The Doctrine of OSAS

[Barrd]

Sure, God knows the end from the beginning...that's a given.
Have you ever peeked at the end of a story you were reading? Maybe you were burning with curiosity to know "whodunit"? And then, once you knew the end, certain things the characters in the story did...or didn't do...made more sense to you....

As a writer myself, I can tell you that sometimes a character...even a well-known and beloved character...can take on a life of his/her own, and begin doing things the writer had not originally expected. I've been surprised a time or two by my own characters.

But I digress. Knowing ahead of time what someone is going to do is not the same as actually forcing them to do it.

And sometimes, our characters can surprise us.

 

[ATP]

This thread is a form of insanity.

We keep repeating the same thing, but no one is willing to change.

 

[StanJ]

Then you still do not understand the parable of the four soils. First, second, and third soils. Only the good soil has salvation...

Actually only the first soil does NOT show salvation...the other 3 do, IF you understand what Jesus actually explains in Luke 8:11-15 (NIV)

1. Those along the path are the ones who hear, and then the devil comes and takes away the word from their hearts, so that they may not believe and be saved.
2. Those on the rocky ground are the ones who receive the word with joy when they hear it, but they have no root. They believe for a while, but in the time of testing they fall away.
3. The seed that fell among thorns stands for those who hear, but as they go on their way they are choked by life’s worries, riches and pleasures, and they do not mature.
4. But the seed on good soil stands for those with a noble and good heart, who hear the word, retain it, and by persevering produce a crop.

Obviously you agree with what Jesus says in v12 & 15. I wonder why you don't agree with what He says in v13 & 14?

 

[StanJ]

Stan,

I am not a Calvinist...this has been your false belief all along...

I do not believe in limited atonement. You have had a straw man in your head through our debate...

Neither am I reformed...

As far as TULIP is concerned maybe TUP...

So you're a 3 point Calvinist. Well IMO that is still a Calvinist, and that also means you DO support Reformed Theology, just not ALL of it.
I'm not quite sure how you justify accepting U, but not L? In any event as we are dealing with U here, let's just stick to it and not bring in non sequitur components shall we. It's hard enough to pin you down on one issue let alone 3, 4 or 5.

 

[Barrd]

I'm afraid I'm not terribly familiar with Calvinism. TUP? It sounds kinda nasty...

 

[StanJ]

Because this post is a red herring...

What I can't comprehend is why people would think God would start saving someone that He knows will eventually apostatize. God is omniscient and logical. This premise goes against both of these traits of God.

Salvation is not something to be lost, it can only be gained.

Every time you read a warning passage ask yourself, "Self, which soil is God talking about here?"

Jesus states He will not lose any the Father has given to Him. These are those whose names have been in the Lambs book of life since before the foundations of the world. Jesus says "I, myself! Will raise them at the last day..."

What part of that do people not believe?

Come on, now you're just avoiding my direct questions. This is a clear example of what deprogrammers go through.

Oh, and BTW, you have been told constantly that no one here is purporting that anyone LOSE their salvation. We are dealing with a willful choice to fall or walk away.

 

[StanJ]

I'm afraid I'm not terribly familiar with Calvinism. TUP? It sounds kinda nasty...

Total Depravity (also known as Total Inability and Original Sin)
Unconditional Election
Limited Atonement (also known as Particular Atonement)
Irresistible Grace
Perseverance of the Saints (also known as Once Saved Always Saved)

 

[Barrd]

Total Depravity (also known as Total Inability and Original Sin)
Unconditional Election
Limited Atonement (also known as Particular Atonement)
Irresistible Grace
Perseverance of the Saints (also known as Once Saved Always Saved)

Oh. Thanks, Stan.

 

[mjrhealth]

It is my contention that the Bible is intended for simple people.
Fishermen. Carpenters. Tentmakers. Housewives.

And when Jesus sent His Holy Spirit He sent Him to those who believe Him.

And as it says in teh bible,

1Co_1:18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

See unbelief...

Eph 2:4 But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,
Eph 2:5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved
Eph 2:6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:

But to those who believe it is the power of God, and to Him be all the glory.

In all His love

 

[justaname]

Actually only the first soil does NOT show salvation...the other 3 do, IF you understand what Jesus actually explains in Luke 8:11-15 (NIV)

• Those along the path are the ones who hear, and then the devil comes and takes away the word from their hearts, so that they may not believe and be saved.
• Those on the rocky ground are the ones who receive the word with joy when they hear it, but they have no root. They believe for a while, but in the time of testing they fall away.
• The seed that fell among thorns stands for those who hear, but as they go on their way they are choked by life’s worries, riches and pleasures, and they do not mature.
• But the seed on good soil stands for those with a noble and good heart, who hear the word, retain it, and by persevering produce a crop.

Obviously you agree with what Jesus says in v12 & 15. I wonder why you don't agree with what He says in v13 & 14?

So 1,2,and 3 are not saved...4 is. At what point in time in God's omniscience were they being saved? Is it possible they believed in vain as described by Paul?

I say never were they being saved from God's perspective. They believed in vain. They had no salvation to begin with, their faith was not salvific.

 

[justaname]

So you're a 3 point Calvinist. Well IMO that is still a Calvinist, and that also means you DO support Reformed Theology, just not ALL of it.
I'm not quite sure how you justify accepting U, but not L? In any event as we are dealing with U here, let's just stick to it and not bring in non sequitur components shall we. It's hard enough to pin you down on one issue let alone 3, 4 or 5.

No Stan I support what is biblical. You are the one labeling while I support my positions with Scripture.

Call me what you like...

 

[justaname]

Come on, now you're just avoiding my direct questions. This is a clear example of what deprogrammers go through.

Oh, and BTW, you have been told constantly that no one here is purporting that anyone LOSE their salvation. We are dealing with a willful choice to fall or walk away.

And this is still a red herring. What have you said about the post? Nothing...


This brings up the issue why you terminated the conversation previously so I will repost...

Post #1431 this is yours...

"The calling is EFFECTIVE, as it comes after one is saved. Whether it remains effective is up to the individual who is called."

Who is prevaricating? You clearly state here the call is effective...

So which way is it? Is the call effective or not?

Speaking a bit on the OSAS subject...

​I have continually said I do not like the language of OSAS, rather I support the perseverance of the saints doctrine. This is corroborated in the scriptures.


The "loss of salvation" issue is something we did agree upon at one point in time, yet I am unclear how you hold this position.

You clearly state in the quote above that the calling is after one is saved. Then you say one does not necessarily stay effective in the calling.

I understand that to mean they are "saved" before they are called, then they no longer are "saved" if they don't continue. Is this correct? I apologize for my ignorance of your position here but this is what I am understanding from your communications.

Would this not constitute having salvation then losing it?

 

[brakelite]

Here is the rub...we are not eternal like God, so we must abide to gain salvation. The exhortations are real. The warning passages have validity in our lives because not all abide. Sin is not the issue because Jesus atones for sin but unbelief will cause a branch to wither.

Isn't that what I said in points 1 and 4 previously?

 

[justaname]

Isn't that what I said in points 1 and 4 previously?

No because you said God will not override our will. The logical conclusion of this idea is deism. This simply is not supported in scripture, rather scripture is littered with evidence God does and continues to be active in the life and will of men. Jonah said No God, and ended up in a great fish to finally submit to God.

 

[StanJ]

No Stan I support what is biblical. You are the one labeling while I support my positions with Scripture.

Trying to pin you down is not labeling. Being equivocal about what you believe makes no sense, unless you know some of the doctrine is indefensible. I only bring it up because you did. I'm more than willing to stick to this sole issue if you are and don't bring them up again.

 

[StanJ]

And this is still a red herring. What have you said about the post? Nothing...


This brings up the issue why you terminated the conversation previously so I will repost...

Post #1431 this is yours...

"The calling is EFFECTIVE, as it comes after one is saved. Whether it remains effective is up to the individual who is called."

Who is prevaricating? You clearly state here the call is effective...

So which way is it? Is the call effective or not?

Speaking a bit on the OSAS subject...

​I have continually said I do not like the language of OSAS, rather I support the perseverance of the saints doctrine. This is corroborated in the scriptures.


The "loss of salvation" issue is something we did agree upon at one point in time, yet I am unclear how you hold this position.

You clearly state in the quote above that the calling is after one is saved. Then you say one does not necessarily stay effective in the calling.

I understand that to mean they are "saved" before they are called, then they no longer are "saved" if they don't continue. Is this correct? I apologize for my ignorance of your position here but this is what I am understanding from your communications.

Would this not constitute having salvation then losing it?

You're still avoiding my direct questions, and I won't move on from them so you can answer them or not, your choice obviously, but don't expect me to answer your question until you start answering mine.

 

[StanJ]

No because you said God will not override our will. The logical conclusion of this idea is deism. This simply is not supported in scripture, rather scripture is littered with evidence God does and continues to be active in the life and will of men. Jonah said No God, and ended up in a great fish to finally submit to God.

That's your assumption or assertion, not a logical conclusion. BTW, how God handled his OT prophets and how he handles us are two different covenants. We're not under the written LAW anymore, so it's disingenuous to try and use these kind of OT examples to make a point, that is already invalid.

 

[justaname]

That's your assumption or assertion, not a logical conclusion. BTW, how God handled his OT prophets and how he handles us are two different covenants. We're not under the written LAW anymore, so it's disingenuous to try and use these kind of OT examples to make a point, that is already invalid.

Saul of Tarsus was on his way to capture and possibly kill Christians. Jesus struck him with blindness and changed his life completely....

OT examples are completely valid when discussing how God interferes in the will and affairs of men.

If God does not override man's will then Jesus' intercession is powerless. Praying for someone to come to salvation is pointless. God would not be sovereign, man would be.

The logical conclusion to that is deism.

 

[justaname]

You're still avoiding my direct questions, and I won't move on from them so you can answer them or not, your choice obviously, but don't expect me to answer your question until you start answering mine.

These are questions that remain unanswered by you prior to any questions you raised...btw I don't even know of questions I did not answer from you.

Please state them clearly...

 

[Barrd]

Obviously, God created man with free will...and the ability to disobey.
Events in the Garden of Eden are proof of this.