Resolved: <Once Saved, Always Saved> has no scriptural basis

Great Debates
21

First off I believe in a BIG God. I believe that God is bigger than I or anyone else can describe. I believe that God gave us written revelation (or published… that might be the better term) that reveals his attributes and his plan as best as could be described 4000-2000 years ago.

The Bible and its revelations reveal how God works, and that revelation often shows two sides of a coin. I believe that it shows that God has a plan that he predestined, and I believe that he is a volitional being. I believe that he created humans in his image, and that as a result we are volitional beings as well. That I believe in 100% predestination and 100% free will, causes me to be branded a heretic by both Calvinists and Arminianist alike, and to be described as insane by most non-belivers.

But as the Trinity remains a mystery, the fact that an omniscient God granted his creation the ability to make choices remains unreconcilable to my limited understanding.

How does this relate to OSAS??? Well I need to get some more facts on the table. The gospel is that God came down to earth incarnate as Jesus Christ, where he suffered and died for our sins, then rose again on Easter Morning. His sacrifice enables us to live free from the burden of sin, by accepting his attonement as the price for our transgressions. God granted his bride the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, that lives in us, and counsels us and helps us.

God by grace has saved us by faith. The action is His, and the faith is His, that he bestows on who he wills. We in faith have a choice to accept his call or reject his call. By acceptance we are in effect lying down our will, and accepting his will. He will guide us and perfect us by the action of his holy spirit. Given that, I have a hard time believing how a blood bought, indwelt believer would turn away from the grace of God that infuses his spirit.

On the other side of the coin, I think that blood bought, indwelt belivers can spend sometime in the wilderness. They can ‘turn off’ the indwelt spirit, and ignore it pull, and tug at our hearts. Our hearts can be hard at times. But I think that God knows who are his, and like the good shepherd or the lady looking for the lost coin, he will pursue his sheep, and bring everyone of them back to the fold. I accept this on faith.

We can try to reconcile this verse with that verse, and would most likely end up twisting scipture on both sides, to meet what we believe to be true. Scripture is fascinating in that one can pull anything one wants out of God’s word, and use it as a proof text for personal philosophy. But running through these ‘proof texts’ is a story, a scarlet thread of redemption, of a God that loved his creation so much, he gave his son…

Thanks for wading into this stream with me, I’m not sure if I cleared things up and muddied the water further. I pray that these words mean something to whoever God is pulling at…

Peace.

22

Explain how this verse has been “twisted” or otherwise taken out of context. The author of Hebrews (traditionally but most certainly not Paul) says “if they commit apostasy.” One may question, “Well, maybe it’s impossible to commit apostasy.” The very next phrase uses the PRESENT tense–“they crucify” and “[they] hold him up to contempt.” The author then compares the apostate to a plot of land. This land is worthless. At the end of the day (or life, I suppose), it is to be burned. So, how is this twisted out of context???

While you (whoever) are answering, please explain this to me as well. Christians laud Free-Will as the greatest gift that God gave us, even greater at times than life itself. If OSAS is true, then, in effect, by accepting God, we’ve relinquished this precious gift. Once I’ve made the conscious choice to accept God in my life, OSAS says that my Free-Will is gone. I can’t choose to evict the Holy Spirit, and God sure as hell isn’t going to leave. So, is that the end of the game? Make the one right decision (i.e., accept God), and there goes your Free-Will? (I’ve used the capital letters in Free-Will to distinguish it from the ability to make decisions. After accepting Christ, a believer can still decide between chocolate and vanilla ice cream. S/he is not an automaton. But THE Free-Will is gone, yes?)

Quix

23

By leaving off the very next part…

Hebrews 6:9-12 (NASB)

The argument in vs 4-8 presents a strawman… an example, and the author of Hebrews does not think it is true of the people to whom he wrote. It is more pastoral than prophetic. He is saying, if someone were to … then they would be crucifying Christ again, which is folly. But can we determine the heart of anyone? Believer or unBeliever? When does one fall into apostasy? When they sin? Which sin breaks the back?

Taking your other point, about sacrificing our ‘FreeWill’[sup]TM[/sup] when we accept the sacrfice is true. IF that is true, then when one truly performs such an act, how can they exit the faith? Their will has been submitted to a God that says he loves everyone, it would be contradictory to think that the Holy Spirit would lead one away from God. Unless He allow us and our choices to lead us into the wilderness, and teach a lesson there.

We won’t be able to judge, I don’t even think we can truly judge ourselves. So that is why I think this discussion is unresovable, we step up and put ourselves in the place of the righteous judge, and say ‘sure, we can step away from the faith,’ or ‘no, I’m sorry, you are locked in.’ Instead of trusting in the one righteous judge to make that determination.

I am convinced of better things concerning you…

Peace.

24

slight nitpick…

I guess Calvinists aren’t Christian…

FWIW, there is a BIG debate within the body regarding this one issue. So I think it is wrong to lump all of Christianity into the ‘Free-will is great…’ category. Perhaps all we have is the perception of free-will.

25

No No No. I made a point of specifically calling attention to this, but I didn’t make it totally clear (hey, it was nearing 4 in the morning). The author does NOT use the subjunctive form. He does NOT say “If you were to do this, then this would happen.” He says, “If you do this, then this does happen.” I think the distinction is subtle but definite. The author is not saying “Apostasy is impossible, but if we suppose it could be done, then hellfire is the result.” Instead, he is saying, “Apostasy is possible, and when it is done, hellfire is the result.”

I agree that the author didn’t think that it would happen to his audience, the Hebrews. This is because they’re still ministering to “the saints.” What does this have to do with me? I suppose it could be said that I used to minister to the saints, but I don’t anymore. Lake of fire for me.

No, I can’t determine your heart. But I can determine mine–I have rejected the Spirit I used to accept. You can answer, “Well, God isn’t done with you yet,” but that’s a double edged sword. If I’m not capable of knowing whether I’ve given up the Spirit, then no one can know their “Spirit Status.” That means that all the Johnny Slaininthespirits of the world must be as uncertain as I am.

Or unless He doesn’t really remove our Free-Will, and we can still evict the Holy Spirit… that’s what apostasy is. That’s what Hebrews’ author says can happen.

So, you don’t walk around claiming that you’ve got the Spirit, do you? If I can’t diagnose myself as having evicted the Spirit, then you can’t diagnose yourself as possessing the Spirit. That’s the double-edged sword.

I’m not debating whether OSAS happens in real life–that’s one of those “you’ll find out when you die” things. I’m debating whether it has scriptural basis, as per the OP, and I think it’s pretty clear that it doesn’t. Or, if it does, then other parts of the Bible contradict this assessment. But you probably don’t want to hear about that.

And I suppose that I should have specified that Born-Again, Slain-in-the-Spirit type Fundies are those who laud Free-Will as the greatest gift God has given us. But, then again, I suppose that’s to whom this whole thread is addressed. If you believe in the fatalism of predestination, then this whole discussion is even more moot than it already is.

Quix

26

I do think it has scriptural basis. I also think that an idea of free-will and rejecting the spirit has scriptural basis. The problem lies in reconciling the two. Not that it is contradictory, but it is describing a paradox. How can you describe the trinity… you can’t. How can you describe a loving God that is also a wrathful God… you can’t. I do think reasonable people can come to the conclusion that something beyond explanation is occuring, but not that it is contradictory, but that we lack enough data to make a determination either way.

Now, I’m sure someone is going to come in here and claim that because I admit that both type of passages occur, that the Bible is fallible and invalid. I reject that because from my vantage point I don’t have enough data to state that what the Bible describes is telling the entire picture. God is a BIG God, I can’t describe him more than he has allowed himself to be described. If God wasn’t a big God, then we would’ve nailed him down centuries ago. But we still struggle with the concept of a big God. Some might give up and say well since I can’t describe it, I’ll reject this notion of a ‘god’ and live as I please. I have no problem with those who take that stand, as long as they allow me to continue in my stance, that there is a BIG God, he has revealed part of himself in scripture, and he loves all of his creation.

Many will say THIS point is vital to a faith. Others will say THIS point is meaningless and moot. I say this is a valid discussion, but it will never be reconciled, until God wants us to know his true nature. Each side can be Procrustean, and unwavering. Part of what makes us… us… isn’t it?

Quix **
[/QUOTE]

27

No, his Gospel is he died for the sins of those who keep his commandments. It doesn’t just apply to anyone, any more than if I picked up a quarterly report for a company I didn’t work for and went around claiming “we” made money this quarter, because that is what the document says.

28

So, if I was a spirit-filled, on-fire-for-God believer (which I was for years), why would I want to turn that off? And how can I do such if I was promised that God would never leave me nor forsake me? Why would I at one time believe in Jesus as Saviour and then not a month later see gaping holes in Christian theology? Are you saying I’M responsible for turning off the voice of God?!

I can see of no reconcillation for my current thoughts on Christianity other than turning off my mind and accepting things I truly don’t believe in. Again, “Love God with all your heart, mind, soul and strength” is a commandment that I must abide in.

So, if I was once “saved” but now, and still believe in God but not in a Jesus as God incarnate and his human sacrifice for sin, how could God forsake me knowing my mind and heart? Regardless of both sides of the scriptually based arguement of OSAS, I believe in a BIG God too. I trust him enough that he would not determine the status of my eternal afterlife on the words, concepts and interpretations of men.

29

I’m not saying that? I’m saying I don’t have enough information to answer the question why God is silent to you. Or why God is silent to many that profess to walking away from the faith.

Or for that matter why God is silent to many committed Christians that believe fully in his indwelling spirit, but are going through a time of trial.

I can’t answer that question for you. Nor can you answer why I don’t see holes in the Christian faith, and see a full and revelation that I find trustworthy to live my life by.

30

**
What exactly do you mean by a BIG God? It seems to me that you’re saying that no human, not even a divinely inspired book written by humans, can “nail down” what God is, what He does, or what He will do. That’s fine by me–part of the reason why I’m an agnostic, as a matter of fact. Even if I were to believe that there were empirical evidence for God, I would have to maintain that God is Ultimate Ineffability. We can’t say squat about Him, because language is a horrible and unwieldy tool, totally incapable of describing the divine.

If I were to overcome my “empirical agnosticism” and concede that there IS a higher power, I’d be unable to label people wrong. If a Hindu says, “I experienced Brahman through yoga and meditation,” I’d take him at his word. If a Wiccan says, “I experience the Goddess by doing such and such,” I’d take her at her word. I could not discount any of these experiences.

Ok, I’m rambling, so let me put the question(s) back to you, Navigator.

(1) Does your BIG God mean that He can’t be described at all? That He can only be poorly described? What?

(2) If you have such a hard time describing this BIG God, then how can you be sure that Jesus is necessary for salvation? How do you know that BIG God will not also rescue Muslims, abortion doctors, Richard Nixon, all of the original Mouseketeers, etc.? This BIG God of yours, as I understand it, sounds a helluva lot more like Allah than Jehova (I can elucidate on this last point if you wish, or you can just refer to, for example, Karen Armstrong’s A History of God).

(3) Hi Opal

(4) Isn’t this “BIG God” technique merely a rhetorical tool for saying, “If the Bible seems to contradict itself, it really isn’t, because God is BIG”? Sorry to sound cynical here, but I think you’d need to defend yourself from these type accusations.

Quix

31

Quix, I’m sorry that I’m not better able to make my thoughts clearer to you, I’ll try to be as detailed as I can.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by quixotic78 *
snip all the rambling and getting to your questions…

(1) Does your BIG God mean that He can’t be described at all?**
[quote[
No, clearly the Bible describes the attributes of God.

No, some of the descriptions of God are quite clear.

That the Bible incompletely describes God. The descriptions that the Bible details are sufficient for people of faith to have a good understanding of God, and yet there are parts of God that are beyond our ability to understand completely.

Since Jesus is the only man to overcome the grave, I guess I take him at his word. I’m all for a God that humbles himself to become human, and have saturation knowledge of what it means to live as a human. AFAIK, the Christian God is the only one to make that claim.

Clearly I don’t KNOW this, I leave that up to him. I’m told to go tell others, not to decide their fate. If you wish to decide others fate, have at it, it ain’t my yob.

Thanks for the offer, I’ll pass. I had my fill of Allah during a world religions course in college. And I’d rather not get into the whole Karen Armstrong debate. This is a pretty good piece on the whole competing revelation question, have a look if you like.

Hello to Opal as well! :slight_smile:

Shrug… If that is how you feel about the question, that is cool. I’m not going to tell you how to think. I tried (unsuccessfully I suppose) to give a good reasons for my faith. I don’t think that the attributes of God are contradictory. Nor do I think that passages of the Bible are contradictions, difficulties is a better term, but not irreconciable. YMMV.

32

I ['d when I shoulda ]'d…

A little help from you friendly moderator types would be appreciated! Thanks…