Why do some people not like the idea of OSAS?
- Thread starter Raccoon1010
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
So, you read Paul's statement "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" to mean "All scripture -- including gospels and epistles that have yet to be penned and including all of my own letters to various churches, but only to the extent declared canonical by consensus three centuries from now -- is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness."
I very much doubt that Paul meant to include what we now know as the New Testament in his use of graphē in this verse.
St. SteVen
Well-Known Member
So you see those "warnings" and then Eternal Security is suddenly out the window?
Why do those "warnings" supplant God's loving purpose and promises to us?
Seems like a trust issue. We are too quick to believe the worst about God's intentions.
/
Precious friend, in which case we will have to defer To His Scripture That States:
"For My Thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways My Ways, Saith
The LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My Ways Higher
Than your ways, and My Thoughts Than your thoughts." (Isaiah 55:8-9)
"(As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before
Him Whom he believed, Even God, who quickeneth the dead, and
Calleth those things which be not As Though They Were." (Romans 4:17)
Be Blessed...
MA2444
Well-Known Member
That's a fair question. It is a trust issue within the resume of trust that we have built up with the Lord. Eternal security that no one can snatch us from His hand is for dedicated people who cling to Christ and are led by the Spirit, always.
WHen we turn our back to the Lord and wander off into the world and start making our own decisions then no one snatched us from His hand, we walked away and are in danger of dying in that state of seperation from God.
Make sense?
St. SteVen
Well-Known Member
Good post, thanks.
No, it doesn't make sense. (to me)
You are not making a case for Eternal Security, but rather Eternal INsecurity.
By making dedication and commitment qualities to retain security.
How are such things measured?
Were you dedicated enough to retain your salvation? (who knows?)
Could you have been more committed? (sure) Was it enough? (who knows?)
/
MA2444
Well-Known Member
Well scripture does say to work out your salvation with fear and trembling. And all that talk about enduring until the end sure means something. Then there are those who turn again like a dog unto his vomit to live in the ways of the world. Those do not have eternal security.
Those who stumble (all of us) do what? Lord I am sorry and I repent, please forgive me for ...XXX whatever. Like King David (Psalm 51).
If someone is slipped from the Holy Spirit guidance and is in the world but has not sinned...are they still saved? Perhaps. I don't know for sure. Has the man won any souls for the Kingdom? Has He been a profitable servant? If he has then I would venture to say yes he prolly is still saved. But who knows for sure before the day comes?
Yes that is a serious warning, and it is at the end of the sheep and goats which is the discourse on tending to others needs. There are also discourses on not requiring pay for proclaiming the gospel. I wonder if they are related. As the portion in the parable of the tax collector and Pharisee also says, that sinners may become justified.
I think some people believe in continual repentance as we are not perfect.
Romans 3:21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22 even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference; 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, 26 to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.
St. SteVen
Well-Known Member
IF all the scriptures we have read do not agree with each other, then we don't understand. We cannot rest on our laurels thinking that we cannot displease God and have our names blotted out of the Lamb's Book of Life and think we have a guarantee under the New Covenant without understanding that we have obligations under it as well. As the people of Israel have discovered many times, failure to abide by God's covenants have bad results.
Eternally Grateful
Well-Known Member
Endure to the end, Can you give us the context of these words in Matt 24?
Obedient to Christ.
I always ask the question. How good is good enough. Do you know? The bible tells us.. I think many overlook this point
Titus 3. I have been saved.
Eph 2: 8 for we have been saved.
What are we saved from? What did the law tell us about our salvation?
for by one offering he has PERFECTED forever. those who are being sanctified.
How long is forever?
St. SteVen
Well-Known Member
I guess you have a real problem then. (from your perspective)
Why assume that you are right?
I posted 124 scriptures that support Eternal Security on this new topic.
The Case for Eternal Security
/
I am not of that view. I think there are lots of instances of scriptures not agreeing with each other that can ONLY be understood as just plain contradictory. Fortunately, they are generally disagreements over irrelevant factual details.
Do we really care whether the centurion who wanted Jesus to heal his servant approached Jesus in person (Matthew 8:5-13) or sent an intermediary (Luke 7:2-10)? Do we really care whether “Saul took his own sword and fell upon it” (1 Samuel 31:4) or whether “the Philistines killed Saul on Gilboa” (2 Samuel 21:12)? Do we really care whether Jesse had seven sons (1 Chronicles 2:13-15) or eight (1 Samuel 16:10-11)? Do we really care whether Ahaziah was twenty-two years old when he began to reign (2 Kings 8:26) or forty-two (2 Chronicles 22:2)? Do we really care whether Solomon had 4,000 horse stalls (2 Chronicles 9:25) or 40,000 (1 Kings 4:26)? Do we care whether Moses’ sending spies into Canaan was suggested by God (Numbers 13:1-2,) or by the people (Deuteronomy 1:22)? Does it matter whether Joseph’s lineage is traced from David through Solomon (Matt. 1:6) or through Nathan (Luke 3:31)?
Why couldn’t two different writers just disagree on these details? Ask an inerrantist whether Jesus sent his apostles out with sandals and staff (Mark 6:8-9) or without them (Matthew 10:10), and the answer will come back “The gospels must have been describing two different missions.” Ask where the “must have” comes from, and the answer ultimately comes back, in words or substance, that the consistency of Scripture is a given. This approach seems to me to be reasoning the matter backwards. Inerrancy should be a conclusion from the evidence, not an axiom by which to assess the evidence.
I do not see the point in downplaying the human element like this. I expect theological truth from my Bible, not factual accuracy on minute historical details. And I am not scandalized by inaccuracies as to the latter.
The better approach, in my opinion, is to focus on the inerrancy of the message of a given passage, rather than of the extraneous details with which the passage is adorned. Consider, for example, Mark 2:26, which quotes Jesus as saying that David entered the house of God and ate the altar bread “when Abiathar was high priest.” 1 Samuel 21:1-6 is explicit that Ahimelech, not his son Abiathar, was high priest at the time. In my view, it doesn’t matter whether Jesus got this detail wrong or Mark got it wrong, simply because it doesn’t matter at all―to the message of the gospel story. The point being made by Jesus (or Mark) is theologically sound even if not historically accurate, originally or in the retelling.
St. SteVen
Well-Known Member
Wow! Great post, thanks.
And you listed many good examples of such.
Worshiping the book is a very bad idea. Many Christians have idolized it.
Inerrancy is a blind claim. (your post as sufficient evidence)
While the apologists scramble to prop the book up.
Working from a false premise. (inerrancy)
/
Agree.
And you listed many good examples of such.
Agree.
Worshiping the book is a very bad idea. Many Christians have idolized it.
Inerrancy is a blind claim. (your post as sufficient evidence)
While the apologists scramble to prop the book up.
Working from a false premise. (inerrancy)
/
MA2444
Well-Known Member
Now that's a cute sounding cliche but it isnt biblical in the least. "Eternal" insecurity? Do you realize what you have implied? Not biblical in the least.
God has patience in long suffering as mentioned in the scriptures (Galatians 5:22-23), he waits and goes after the lost sheep too. I wouldn't throw around God's judgments from the mind set of human thinking. Remembering how long he waited to free Israel from Egypt: 400 years.
There is mention of judgment for certain people rejecting Jesus though:
Matthew 10:14 And whoever will not receive you nor hear your words, when you depart from that house or city, shake off the dust from your feet. 15 Assuredly, I say to you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city!
MA2444
Well-Known Member
I think that some people speak highly of the scriptures because they live it in their lives. These are not the ones who idolize it.
I've been accused of idolizing the scriptures by some. But I think that stemmed from people on the fence who's conscience bugs them about some sin in their life, which they dont want to give up, so take offense at the scriptures and he who brought this truth to their attention.
Highly likely I think. I do not idolize the word of God, but I do think that they it is a very special book which should not be underestimated.
Similar threads
