OSAS debunked by Ezek 18 and Matt 18??

I have been reading,
"Hear, o my people, hearken well, / I testify to thee / Thou ancient stock of Israel / If thou wilt list to me / Throughout the land of thy abode / No alien god shall be / Nor shalt thou to a foreign god / In honour bend thy knee / I am the Lord thy God which brought / Thee out of Egypt-land / Ask large enough, and I, besought / Will grant thy full demand. / And yet my people would not hear / Nor hearken to my voice / And Israel whom I loved so dear / Misliked Me for his choice. ..." Ps81, Milton.

The last stanza, "Misliked Me for his choice".
Depravity holds the will in bondage still this day. You think you may choose? You may not - thou shallt! Thou shallt choose, and choose of thine choice - of the heathens' gods and between them, but I and my house, we, shall, serve the LORD. That, is the overriding will of God, called, grace.

 

GE

Steaver, you know, there are necessary ROI (return on investment) positions in this world. Some people just have the ability to open one's eyes to so many new and good things, it's just not true. We have rhinos and hypos and things like that in Africa, but thick skinned and thick skulled things like you Americans have, we must still discover.

 

It is an exercise for the reader to seek the knowledge of the parable. By process of elimination one can clearly eliminate "saved then lost" since salvation is "by grace through faith and NOT of yourself". The act of forgiving another to obtain salvation would be "of yourself" and this would cause a contradiction so it must be rejected outright.

Always use all scriptures to test what you think the focus may be on. In this case the focus of "saved then lost" fails completely.

One "other option" (other than saved then lost) could be that those who do not forgive from the heart those who trespass against them will likewise not receive forgiveness and will suffer torment until it is settled.

There are differing lessons that we can extract from the parables. But we must be careful not to go beyond what is written and also not to contradict those scriptures that are very precise when speaking of salvation.

You will not find the words saved or faith in the parable, therefore we must not automatically conclude the parable is speaking about salvation. It could be, in one sense that the man declared his unregenerated heart by not forgiving the ten bucks when he had been forgiven millions. This would seem very unlikely for someone who would have experienced the love of God through Jesus Christ.

I believe you must take in the whole chapter to make a right judgment of it.

The man in the parable showed no sign of having been born-again which is what we called "saved". I believe it is agreed upon by most if not all born-again Christians that refusing to forgive another such a small debt would not be found amongst us. Anyone here have that kind of heart since being saved???

If the man was given a new heart (born-again-saved) as you claim, I can see no way (as I understand born of God from the scriptures) he would have taken another by the throat demanding ten bucks.

So you are left with seeking the lesson of the parable without the possibility that it is warning against receiving a new heart (stoney one removed), becoming a new creature in Christ, having the gift of the Holy Spirit, receiving the love of God and then grabing another by the throat, demanding money be repaid and ending up in eternal hell.

You will find the words saved and faith (also "not of yourselves" ) in this scripture......"by grace ye have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God".

If you let the scriptures just say as much as they say you will have no conflict with your eternal security being fully in the hands of God in Christ.

HP answered with.....

My response as all can see was not a "dodge" but rather a follow up with....

HP resonded with.....

As all can see, this is a "I choose not to elaborate". One can see why.

As all can see, it is not I who "dodges" the questions.

(Page five and no posters found yet that agree with your view that the man in Matt 18 was saved then lost for not forgiving the ten bucks).

God Bless! :thumbs:

 

GE,

You lost me on those post. Sorry.

God Bless! :wavey:

 

HP: Being the nice man that I am, I will indulge you once again. Listen closely and read my lips. :laugh:

I AGREE WITH BR IN HIS ASSESMENT THAT MATT 18 SPEAKS DIRECTLY TO THE ISSUE OF SALVATION REVOKED.

How’ s that? Having posted this twice I should be counted as two posters that agree with BR, not just one.

 

That is great!

Actually it is the first time you posted "salvation revoked" , thus the reason for my claims.

Well I stand corrected brother BobRyan. HP also believes Matt 18 is the picture of a saved man having his salvation taken away for not forgiving a person who owes him.

I'm not certain he has said as much in past post, which was my reason for the comment in the first place, but I will concede the point. You do have support from another in your view of Matt 18.

The problem with you guy's view is that it directly conflicts with "grace through faith and that not of yourselves". You see the "not of yourselves" would be violated in your view that something I do as righteous has anything to do with salvation.

Tts 3:5Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

One must ask, is forgiving another a righteous "work, deed, act, etc" ?

If you answer "no". Then it is an unrighteous act?

Surely the unbiased reader can see the conflict your view of Matt 18 brings to the word of God. God does not author confusion. The word of God is very clear on this subject to be sure God gets every last drop of credit for saving His children.

God Bless! :thumbs:

 

HP: Preach it Steaver. BR and I sure do:thumbs:

 

The question in the OP has been answered, therefore, we can move on. There are plently of OSAS threads going at this time so this thread is now closed.