How to salvage OSAS in view of Rom 11 and 2Tim2

Bob speaking of John 15:1-7 2Tim 2, Romans 11, MAtt 18 etc

Quote:
-- But then try to rework each of these texts so that those who fall -- had already fallen and were never saved. Those who failed to persevere in fact never had anything to persevere IN so they in fact did not fail to persevere because they were never "in" to start with. (In interesting self-conflicted argument).

#1. IF you really "believed" that idea you propose "Worked" you would not have abandoned it for the text-denying model of preterism. So we know that even you see the flaw in what you are suggesting.

#2. I have pointed to specific texts - but where do you see yourself exegeting those texts to show that "IN CHRIST" means "LOST" as you propose above? Or as in Matt 18 "obtaining forgiveness" is really "being lost still" or in Rom 11 "Being IN the vine of Christ" and persevering in BELIEVING is the "wicked state" -- try to "Show that".

Even your reference to John 8 does not "show" the quote for "belief" and how that means "lost". Of course I could point to James 2 showing that those who "believe" are lost - in fact lost as demons who believe the same way are lost. Perhaps you had intended to use that text? "Can that faith save him?" did you mean to use James 2?

In Christ,

Bob

 

The text states "Sin" as in "continually sin" as in one who says "I do not care that I am breaking the Law of God". Even Christ affirmed this in the Gospels "IF you LOVE Me KEEP My Commandments".

And as John says in the SAME book "Those who CLAIM to KNOW Christ and yet do NOT walk AS HE WALKED are liars" 1 John 2.

This poses no problem for those 3 and 5 point Calvinists that believe in OSAS and hold to perseverance because they will simply say "well these guys were never saved - never knew Christ, were liars, were never ABIDING IN Christ to start with".

So when I show the failure of OSAS I usually go to texts that DO claim that the person IS forgiven and then has forgiveness revoked, or IS in the vine of Christ and THEN is cast out or IS among those who DO NOT deny Christ and are NOT denied by Christ - but then take some action causing them to BE denied by Christ.

In other words - you really have to deal specifically with those actual problem texts (like those in the OP) to respond to the point.

And then having done so - you can not "blame that scripture on me" just because I am the only one willing to quote it.

In Christ,

Bob

 

#1. That is not exegeting the texts of the OP it is merely showing "why we shouldn't read them".

#2. It clings to one's tradition "as if the principles and definitions used in that tradition were correct no matter what the Bible says" over the "unpleasant text". Why not try to understand first how it is that your traditions for OSAS are in error as they conflict with the OP texts?

 

Quote:Bob
Why not give up your OSAS tradition BEFORE giving up these texts of scripture?

I doubt that. My view fully embraces both sets. The problem in your view is that it only allows you to read one set -- taking them to such an extreme that you find the other set to be fully contradicting to your views.

It would be like the Jews in Mark 7 who make up the tradition of CORBAN arguing "Obey your elders" as "The TEXT" to extend to far extremes and then glossing over the commandment "Honor your parents" saying "This does not conflict with our tradition and definitions". Yet Christ shows that they clearly were in conflict with scripture.

You are not exegeting these "inconvenient texts" to SHOW that "IN Christ" and "IN the vine of Christ" is the definition of "LOST" in scripture. You simply hold it to be "a challenge" for your view as you make up ways to try and preserve an a priori bias to OSAS.

Why no TRY the harmony of texts I have recommended here before jumping right into "THAT NT text should not be paid attention too".

Your OWN "solution" SHOWS that you do NOT see harmony between your view of OSAS and faith and salvation - and the texts I have mentioned.

You can not now pretend that they fit your model after admitting that they are soooo devastating to your views that you need them "to not apply to Christians" anymore!

You can't have it both ways!

In Christ,

Bob

 

There is no doubt that sin is transgression of God's law "by definition" but the tense for "DOES NOT sin" is in the "continual" sense. No escaping that.

And Christ uses the same tense "be angry and yet SIN not". Trying to insert a dividing wedge between the words of Christ and 1John 3 does not serve your point as you may suppose.

Christ said "IF you Love Me KEEP my Commandments" that also is in the "continual sense" it does not mean "At least one time in your life keep the commandments of Christ" any more than the 1John 3 text means "if you sin ever - even once you are not a Christian".

In Christ,

Bob

 

Quote:
Rom 11
Quote:
18do not be arrogant toward the branches; but if you are arrogant, remember that it is not you who supports the root, but the root supports you.
19You will say then, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.”
20Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith. Do not be conceited, but fear;
21for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either.



Quote:
2 Tim 2
Quote:
10For this reason I endure all things for the sake of those who are chosen, so that they also may obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus and with it eternal glory.
11It is a trustworthy statement:
For if we died with Him, we will also live with Him;
12 If we endure, we will also reign with Him;
If we deny Him, He also will deny us;
13If we are faithless, He remains faithful, for He cannot deny Himself.



How can you salvage OSAS "in spite of these texts"?


Will you really settle for "ignoring them" and avoiding all exegesis of them as the responses have done so far?? Is it really "Biblically honest" to treat the NT text as "not applicable to me"??

How sad that man's desire to cling to the traditions of OSAS would drive one to such an extreme position!

 

Notice that the contrast is not between “practicing righteousness” as a child of God and “practicing evil” as an even MORE established “child of God”. Rather the contrast is between the children of God and the children of the devil. (John’s words not mine).

 

What a great way to ingore the OP texts! What a wonderful way NOT to exegete Rom 11 or 2Tim 2!!

I love it!!

You gloss over the points you can not withstand and simply flee to irrelevance.

IN Christ,

Bob

 

Those are some entertaining notions to be sure.

Now let's read what God has to say on the subject about "Faith without works" to see if "MORE HEAVEN" is the result.

The popular man made tradition that “faith in Christ” certainly means “heaven” for the saints and “faith without works” means “even MORE heaven” must be tested by the Word of God.

James is not “playing word games here” the way many Christians do when they see this clear teaching of scripture set at naught their man made traditions. James is serious when he points to the Ten Commandments of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ and declares that we will be judge by that standard.

So it is the wise in heart and those who “love the truth” that will listen to James’ warning So speak and so act as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty.[/b]

Here again – James plays no word games. He declares that the actions of the people of God will show their heart as really being “for God” or against Him and so judgment will be merciless to those who do not “Love their Neighbor” who “show no mercy” who disregard the spoken and written WORD of our Great God and Savior Jesus Christ.

To that question man made tradition will shout a loud “YES it WILL save him for having faith in Christ is heaven for us and having faith without works is MORE HEAVEN!”. Could there BE any louder siren call for “Peace and Safety” when suddenly destruction comes upon mankind?

Let us see how the “faith of demons” works according to James.

James calls the faith of demons – claimed by many today - “dead faith” – Paul does not claim “By grace your are saved by dead faith without works”. And so Paul and James are in fact in perfect agreement.

Then James continues in this same line of instruction calling us to hear the example given of living faith. The faith of Abraham referenced in Romans 4 is again used here in James 2 to contrast living faith with “dead faith” – the faith of demons that “believe” the facts – but do nothing except remain in rebellion against God.

 

Though you have inserted this disolaimer between your non-stop posts embracing Preterism and defending its doctrines - your disclaimer does little to erase your previous posts.

How much better history for you if you had in fact taken an objective approach to the topic and had been willing to weigh strengths AND weaknesses. THough I utterly reject preterism at least I showed where it had some strengths in shielding the man made traditions of OSAS from the Bible. I also showed that some of the points claimed in that view actually SUSTAIN the confession that the Bible texts it seeks to ignore are in fact devastating to OSAS were they allowed to APPLY!

In Christ,

Bob

 

Huh?? I don't remember being included in such a discussion.

I have never said that.

My argument is that the gay person that accepts Christ is saved - and then when he decides to give up the Christian life and go back to living in rebellion he is lost again.

"If we deny Him HE WILL ALSO deny us" 2Tim 2

"You stand only by your faith -- FEAR if He did not spare them neither will he Spare you" Rom 11.

John 15 branches removed from the vine of Christ - withered and then good for nothing but burning in the fire.

That is not "more heaven" rather it is the description of hell. Not even of "purgatory then more heaven" -- just hell.

In Christ,

Bob