Faith and OSAS. Issues in Conflict

All thoughts, or so it would appear, demand certain logical ends. OSAO is no exception. If OSAS is true, and men can be cognizant of it pertaining to their salvation personally, certain things are logically assumed. The issue I wish to address is the issue of salvation held by faith or salvation held by absolute knowledge as OSAS assumes.

If one states that OSAS is true, they must possess knowledge where all doubt is forever eliminated and the notion held, eliminating any possibility of deception or error. My question to the list concerns ones idea of faith, and what logical ends such a notion as faith demands.

Is it possible to have faith in ones salvation and hold to OSAS not only a doctrinal belief but as a cognizant notion concerning ones own standing before the God in this present world? Can one hold any notion by faith while at the very same time hold something by absolute knowledge? Can one hold ones salvation by faith and yet at the same time hold that faith by absolute knowledge, which the logical ends of OSAS demand?

 

HP: Why would you even suggest that I or anyone else believes that you could be saved by "convincing yourself that you are?”

HP: Why would you seem to suggest that I or anyone else believes that one is saved by their assurance? Where in Matt 25 does it suggest or imply that some will be surprised that they are saved?

HP: I don’t care if you are a one point or fifteen point Calvinist, or an Arminian, no one has absolute knowledge of their salvation if it is held by faith.

HP: I have no idea what an arimian is, but if what you are referring to is Arminians, if they believe in OSAS they are not who they think they are. Arminians and Calvinists are at antipodes concerning OSAS.

HP: I do not care what denominational stripe you are, you can know that you are saved today, but that knowledge is not absolute knowledge if it is held by faith. Salvation by faith is the only salvation Scripture speaks of.

 

HP: If I say that you ‘should not’ get drunk, an I insinuating that such is the definition of being sober? If I say that you ‘should not’ fail the test, am I saying that such is the definition of passing the test? I fail to follow the logic employed here. How is Jeus stating that one 'should not' perish the definition of salvation?

 

HP: No Amy, I am not unsure of my salvation, but it is not held by absolute knowledge either. I hold my assurance of salvation by faith, not absolute knowledge. Are you insinuating that you know of your final state before the Lord absolutely, without the possibility existing that you could be deceived? If so, you are not walking by faith, and without faith it is impossible to please God.

Everyone has a philosophy, whether or not one is cognizant of what it consists of or not. You either assume or are able to articulate a philosophy, but without exception, we all have one.

As for logic, God has designed and instilled principles of logic within us to help guide us into truth. You cannot separate the truth of God from His wisdom and logic employed. We may have many uncertainties in our understanding of truth, but we should never entertain ideas clearly absurd or contrary to matters of fact, truths of immutable justice, or first truths of reason. We all would do ourselves a favor by pursuing wisdom in relationship to the theology we espouse. That requires in addition to prayer and the study of God’s Word, much thought and meditation, the careful examination of the principles of logic, and insuring that we are holding to sound philosophy as well as being sound theologians.

 

HP: It is your reference. You read it and give us your interpretation with how you see it relating to the OP. Then we might have a point to discuss.

 

HP: This is very true. Just the same, are you telling me that logic comes from a God given ability, but the truth of the Holy Spirit will be found, or can be found, to be at antipodes with the intuitive wisdom the same God has instilled by the means of logical capability? If so, God would be found to oppose Himself and the intuitive abilities He instills, would He not?

 

HP: We are addressing faith as it relates to salvation, so I will limit my definition as it relates to that issue for now. Faith is at it’s heart an act of the will. Having faith in God is to voluntarily accept the testimony of God upon the basis of His word alone without any other supportive evidence other than the evidence He has granted to us in His Word, and to formulate intents in agreement with that acceptance of God’s testimony. Faith, as herein defined, couples an intellectual assent of accepted truth with an act of the will to form intents consistent with the knowledge we say we believe in that is granted to us by God’s Word. Faith is not just an intellectual assent, nor is it a mere act of the will. It must utilize both in harmony with each other to be faith that saves and is needed to comply with the condition of salvation known as faith. I am sure as we go along this definition will grow and change to some degree. This is only my first shot at defining it.

HP: May I disagree? You were married by sight, not faith. Sure you exercised faith in your wife, and she in you, but your marriage was not culminated because of or due to faith. You could have had no faith whatsoever in your wife and still got married. Upon hearing those words, “I now pronounce you husband and wife” you knew absolutely, not by faith, that you were married. You had absolute knowledge that your marriage was consummated.

In the case of our salvation, we will not hear in such absolute terms such an appraisal of our standing before the Lord until we stand before Him at the judgment and hear those words, “Well done thou good and faithful servant!”

HP: You also have a piece of paper that testifies to the ‘fact’ not faith, that you are married.

HP: This is where I see you as going astray. Faith cannot be based on fact. It is based on trust.

HP: Amen. I totally agree with you here.

HP: This is true, but we must accept His Word by faith. We must voluntarily choose to exercise or will in the formation of an intent to believe His Word as fact, not due to our being able to prove it ‘by facts’, but rather simply upon the grounds of God’s testimony which we have chosen to believe.

HP: Amen. I agree.

HP: But your knowledge of your marriage is based upon fact, not faith. Sure there are things about your relationship that our based upon faith, and if you fail to have faith in your wife it most likely will end in the dissolving of your marriage, yet you do not hold ‘the knowledge of the marriage itself’ by faith, that is held by absolute knowledge.

HP: True, as you know by absolute knowledge , not by faith.

HP: That you do not know by absolute knowledge, but rather hold that belief by faith.

HP: As known by many due to the absolute knowledge of the marriage license, not faith. I can have faith that you are married, but you cannot. I only know what you have told me. I have not seen those papers or heard those words pronounced at your wedding. You cannot have faith in your marriage, but I can. Again this is not to say that ‘within the marriage’ there are still things you indeed can have faith in.

HP: Amen, but one is held by faith, the other by absolute knowledge.

HP: I would think you might have a case of serious amnesia, that might soon be cured with a frying pan at the hand of your wife.

HP: Then I would wonder if they have ever really been saved, or if in fact they have departed from the faith.

HP: I hope I might have shed a glimmer of light upon that.

HP: Since I as well have chosen to place my faith in God’s Word, I too accept the risen Savior as fact, although in reality it is based upon faith, not provable fact. If you think it is, try ‘proving’ the Scriptures are true to an agnostic or an atheist. What you and I call fact, is denied mby multitudes everyday. Although there are some things that can be pointed to as fact, there is still the overall view that it is true that must be accepted by faith.

“Without faith it is impossible to please God.”

 

HP: And so have I! Let us rejoice together!

 

HP: No, I would not call it ‘proof.’ I believe it is clearly implied, but I would have to admit I accept that by faith much as I do most other Scriptural statements or implications. IMO, Scripture presents little ‘proof.’ I must accept it’s message by faith.

HP: Cessation of the physical body as we now know it.

HP: There is no end to eternal life. There may in fact be an end to our ‘hope of eternal life,’ which is how I believe Scripture states that we hold eternal life in this present world.

HP: It never ceases IMO as I understand Scripture. We will always be rational beings if I understand the word as you present it. Even those in hell will be rational beings, they will just lack the ability to carry out their selfish desires.

HP: This is a tough one. Obviously, there will be no need for certain mental functions to continue outside and apart from the physical body. Even in this life we may loose the ability of mental functions. Just the same, I believe we will still be cognizant much the same as our physical mind 'normally' enables us to be in this world concerning our existence and spiritual matters, etc. I have to admit I have not tried to answer some of your questions or gave them a lot of thought before in such a direct manner. I reserve the right to edit them as needed in the future.