Once Saved Always Saved?

1a) Agreed
1b) Agreed

2a) Agreed
2b) Agreed

b) Agreed
1) Agreed
a) Agreed

(1) Agreed

All agreeable commentaries on your part. Absolutely nothing said here that suggest they became lost.

Job is an OT example of how one can be turned over to satan, even God Himself doing the turning over, yet it has nothing to do with becoming lost. These men, just as many preachers throughout history, have "shipwrecked" their faith. "Shipwrecked" does not mean "lost".

One down, two to go......

:jesus:

 

1.) Agreed
a.) Agreed

1) Agreed
2) Agreed
3) Agreed
4) Agreed
5) Agreed
6) Agreed

2) I don't think I read anything about eternal salvation in 4:16. Maybe you are adding your own pov here, wanting it to say more than it is and straying from the context of the letter? Let's look at it....

1Ti 4:16Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee.

1) Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine. Take heed unto the doctrine of God and you will not be "giving heed...to doctrines of devils" (vs 1). We are instructed to try the spirits....

1Jo 4:1Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.

The entire letter to Timothy is concerning doctrine, not salvation. The topic is the doctrine of God, as Timothy had learned through Paul, verses the doctrine of a seducing spirit, a false prophet?

Take heed and you shall save thyself....Do we save ourselves in the sense of eternal life? Eternal life is by grace through faith (Ehp 2). Eternal life is a gift of God. Can I save someone else eternally? Of course not, eteranl life is not spoken of in this passage, so what is Paul speaking of when he says "save thyself" and not only thyself but others as well?

The only answer would have to be save thyself from seducing spirits leading you astray and shipwrecking your faith. This is the context of the letter. Nobody saves themselves eternally through keeping and teaching correct doctrine. By grace are ye saved through faith.

Look above at your commentary. You give eight comments in context of Godly doctrine verses doctrines of demons and then you conclude that this is a message of eternal security. Eternal security is not the context.

Two down...one to go...

:jesus:

 

I believe it is wrong to bring up the Fathers when trying to defend and articulate a doctrine in Scripture. Some of the Fathers, as far as I know, did not have the right understanding about the Trinity. Michael Patton at The Theology Program makes note that some Fathers were subordinationists, the the Father was greater than the Son not just in role, but Deity as well.

"Once Saved Always Saved" is used by Arminians to pervert the actual doctrine of eternal security. Dan Corner is one such person.

Jesus said I'd have eternal life, not temporary eternal life. It boggles the mind that one can believe in "eternal life" and believe in conditional security at the same time.

 

1.) Agreed (erred, strayed from the faith)
a.) Agreed
b.) Agreed
c.) Agreed
d.) Agreed

Not sure why you posted these verses in support of your pov. I suspect it is the "taking hold of eternal life" verse. It means just what it says. I don't see it having anything to do with forfieting eternal life. That would be an added opinion not written there in the scripture. The context of the passage is clear...lay hold of eternal life and avoid the sorrows of coveting.

Did you ever hear the expression.."GET A HOLD OF YOURSELF MAN"! ? You already have eternal life through grace through faith, through the gift of God, through regeneration. Now lay hold of it brothers and sisters!

:jesus:

 

Either we have eternal life In Christ or we don't! It isn't something that can come and go. God is eternal, how can God ever be anything different than eternal?

It would be dumb to say i have eternal life today, but I might not have it tommorow! That is wierd. :thumbs:

 

Continuing with "lay hold of eternal life", if you try to make this a condition of "staying saved" so to speak or even "getting saved" in the end, you would create a contradiction of scripture. You would be violating "harmony" of the scriptures.

You said....

I agree, but if you make this "getting saved" or "staying saved" then you violate this...

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;

:jesus:

 

You are absolutely correct R. Lawson. Your comment reminds me of something I read by Philip Edgecumbe Hughes in his commentary on The Book of Revelation as he comments on the following Scripture [page 57]:

Revelation 3:5. He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.

The book of life, in which are written the names of those to whom the grace of eternal life has been given, symbolizes the truth that the names of His elect whom He has redeemed are all known to the Lord and that their persons are cherished by Him. [It is mentioned again in Revelation 13:8; 17:8; 20:12, 15; and 21:27; see also Phil. 4:3.] Christ counseled the seventy who had returned from their mission with joy because even the demons were subject to them in His name: do not rejoice that the spirits are subject to you, but rejoice that your names are written in heaven [Luke 10:17-20]. In a similar way the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews speaks of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven [Hebrews. 12:23]. The imagery must not be interpreted literalistically: to blot out a name signifies that that name has no place among those who have received eternal life, because the person whose name it is is an unrepentant sinner and a rejector of the gospel [compare Exodus. 32:33; Deuteronomy. 9:14; 29:19f.]. It would be altogether wrong to imagine an activity of constant book-keeping in heaven, involving not only the registration of new names but also the removal of names previously entered and the restoration of names previously removed. Such a conception could only be conducive to insecurity on the part of God’s people [whose names might be in His book today and out tomorrow] and to uncertainty even in the mind of God Himself regarding the outcome of His redemptive action, which is unthinkable.

It is precisely everyone whose name had not been written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world who worships the beast [13:8]; whereas the Good Shepherd says of His sheep: I give unto them eternal life, and they shall never perish, and no one shall snatch them out of my hand [John 10:28]. As those who have been chosen in him before the foundation of the world [Ephesians. 1:4] their inheritance reserved in heaven for them is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading [1 Peter. 1:4]. Were this not so the eternal life possessed by the redeemed [John 3:16, 5:25, etc.] could turn out to be not eternal life after all but only for the time being, dependent on man rather than God, with the consequences that the promises of God would be open to falsification, which again is unthinkable.

 

You are absolutely correct R. Lawson. Your comment reminds me of something I read by Philip Edgecumbe Hughes in his commentary on The Book of Revelation as he comments on the following Scripture [page 57]:

Revelation 3:5. He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.

The book of life, in which are written the names of those to whom the grace of eternal life has been given, symbolizes the truth that the names of His elect whom He has redeemed are all known to the Lord and that their persons are cherished by Him. [It is mentioned again in Revelation 13:8; 17:8; 20:12, 15; and 21:27; see also Phil. 4:3.] Christ counseled the seventy who had returned from their mission with joy because even the demons were subject to them in His name: do not rejoice that the spirits are subject to you, but rejoice that your names are written in heaven [Luke 10:17-20]. In a similar way the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews speaks of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven [Hebrews. 12:23]. The imagery must not be interpreted literalistically: to blot out a name signifies that that name has no place among those who have received eternal life, because the person whose name it is is an unrepentant sinner and a rejector of the gospel [compare Exodus. 32:33; Deuteronomy. 9:14; 29:19f.]. It would be altogether wrong to imagine an activity of constant book-keeping in heaven, involving not only the registration of new names but also the removal of names previously entered and the restoration of names previously removed. Such a conception could only be conducive to insecurity on the part of God’s people [whose names might be in His book today and out tomorrow] and to uncertainty even in the mind of God Himself regarding the outcome of His redemptive action, which is unthinkable.

It is precisely everyone whose name had not been written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world who worships the beast [13:8]; whereas the Good Shepherd says of His sheep: I give unto them eternal life, and they shall never perish, and no one shall snatch them out of my hand [John 10:28]. As those who have been chosen in him before the foundation of the world [Ephesians. 1:4] their inheritance reserved in heaven for them is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading [1 Peter. 1:4]. Were this not so the eternal life possessed by the redeemed [John 3:16, 5:25, etc.] could turn out to be not eternal life after all but only for the time being, dependent on man rather than God, with the consequences that the promises of God would be open to falsification, which again is unthinkable.

 

OldRegular,

In Rev. 2:10 and 3:5 telling us, if anyone shall overcome the world, Christ will not blot person's name from the book of life. Otherwise, if a person fail to overcome them in the life, then Christ have the rights to remove person's name from the book of life. This very clear speak of conditional, if we endure till the end, and will make it as overcomer, it according to Matt. 10:22; and Matt. 24:13.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20- Amen!

 

Not responsive to my challenge. See Post No. 9, supra. However, since you brought up the scriptures, they do not prove eternal security. In fact they demonstrate just the opposite. I renew my queston, if eternal security is such a sound doctrine so well grounded in the scripture, why did not a single person advocate or affirm it over a period of 1500 years? Surely someone can come up with something here, be it ever so obscure. I know! Why don't you look in The Trail of Blood?

 

First Century A.D.; ca. 90 A.D. The writer--The Apostle John; The book: The Gospel of John; The passages: John 5:24; 10:27-30; 3:16-18, 36

The nature of the book: The inspired Word of God--accepted by all the early believers as accurately recorded by the Holy Spirit.

 

HP: Great passages, but how do any of them support the Calvinistic notion of OSAS?

 

Every time the words "eternal life" or "everlasting life" are used, they by very definition teach OSAS. Eternal cannot turn into temporary, or else it would not be eternal. It is as simple as that.

 

HP: That is indeed an assumption you make, a presupposition by which all Scripture is filtered through. The problem remains that it is a presupposition unfounded upon the Word of God. It is a reckless presupposition that ignores the warnings of Scripture that one can indeed make shipwreck of ones faith and be eternally lost.

Speaking of “eternally” lost, that was the state of everyman prior to coming to a saving knowledge of salvation. Can we not rejoice together that such did not determine the final state of our eternal abode? I certainly can and do!:godisgood:

 

Where does scripture state that we are eternally lost prior to salvation?

If we were eternally lost, there would be no hope of salvation.

We are only eternally lost upon our physical death if we have not received Christ as Savior.

 

Someone please explain why this topic seems so important to some people?

 

There you go making common sense again sister :tongue3:

Apparantly some do not accept the fact that something can be eternal. They reject the very definition of the word. Therefore i must assume that they also must believe God is not eternal either, since they refuse to accept the definition of the word.

Accept the definition of the word eternal and this argument over OSAS is over!

:jesus:

 

If your are of the anti-osas pov, you believe the osas camp is promoting sinful living.

If you are of the pro-osas pov, you believe the anti-osas camp is promoting a works based salvation.

Now, every pro-osas person I ever talk with does not promote any such thing as wilfull, sinful living.

However, I find the anti-osas folks consistently promoting obedience a condition for salvation, which obedience is works of righteousness, and therefore there pov is a works based pov. The word of God rejects "works of righteousness" having a part in eternal security or God's work of regeneration, which is what saves.

:jesus:

 

Are you serious HP? Saying that "eternal" is defined as "never ending" is an "assumption"? You are turning word definitions on their head! ANd you say we are "reckless"? raying:

And there you go again adding to the word of God. Shipwrecked does not equal "eternally lost". You add this every time you speak it, this is "reckless" and actually sin. Paul was shipwrecked once, did Paul die? WE are instructed to "rightly divide the word of truth". You continue to ignore this instruction everytime you add "eternally lost" to your commentary on the passage of "shipwrecked".

Why? WHy must you pervert this passage of scripture? Find a passage that speaks on the subject of eternal life and make your points. Stop perverting passages just to promote your opinions. Our object should be truth IN CONTEXT.

:godisgood:

 

HP: Have you been asleep or have you just failed to listen? We have been told that all men are liars, all men sin, you cannot help but sin, anyone that says he can live above sin, even for a day, is a liar and the truth is not in him. We are told that are actions are divorced from who we are, in that we can positionally be in Christ while actively engaged in open sin. We have been told that nothing can separate us from God, including any sin regardless of what it is and regardless if one has repented and turned from it, which includes murder, fornication, adultery, lying, or stealing, just to mention a few. Of course condemnation is something that simply has no place in a believers life, regardless of what ones conscience tells them, for all past present, and future sins have been paid for in full.

Such notions would certainly appear to me to promote a sinful lifestyle. Yea it establishes that ‘nothing but a sinful lifestyle’ is even possible for the believer, and anyone with any other view is but a liar and as such a sinner like all the rest of believers, at least to those promoting OSAS, that is. Maybe you can set the record straight as to what the OSAS doctrine promotes. Certainly I believe that there are some within the OSAS camp that live on a higher plane than their doctrines allow or even limit believers to. That still would not change the tendencies of the doctrine to encourage lifestyles to the contrary.