The OSAS camp verses the Anti-OSAS camp. Sometimes as I listen to these arguments I get the feeling that much of the disagreements are due to a lack of understanding just what each camp truly believes, and that maybe either side just isn't doing an adequate job of conveying their message. Plastering proof text all over the screen (by either camp) simply does not persuade anyone. It does not get to the core of the issue. The issue is justification, if we cannot agree on the how one is justified before God then moving on into other scriptures which speak of "warnings and threats" will be meaningless, or worse, only confusing to the reader. There are many passages which speak to justification, but one in particular is absolutely clear about the law and it's role in justifying, so let's take a look at it, ask ourselves a question or two, settle this issue of justification as pertaining to the law, and then move on from there. For the law is probably the most debated topic between the two sides. Gal 5, Paul scolds the Galatian Jewish believers for demanding that the Gentile believers be circumcised in order to be justified before God. We know that being circumcised is taking a vow, or making a covenant between the person and God to obey the law. We know that it is not the act of circumcision in itself Paul is opposing, but rather the covenant behind the sign which is an oath to keep the whole law. This leads Paul to declare this statement; "Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace". Now here is the simple question that will reveal unto the reader just where they stand before God.... Whosoever reading this OP believes they are justified by the law?