The Eternal Security Heresy: A Comprehensive Refutation of OSAS

[ChristisGod]

I am not unaware of the Sola's - but we are only talking about "Sola Fide" - a man made doctrine that did not exist at the time of Abraham.

Your claim that this doctrine did exist - is a patent false hood - a falsehood not changed by you posting the 5 sola's - 4 of which are completely unrelated to the "Sola Fide" in an effort to distract and divert away from scripture.

Repeating "Sola Fide .. Sola Fide .. Sola Fide" over and over again to yourself - does not make Sola Fide part of the beliefs of the people of Abraham.

Your claim that Sola Fide was part of the beliefs of the people of Abraham .. is supported Nowhere" in the OT .. and is complete nonsense in that these people did not know who Jesus was ... never mind belief that belief in the sacrifice of Jesus purchased a free pass through the pearly gates ..

What I find very peculiar is how you claim to know church history about Luther (the Reformation) yet are ignorant about the 5 solas during the same Reformation Period in Church History. What his tells me you are just winging it and flying by the seat of your pants. How can we take anything you say as truth when in reality what you claim to know and what you actually know ARE TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THINGS.

BTW- your bible history is much like your church history.

hope this helps !!!

 

[Heyzeus]

What I find very peculiar is how you claim to know church history about Luther (the Reformation) yet are ignorant about the 5 solas during the same Reformation Period in Church History. What his tells me you are just winging it and flying by the seat of your pants. How can we take anything you say as truth when in reality what you claim to know and what you actually know ARE TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THINGS.

BTW- your bible history is much like your church history.

hope this helps !!!

Once again you spew falsehoods - in an effort to divert from your false claim. Out of the blue you bring up the 5 sola's - something that has nothing to do with what is being discussed .. and then claim I have never heard of them - which is a complete falsehood.

You are a spewing falsehood - with no ability to defend your nonsensical claim that the people of Abraham believed in "Sola Fide" doctrine.

 

[ChristisGod]

Once again you spew falsehoods - in an effort to divert from your false claim. Out of the blue you bring up the 5 sola's - something that has nothing to do with what is being discussed .. and then claim I have never heard of them - which is a complete falsehood.

You are a spewing falsehood - with no ability to defend your nonsensical claim that the people of Abraham believed in "Sola Fide" doctrine.

faith alone =sola fide from the 5 solas ie which came from the BIBLE just like the CREEDS.

next.............................................

 

[Ferris Bueller]

Abraham's obedience to God are the EVIDENCE of his faith.

It was his faith that saved him, not his deeds.
.

You have to qualify what you mean by 'saved' him. If you mean his deeds did not save him by earning him salvation you would be correct. But if you are saying his deeds in no way are used to judge him as someone who has faith in God and do not 'save' him that way then you would be incorrect. Just as that would be incorrect for all of us.

 

[Heyzeus]

faith alone =sola fide from the 5 solas ie which came from the BIBLE just like the CREEDS.

next.............................................

None of which was believed by the people during Abrahams time. Next :)

 

[ChristisGod]

None of which was believed by the people during Abrahams time. Next :)

Abraham BELIEVED GOD and it was counted to him as righteousness. Genesis 15:6

anything else I can help you with ?

 

[Cooper]

You have to qualify what you mean by 'saved' him. If you mean his deeds did not save him by earning him salvation you would be correct. But if you are saying his deeds in no way are used to judge him as someone who has faith in God and do not 'save' him that way then you would be incorrect. Just as that would be incorrect for all of us.

Please do not tell me what to do and what not to do. I do not HAVE to qualify anything. Read Hebrews 11 for your answer.

 

[Renniks]

You are projecting your issues onto others. You are the one who has been ignoring and running from scripture you don't want to be true.
Don't try to put your failings onto me.

I tackle scripture I don't like directly. You have forced yourself to live in a world of denial by accepting the literalist position.

Lol, you literally believe a lot of the stories in scripture never happened by your own admission.
That's not " dealing with them."
If you want to pick and choose we can not take any of your scripture interpretation seriously.

 

[brightfame52]

Yes, faith gives assurance OF WHAT IS TRUE ABOUT SALVATION. It does not give assurance that you're actually participating in that salvation. Your works are what does that. That is what the Bible says.

Hogwash.

 

[brightfame52]

No! I was quoting you.

I was quoting scripture

 

[Heyzeus]

Abraham BELIEVED GOD and it was counted to him as righteousness. Genesis 15:6

anything else I can help you with ?

On this we both agree. So why would you say this ?

How does this relate to your claim that Sola Fide was alive and well ? and that it was "Faith Alone - in the sacrifice of Jesus" by which Abraham was counted as righteous ?

and what does Abraham believing God's promise to him - that had just come to him in a vision - that he would have offspring - and his seed continue .. have to do with Sola Fide ?

You misrepresented tis passage ..

"And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be. And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness. And he said unto him, I [am] the LORD that brought thee out of Ur of the Chaldees, to give thee this land to inherit it."https://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/OTpdf/gen15.pdf

So you clearly did not understand the context - as Abraham is conversing directly with God .. but you also messed up the translation .. or what ever source you were using did.

The He being referred to is Abraham .. so Abraham counted it as on behalf of his righteousness that he is being promised what he is being promised.

Abraham needs no "Faith" as he is talking directly with the Most High .. via a vision. Only an idiot would call that faith .. When you are standing before God .. that is defacto proof that God exists.

What you have done is cherry picked some passage .. then bastardized meaning of the passage so bad .. that it has no relation to the context ... which you obviously not bother to read.

Your inability to accept correction is off the charts .. however this time it would be wise to make an exception.

and so on

 

[Cooper]

I was quoting scripture

You quoted Matt 13:20,21 and summed it up by saying, “So those who fall away were never born again believers ! Their falling away evidences that !”

Do you understand what you said?

An unbeliever CANNOT fall into unbelief. They are already an unbeliever.

So when a OSAS person says “they never believed,” they are talking nonsense because a person has to believe first, before they can fall into unbelief.

A backslider cannot backslide, unless they first believe.
,

 

[brightfame52]

You quoted Matt 13:20,21 and summed it up by saying, “So those who fall away were never born again believers ! Their falling away evidences that !”

Do you understand what you said?

An unbeliever CAN NOT fall into unbelief. They are already an unbeliever.

So when a OSAS person says “they never believed” they are talking nonsense because a person has to believe first, before they can fall away.

Yes that's what I quoted. The stoney heart hearers are unregenerate so their faith wasn't a true faith. Sorry

 

[Cooper]

Yes that's what I quoted. The stoney heart hearers are unregenerate so their faith wasn't a true faith. Sorry

A person with a stony heart has never believed. They need to believe first before they can fall into unbelief. (Commit apostasy.)

 

[Heyzeus]

Lol, you literally believe a lot of the stories in scripture never happened by your own admission.

Your response is circular mindlessness..

To your first accusation - Guilty as Charged .. I am not a Literalist - and only a small extreme within Christianity maintains a strict Literal Perspective.

That's not " dealing with them."
If you want to pick and choose we can not take any of your scripture interpretation seriously.

Huh ? of course it is dealing with them .. I am not avoiding the passage .. The passage says what it says..

3 choices at this point .

1) Believe that God The Most High-Jesus is a flip flopping xenophobic genocidal manicac - with the most petty and nasty of human characteristics - a completely irrational and illogical God .. who makes one rule one day and completely contradicts that rule in the next breath.. a few pages later .. albeit from different sources - Meaning that the first breath was not from the same source as the conflicting breath .. Genesis is thought to have 4 different sources .. depending on which part ..

I have had folks defend killing children and infants for the sins of their parents in the name of Jesus - adding that to the list .. as this is what the one source recommends

The other source states Children are not to be killed for the sins of their parents .. nor parents for the sins of their children.


2) believe the other source .. where God is not all of the above attributes - and I am not talking when Israel is at war here .. that is completely different ... I am talking within Israelite society.

Now .. on the side of this source - you have history .. not only "History, Archaeology" and so on .. but the History detailed in the Bible.

The Israelites did not go around killing their own peoples children because their parents went south .. Joshua tells us this didn't happen in his farewell speech Josh 24.

3) Allegory - someone was telling a story to try and teach a lesson .. and the story was understood as such by the audience at one point.

Feel free to add other choices to the list .. You have Chosen 1) as your path .. and you are welcome to that choice.

Me choosing a different path - means I have had to deal with these passages .. to try and make sense out of the story - and to make sense out of God.

Your way of dealing with this passage leads down the path of no sense .. of nonsense - and this is what you refuse to deal with.

The literalist perspective is a road to nowhere .. You believe in this great deceiver .. who is on earth .. meddling in the affairs of humans .. and yet somehow .. the great deceiver missed the Bible .. but managed to corrupt the holy texts of all the other Religions..

Somehow you end up supporting all kinds of horrors - and say you are not deceived.

 

[ChristisGod]

lol let me guess @heyzues

no 6 days of creation
no world wide flood
no boat built by noah
no miracles performed by Moses, Red Sea and plagues
no fire called down from heaven by Elijah
no jonah in the belly of the fish for 3 days/nights

shall I go on ?

 

[Renniks]

Me choosing a different path - means I have had to deal with these passages .. to try and make sense out of the story - and to make sense out of God.

How is denying thier Truth dealing with them?
You are the one believing that the Bible is full of lies about God.
If I take your road, I can deny the incarnation, the resurrection, and every other new testament doctrine and just believe in the law if I want to. It's just gooblygook.

 

[Renniks]

) Believe that God The Most High-Jesus is a flip flopping xenophobic genocidal manicac - with the most petty and nasty of human characteristics - a completely irrational and illogical God .. who makes one rule one day and completely contradicts that rule in the next breath.. a few pages later .. albeit from different sources - Meaning that the first breath was not from the same source as the conflicting breath .. Genesis is thought to have 4 different sources .. depending on which part ..

So you can deny any truth in Genisis, but decide that that john's gospel is 100 percent correct? Why not the other way around?

 

[ChristisGod]

So you can deny any truth in Genisis, but decide that that john's gospel is 100 percent correct? Why not the other way around?

Got to love the irony of his heyzues theology.

 

[Heyzeus]

So you can deny any truth in Genisis, but decide that that john's gospel is 100 percent correct? Why not the other way around?

Once again rather than respond to the material presented you seek to misrepresent and state falsehoods about my position.

1) I did not deny every truth in Genesis - far from it - that is not even close to my position .. never said .. nor implied - do you now what allegory is ?
2) I have not decided nor stated that John is 100% truth ..

Now how about responding to your warped and twisted belief system .. where Jesus thinks we should be killing babies in households because some townsfolk down the street of these folks worshiped other Gods.