'. But if we make the assurance unquestionable, we make some of the warnings verse false. Some say directly, 'brethren', and say "lest you depart from the living God", that is being there already, you depart, leave.

However, consider that we are given assurance of protection in him. The great ark of our salvation does promise and assure protection, but only in himself. We have assurance that in him there is safety, if we make him our tower, yes we are safe, in the tower.

The verses of 'assurance' assure safety in him, they 'omit' (so to speak) the fact that it is precisely dependent upon our abiding and remaining under his protection. They can do this because it is in the rest of scripture, and because the context often makes it clear. I have found it impossible to make the promises unconditional without making the warnings false, but have found great clarity when the promises are given proper context: it gives full meaning both to the promises and to the warnings. Reading it this way, I've found the promises to be exceeding great and the warnings fearful (inspiring the fear of God we are called to).

Israel also received great promises, but Jesus said "how longed to gather you under my wings, but you would not". Jesus goes on "behold, your house is left desolate". They had similar promises of protection and prosperity (in a less spiritual way, more physical, but still real promises), and yet because they would not make God their ark, judgment happened upon them.

Are we better than them? Are we God's favorites so that even if we disobey as they did, we do not receive the same punishment? There lies my contention. God is no respecter of persons, we are only safe if we allow him to gather under his wings, and learn to abide and remain there.

Blessings!
Ok...I'm not sure that I disagree with you hugely here....but we still reach a different outcome. I agree that our security is entirely in Christ. It's because of Christ that we can be sure. And I must point out that being 'sure' doesn't stop us in the walk of sanctification...from confessing our sins and by the Spirit's help becoming more holy and Christ like.

I'm sure everyone here has gone through the 'assurance' verses again and again, so I won't again, but do keep in mind how many there are, and the sort of language that is used. Assurance, have, is, are, hope, given.....all in the here and now. And then there are the ones that say 'nothing' can take us from Christ once he has us....this list is complete...nothing, even ourselves, can rip us away from him. Very strong language and messages. Hard to ignore, and hard to supersede them with 'warning' verses as you would have us do.
So...let me try and put together a rational arguement of why those of us who believe in the perserverance of the saints, do it the other way around. How we take the 'assurance' passages and what you believe as 'warning' passages, as basically the same message....and here I will use some content by Wayne Grudem, as I feel he says it excellently, and I feel I've been struggling to put it in a way that explains clearly what I believe...

Consider the statement: "The perseverance of the saints means that all those who are truly born again will be kept by God's power and will persevere as Christians until the end of their lives, and that only those who persevere until the end have been truly born again."

While scripture repeatedly emphaizes that those who are truly born again will persevere to the end and will certainly have eternal life in heaven with God (see all those passages in the thread above!!), there are other passages that speak of the necessity of continuing in faith throughout life....these are the passages that you claim deny eternal security. These passages make us realise that what Peter said in 1 Peter 1:5 is true, namely, the God does not guard us apart from our faith, but only by working through our faith so that he enables us to continue to believe in him. In this way, those who continue to trust in Christ gain assurance that God is working in them and guarding them.

One example of this kind of passage is John 8:31-32: "Jesus then said to the Jews who had believed in him, 'If you continue in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.'" Jesus here is giving a warning that one evidence of genuine faith is continuing in his word, that is, continuing to believe what he says and living a life of obedience to his commands (santification).

Paul says to the Colossian Christians that Christ has reconciled them to God, "in order to present you holy and blameless and irreproachable before him, provided that you continue in the faith, stable and steadfast, not shifting from the hope of the gospel which you heard" (Col 1:22-23). It is only natural that Paul and the other NT writers would speak this way, for they are addressing groups of people who profess to be Christians, without being able to know the actual state of every person's heart. There may have been people at Colossae who had joing in the fellowship of the church, and perhaps even professed that they had faith in Christ and had been baptized into membership of the church, but who never had true saving faith. How is Paul to distinguish such people from true believers? How can he avoid giving them false assurance, assurance that they will be saved eternally when if fact they will not, unless they come to true repentance and faith? Paul knos that those whose faith is not real will eventually fall away from participation in the fellowship of the church. Therfore he tells his readers that they will ultimately be saved, "provided that you continue in the faith". Those who continue show thereby that they are genuine belivers. But those who do not continue in the faith show that there was no genuine faith in their hearts in the first place.

I could go on, Wayne has a brilliant chapter on it, and it goes thouroughly through each 'warning' verse, and some others as well. But this post is already too long. My point, I think, is that perseverance of the saints, or OSAS is a very biblically sound belief, and it doesn't contract other passages. My concern with denying this doctrine, is that I haven't, as yet, seen any sort of proof that biblically explains how it can be false.
 

williemac

New Member
Apr 29, 2012
1,094
65
0
Canada
Rach said:
Okay....as Dodo has been saying...only God truly knows a persons heart, and whether it has been regenerated or not. A pastor works on what people tell him. If a person tells him he "accepts Christ as Saviour and believes" then...not being God, the pastor has to believe him. On years of aquaintence the pastor might determine the truth behind such claim based on the 'fruit' this person is growing and showing.
So just because a Pastor tells a person 'they are saved' does not actually make it so. And I find it very, very hard to believe that you don't know (personally or have heard of) many people who are in the Church who claim to follow Jesus, but just don't grow 'good' fruit. We know from all Paul's warnings, Christ's as well, that these people are in the Church. Why? Good question...some becuase they like the culture, some because they want to belong somewhere, some because they grew up there and all their friends and family are there...and some because they are wolves. How many 'pastors' have you seen who talks the talk perfectly, but are clearly in it for the fame, money or followers? They exist, and they are not reborn into Christ.

For 'true' belief, one must 'believe' of course. But here we're talking about faith...having faith in Jesus as Lord and Saviour. Paul tells us that having a true, redeeming faith in Christ is a gift itself: Eph 2:8-10.
God touches our hearts, giving us believing faith and regenerating us....new birth. And this new birth leads to repentence...true repentence and a desire to walk in sanctification. Sadly....many people who call on Jesus' name, do not have this change at the heart level. They may say they do, but they do not.

Also....I sort of feel I should point out....you really didn't reply to my answer on the 1 John passage. Because biblically there is no reason to suppose it's talking about 'losing' our salvation...as I laid it all out. And I also feel the need to say, as I didn't in my previous post, that you said you feel the passage to be the 'harmonizing' verse that I was asking for. The passages that make both 'warning' and 'assurance' verses mesh together. Even if I think that the 1 John passage spoke of being able to lose our salvation, it in no way addresses how we go on to ignore, or supersede all the verses that speak of assurance. And it's that point right there that can make, or break this discussion.
I beg to differ re: your comment on Eph.2:8-10. The subject at hand is salvation. Paul said by grace we are saved, through faith. And that not of ourselves. What, not of ourselves? Salvation, of course. That is what is being received by grace. If faith is a gift, then it also comes by grace. This would mean that we get a gift of faith so that we can get a gift of salvation. How absurd! This flies in the face of other passages that speak of faith as the means by which we receive life from God. No mention in those passages that it is not actually our own faith. In fact, In Rom.10:9&10, Paul says.." if YOU believe in YOUR heart". As well, In the 5th chapter of Romans we can read that both life and righteousness are called gifts, and in my translation they are called "free" gifts. No mention there that faith is a gift. God 'touches the heart' by speaking to it. The gospel is His power to salvation. It is a message that must be heard, understood, and accepted. This will require humility, as we are also informed that God gives grace to the humble and resists the proud. Grace is not a gift to the proud. Therefore faith cannot be either.

It doesn't make sense to call faith for salvation a gift. The process includes the hearing that is required. We hear about our sin and the consequences. If we humbly accept this truth, we also hear about the sacrifice of Jesus for this sin, on our behalf. At that point if a person wants to have everlasting life, he knows that he simply can accept the offer of life that has been made available through the sacrifice of Jesus. This acceptance is called faith, because it requires that one 'believes' what he hears. Therefore as Paul said, faith comes by hearing. In contrast, those who insist that faith is a gift often also imply that it comes in the absence of any hearing, covertly as it were. (enter the Calvinist type of point of view)

Your comments on 1John are on point. That passage has nothing to do with repeating forgiveness over and over for salvation. Life is a one time gift. It cannot be repeated, as we can plainly grasp in Heb.6:1-6.

In fact, repentance basically means to change one's mind. Therefore since faith is the means to getting salvation (everlasting life), by accessing God's grace, then the change that is required is the change from unbelief to faith, as well as from pride to humility.

Blessings in Christ.
 

Dodo_David

Melmacian in human guise
Jul 13, 2013
1,048
63
0
williemac said:
It doesn't make sense to call faith for salvation a gift. The process includes the hearing that is required. We hear about our sin and the consequences. If we humbly accept this truth, we also hear about the sacrifice of Jesus for this sin, on our behalf. At that point if a person wants to have everlasting life, he knows that he simply can accept the offer of life that has been made available through the sacrifice of Jesus. This acceptance is called faith, because it requires that one 'believes' what he hears. Therefore as Paul said, faith comes by hearing. In contrast, those who insist that faith is a gift often also imply that it comes in the absence of any hearing, covertly as it were. (enter the Calvinist type of point of view)
In John 6:44, Jesus says, "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day."

In John 6:65, Jesus says, "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them."

So, according to Jesus, God the Father has to do something first before a person will accept Jesus - namely, draw that person to Jesus.

Jesus repeated this lesson in order to explain to his disciples why some of the Jews rejected Him after He preached to them.
The non-believing Jews had heard directly from the lips of Jesus, but they still did not believe Him.
Why? "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them."

As for something not making sense, in Isaiah 55:8-9, God says the following:


For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,”declares the Lord.
As the heavens are higher than the earth,so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.”

What God does doesn't have to make sense to us in order for it to make sense to Him.
Indeed, because God's ways and thoughts are higher than ours, we aren't able to fully understand them while we remain on this side of eternity.
 

williemac

New Member
Apr 29, 2012
1,094
65
0
Canada
Dodo_David said:
In John 6:44, Jesus says, "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day."

In John 6:65, Jesus says, "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them."

So, according to Jesus, God the Father has to do something first before a person will accept Jesus - namely, draw that person to Jesus.

Jesus repeated this lesson in order to explain to his disciples why some of the Jews rejected Him after He preached to them.
The non-believing Jews had heard directly from the lips of Jesus, but they still did not believe Him.
Why? "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them."

As for something not making sense, in Isaiah 55:8-9, God says the following:




What God does doesn't have to make sense to us in order for it to make sense to Him.
Indeed, because God's ways and thoughts are higher than ours, we aren't able to fully understand them while we remain on this side of eternity.
Do you honestly see God as One who deliberately causes some to reject His Son? In terms of cause and effect, you have chosen the wrong side of the coin. He draws those who humbly accept Jesus. He resists the proud. The Pharisees were self righteous. That was the issue. You seem to use the word "draw" all the while implying "manipulate". God draws. Men manipulate. His ways are higher. He uses love, not brainwashing. His love is for all to see. It draws those who are ripe for it.

Jesus did not contradict Paul's statement in Romans 1. The gospel is God's power to salvation. Yes, God draws men to Him whom He wills. He uses the gospel, and the Holy Spirit uses the conviction of sin. However, I did also mention the criteria. He gives grace to the humble and resists the proud. Jesus gave an example of just that in Luke 18:10-14. Those who humble themselves will be exalted. Don't think for a second that God randomly chooses those whom He will draw to Jesus. His ways are higher alright. It is in sinful man's wheelhouse to think in terms of such things as control, favoritism, partiality. Therefore the idea that faith for salvation is something that is implanted in a select group is not supported but rather refuted, in scripture. God is both merciful and just. He is full of grace. He pleads with the world to respond to His act of reconciliation. This is stated in 2Cor.5:19,20. The fact is that He desires to draw all men to Jesus.He is willing that none should perish.

Faith is every man's ability. Humility is every man's choice. (mankind). Man is given the ability to think, reason, and respond. The real gift was that of the Son of God to the world. He is the gift. It is given to those who take it freely, with no cause for boasting. This is also mentioned in Eph.2.

It is not uncommon to twist Jesus' words in John 6:44. He is not implying that God does not intend or desire to draw all men. He is merely saying that God is the initiator, as seen in His sending of His Son, which is the subject of the context. In fact, John 6:44 comes after John 6:40. Here it is..." And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life, and I will raise him up on the last day". This is repeated in vs.47. The criteria in that context is faith. And there is certainly no indication there that faith is outside of a man's ability that needs to be a covertly implanted "gift".

The criteria in John 6 is whether Jesus will be accepted or rejected by anyone. (6:50,51, for example).
 

Rach1370

New Member
Apr 17, 2010
1,801
107
0
44
Australia
Dodo_David said:
In John 6:44, Jesus says, "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day."

In John 6:65, Jesus says, "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them."

So, according to Jesus, God the Father has to do something first before a person will accept Jesus - namely, draw that person to Jesus.

Jesus repeated this lesson in order to explain to his disciples why some of the Jews rejected Him after He preached to them.
The non-believing Jews had heard directly from the lips of Jesus, but they still did not believe Him.
Why? "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them."

As for something not making sense, in Isaiah 55:8-9, God says the following:




What God does doesn't have to make sense to us in order for it to make sense to Him.
Indeed, because God's ways and thoughts are higher than ours, we aren't able to fully understand them while we remain on this side of eternity.
Verly Nicely said!



williemac said:
I beg to differ re: your comment on Eph.2:8-10. The subject at hand is salvation. Paul said by grace we are saved, through faith. And that not of ourselves. What, not of ourselves? Salvation, of course. That is what is being received by grace. If faith is a gift, then it also comes by grace. This would mean that we get a gift of faith so that we can get a gift of salvation. How absurd! This flies in the face of other passages that speak of faith as the means by which we receive life from God. No mention in those passages that it is not actually our own faith. In fact, In Rom.10:9&10, Paul says.." if YOU believe in YOUR heart". As well, In the 5th chapter of Romans we can read that both life and righteousness are called gifts, and in my translation they are called "free" gifts. No mention there that faith is a gift. God 'touches the heart' by speaking to it. The gospel is His power to salvation. It is a message that must be heard, understood, and accepted. This will require humility, as we are also informed that God gives grace to the humble and resists the proud. Grace is not a gift to the proud. Therefore faith cannot be either.


It doesn't make sense to call faith for salvation a gift. The process includes the hearing that is required. We hear about our sin and the consequences. If we humbly accept this truth, we also hear about the sacrifice of Jesus for this sin, on our behalf. At that point if a person wants to have everlasting life, he knows that he simply can accept the offer of life that has been made available through the sacrifice of Jesus. This acceptance is called faith, because it requires that one 'believes' what he hears. Therefore as Paul said, faith comes by hearing. In contrast, those who insist that faith is a gift often also imply that it comes in the absence of any hearing, covertly as it were. (enter the Calvinist type of point of view)

Your comments on 1John are on point. That passage has nothing to do with repeating forgiveness over and over for salvation. Life is a one time gift. It cannot be repeated, as we can plainly grasp in Heb.6:1-6.

In fact, repentance basically means to change one's mind. Therefore since faith is the means to getting salvation (everlasting life), by accessing God's grace, then the change that is required is the change from unbelief to faith, as well as from pride to humility.

Blessings in Christ.
I'm unsure if we actually disagree here, or if my clumsy attempt to explain something has led to a misunderstanding. So let me try again to explain what I believe the bible says about 'faith' and salvation...or conversion.

I believe the bible teaches that for an unregenerate sinner to become saved, the work, from beginning to end, is that of God. And when I say 'work' here, I am referring to any such act that would garner praise or glory. That way, we may boast in nothing.

The word "conversion" is only used once in the bible, in Acts:

So, being sent on their way by the church, they passed through both Phoenicia and Samaria, describing in detail the conversion of the Gentiles, and brought great joy to all the brothers. (Acts 15:3, ESV)

We see that this act of 'conversion' involves both repentance and faith in other passages in Acts:

When they heard these things they fell silent. And they glorified God, saying, “Then to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance that leads to life.” (Acts 11:18, ESV)

And when they arrived and gathered the church together, they declared all that God had done with them, and how he had opened a door of faith to the Gentiles. (Acts 14:27, ESV)

Becoming a Christian involves both repentance and faith...you can't have one without the other...and this means that a saving faith in Christ always involves a profound change of heart. It's not just as simple as 'believing'...even Satan believes (James 2:19). So saving faith is far deeper and much more pervasive than just believing.

But we come to a problem then, as we know that man, by himself is:

for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, (Romans 3:23, ESV)

as it is written:
None is righteous, no, not one;
no one understands;
no one seeks for God. (Romans 3:10-11, ESV)

Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. (Romans 1:22-23, ESV)

We are: Blind (2 Cor 4:4), Hard (Ezekiel 11:19; 36:26), dead (Eph 2:1, 5), unable to submit to the law of God (Rom 8:7-8), and by our very nature are children of wrath (Eph 2:3).

If man is so lost and hopeless, so incapable of even understanding that he needs to search for God, how do you suppose that we pull ourselves out of our deceptions and sinfulness, to even see the glory of God, let alone have enough faith in him that it leads to redemption??

We begin to see that the wonder of conversion is a gift of God in Acts:

When they heard these things they fell silent. And they glorified God, saying, “Then to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance that leads to life.” (Acts 11:18, ESV)

God exalted him at his right hand as Leader and Savior, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins. And we are witnesses to these things, and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey him.” (Acts 5:31-32, ESV)

And when they arrived and gathered the church together, they declared all that God had done with them, and how he had opened a door of faith to the Gentiles. (Acts 14:27, ESV)

One who heard us was a woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple goods, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to pay attention to what was said by Paul. (Acts 16:14, ESV)

As John Piper said: "We will never fully appreciate what a deep and awesome thing conversion is until we own up to the fact that it is a miracle."

So...keeping in mind that we do not just sin...we are sinful - that we are hard, dead, unable to submit...when we hear the gospel we are unable to positively respond to it unless God performs the miracle of regeneration.

Now, I'm not saying that repentance and faith are not ours in a way...that we are automatons that enact commands from God. But before we repent and believe, God must do His work to overcome our hard and rebellious hearts.

I suppose, in a way, you would call what God does 'regeneration', and then how we respond to that 'conversion'....and that they happen at almost the same instant...but God's work must come first.

I hope that makes sense, that I've managed to put that clearly...because the bible is clear, even if I am not. If man was able to be intimately aware of what would happen without God...his need for God, and had the ability to 'pull' himself up to believe without first a work done by God....then no one would die without Christ...how could they knowing the truth??
 

williemac

New Member
Apr 29, 2012
1,094
65
0
Canada
quote from #328: "So...keeping in mind that we do not just sin...we are sinful - that we are hard, dead, unable to submit...when we hear the gospel we are unable to positively respond to it unless God performs the miracle of regeneration."

I regret to reply that:

I wholeheartedly disagree with the concept that some hold to, which is that God provides regeneration first in order for faith and repentance to be possible in a person. The bible specifically states that the gospel is God's power to salvation. You have transferred this power to regeneration. So now instead of God speaking to people, He manipulates them covertly. Really? When the bible says such things as He granted repentance, why would we assume that it was done through covert regeneration? That is not implied in those contexts.

Regeneration is not even a biblical term. Therefore there is no agreed upon definition for the use of it in relation to the so called work that God does in a human heart. As well, there is no agreed upon definition for the term "free will". We tend to go around in circles when it comes to discussions that use these terms.

But I always like to cut to the chase and ask the question that usually has no answer from those who support similar positions as yours. The question in context of this discussion is this: What is the criteria that God uses to decide that a person will receive His so called "work of regeneration"? (hint; I have mentioned the criteria)

As well, I did not dispute the need for repentance. But I did clarify the base meaning of that word, which is to change one's mind. Repentance is not...I repeat is NOT a resolve to quit sinning. In scripture, unless sin is mentioned as the object of the repentance, the turning from it is not implied automatically in the use of the word. It is people who automatically imply it, as the word has been mis-defined by many. What this unfortunate definition does is to place a burden of works on the individual for his salvation. No matter how much we insist salvation is by grace, the misuse of that word will put leaven into a heart, causing one to be double minded. Just saying.. ^_^
 

musterion

New Member
Aug 4, 2013
215
5
0
williemac said:
I regret to reply that:

I wholeheartedly disagree with the concept that some hold to, which is that God provides regeneration first in order for faith and repentance to be possible in a person.
Don't regret it one bit. Pre-faith regeneration is a false gospel.
 

This Vale Of Tears

Indian Papist
Jun 13, 2013
1,346
61
0
Idaho
musterion said:
Don't regret it one bit. Pre-faith regeneration is a false gospel.
The Calvinist notion of it is. If we start from the understanding that God calls us to repentance and apart from that calling we're unable to come to him, we're on solid ground. But then the Calvinists suggest that God only calls certain people and by default consigns everyone else to inescapable perdition. This is an obscene distortion of God's character. God calls everyone to repentance and salvation and is at work in the lives of every human being to draw them into relationship with him.
 

rockytopva

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Dec 31, 2010
5,160
2,362
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
This Vale Of Tears said:
The Calvinist notion of it is. If we start from the understanding that God calls us to repentance and apart from that calling we're unable to come to him, we're on solid ground. But then the Calvinists suggest that God only calls certain people and by default consigns everyone else to inescapable perdition. This is an obscene distortion of God's character. God calls everyone to repentance and salvation and is at work in the lives of every human being to draw them into relationship with him.
Agreed! Good comment... And welcome back by the way.
 

This Vale Of Tears

Indian Papist
Jun 13, 2013
1,346
61
0
Idaho
rockytopva said:
Agreed! Good comment... And welcome back by the way.
Thanks. I haven't gone anywhere, just driving a truck and spending time with my family. Trying to be home more often since we're due to have another baby in January.
 

musterion

New Member
Aug 4, 2013
215
5
0
This Vale Of Tears said:
But then the Calvinists suggest that God only calls certain people and by default consigns everyone else to inescapable perdition. This is an obscene distortion of God's character.
True but keep in mind from whom Calvin got much if not most of his notions, including (I'm pretty sure) that one.

Hint: it wasn't a protestant.
 

musterion

New Member
Aug 4, 2013
215
5
0
I mean the guy Calvin got many of his (what we would call) Calvinistic notions from. That guy wasn't a protestant.
 

This Vale Of Tears

Indian Papist
Jun 13, 2013
1,346
61
0
Idaho
Much to his credit, this is where John Calvin got his teachings from.

the-bible.jpg
 

Rach1370

New Member
Apr 17, 2010
1,801
107
0
44
Australia
williemac said:
quote from #328: "So...keeping in mind that we do not just sin...we are sinful - that we are hard, dead, unable to submit...when we hear the gospel we are unable to positively respond to it unless God performs the miracle of regeneration."

I regret to reply that:

I wholeheartedly disagree with the concept that some hold to, which is that God provides regeneration first in order for faith and repentance to be possible in a person. The bible specifically states that the gospel is God's power to salvation. You have transferred this power to regeneration. So now instead of God speaking to people, He manipulates them covertly. Really? When the bible says such things as He granted repentance, why would we assume that it was done through covert regeneration? That is not implied in those contexts.
You're free to believe that I suppose. But for the purpose of conversation, perhaps you could address the passages in scripture that show that on our own we are hopeless, sinful and dead. Perhaps you could explain, if we could 'do it ourselves' why Christ had to come, and after him, why it was necessary for the Holy Spirit to come and work within us? How is that to become a Christian our nature has to change so radically that it is termed 'new birth'. Our physical birth was hardly of our doing, and I truly believe (as I showed in my last post) that the bible tells us that our spiritual birth is not of our doing either...I believe that Christ was making that very point when he used 'birth' as an example of what happens when we become his.

Regeneration is not even a biblical term. Therefore there is no agreed upon definition for the use of it in relation to the so called work that God does in a human heart. As well, there is no agreed upon definition for the term "free will". We tend to go around in circles when it comes to discussions that use these terms.
"Trinity" is not a biblical term either, but do you want to deny that the bible clearly teaches it?? And as for there being 'no agreed upon definition'....I would say that they definition is what scripture paints. And as I've pointed out, scripture calls us dead. Thats pretty strong wording for someone supposedly capable 'regenerating' themselves. The bible also says that we are blind and that no one is righteous. No one seeks God, and no one understands. So let me ask you....if we are so 'dead' and 'blind' that we cannot even understand our need to seek God...let alone actually seeking him, how on earth are you proposing that we ourselves do this deed??
I've trotted out the bible verses that back these ideas, I'd appreciate it if you'd do the same. I'm not one of these people who refuse to even consider the opposite side, I just like biblical proof that maybe I'm wrong. At the moment, I honestly see scripture telling us that without the work of God in our hearts, we haven't got a hope.

But I always like to cut to the chase and ask the question that usually has no answer from those who support similar positions as yours. The question in context of this discussion is this: What is the criteria that God uses to decide that a person will receive His so called "work of regeneration"? (hint; I have mentioned the criteria)
Criteria? Even if God did have a criteria, why would we think we could understand it, or question it? The bible is quite clear. As a Sovereign God, who he chooses to save or damn is for his purposes, his plan, his glory.

though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls—(Rom 9:11)

What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God's part? By no means! For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills. You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory—(Rom 9:14-23)

even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved. (Eph 1:4-6)

The criteria? God does as he wills, according to his purpose, for his glory, and we have no right to question such things.

As well, I did not dispute the need for repentance. But I did clarify the base meaning of that word, which is to change one's mind. Repentance is not...I repeat is NOT a resolve to quit sinning. In scripture, unless sin is mentioned as the object of the repentance, the turning from it is not implied automatically in the use of the word. It is people who automatically imply it, as the word has been mis-defined by many. What this unfortunate definition does is to place a burden of works on the individual for his salvation. No matter how much we insist salvation is by grace, the misuse of that word will put leaven into a heart, causing one to be double minded. Just saying.. ^_^
I agree that repentance is not 'a resolve to quit sinning'...that is foolishness as clearly we will not suceed until we have been glorified (read: dead). But what it does mean is that we need to choose to use our freedom from sin to actively seek Gods will. In other words...as the Spirit convicts us of sins we commit, it's not so much a determination on our behalf to 'stop sinning, stand up straight and get it right this time'....it's more that we instead turn from it, facing Christ and his light. We choose to think what Jesus wants from us, not what we want for ourselves...we determine to turn right, rather than left. I also believe that true repentance needs to come with a certain amount of grief and joy. Grief that we have sinned against our Lord, and joy that we are not enslaved to it, and that we are loved enough to have it pointed out to us by the Spirit.
musterion said:
Don't regret it one bit. Pre-faith regeneration is a false gospel.
Biblical proof for that claim? I've laid out mine, show me yours....
 

musterion

New Member
Aug 4, 2013
215
5
0
First, let's be clear on one thing. Faith, most simply put, is simply believing what God wants us to believe, whatever it may be.

Genesis 4:7 - Cain was born as "dead in sin" as anyone yet was given a clear choice by God to sin or not to sin. Cain heard, understood and could have believed and obeyed God, but CHOSE not to. Is it because God didn't give Cain the ability to believe what He said? If so, God is a liar because He pretended sincerity and pretended Cain had a choice when he really didn't.

John 5:39-40 - They WOULD NOT come to Him for life because they refused to believe on Him. If the real reason they WOULD NOT come is because they COULD NOT come, then Christ's judgment against them is a lie.

Romans 10:17 - Faith comes from hearing the Word of God, not from first being regenerated by Him to be able to hear it and believe it. Paul would have told us if that were the case. God draws, true, but any and all can hear and believe apart from God enabling them to do so.

Ephesians 2:8-9 - Faith is excluded as "the gift" because [a] faith is never said to be "of works" but salvation (wrongly) is, and salvation is "not of ourselves" but faith is of ourselves, else the urgings to believe and be saved and the warnings for not doing so are lies.

2 Thessalonians 2:10-12 - Those who perish here are said to perish because they CHOSE not receive a love of the truth and CHOSE not believe the truth, but rather clung to the pleasures of unrighteousness. They CHOSE to not be saved when they had the opportunity, meaning God COULD NOT force saving faith upon them. If God is love and COULD force saving faith upon men, would He not do so for all? I believe He would. But He doesn't. So it is throughout Scripture - God wants to be believed but man is free to believe Him or not, at his peril.

God draws, but does He make anyone believe Him? That's not even the right question: Does He need to? No, doing so would negate saving faith as the Bible describes it and make it a sham. It likewise makes condemnation for LACK of faith a sham, too, because neither one is genuine and God would be a liar.

So to say God must regenerate anyone before they can truly hear and truly trust what He says is a false gospel because that not only isn't how the Bible says one is saved, it also removes human all responsibility - saved or lost - from the equation. The Bible says faith is a capacity all people have; what they CHOOSE to do or not do with it is the real issue.

Rach said:
Biblical proof for that claim? I've laid out mine, show me yours....
 

Dodo_David

Melmacian in human guise
Jul 13, 2013
1,048
63
0
Folks, the OSAS issue is not identical to the issue of Calvinism.

Whereas as the former is a feature of the latter, plenty of churches accept the former without accepting the latter.