Hey everyone. I am debating with a Protestant Christian on Facebook who believes in “once saved always saved”. As a Protestant, she believes in sola scriptura as well so I am trying to use only the Bible to refute this false doctrine. So anyway, I was wondering if I could get some advice on how to convince her that this doctrine is false?
ONE APPROACH
*" It is hard for us Christians to explain this theory, even though many adopt it…"
After all “Once in Paradise, Always in Paradise” wasn’t true for Adam and Eve - though it COULD have been.
And “Once in heaven always in heaven” wasn’t true for Satan and his angels after the battle when there was found no place for them anymore.
And in Jesus’ parable of the Wicked Servant, the servant is condemned - then granted mercy by the King - but then is condemned again when it is reported that he has required strict justice and refused mercy on someone who’d owed HIM money. He lost his salvation.
That parable DOES go on to qualify that Jesus said the servant was sent to the torturers
(some bibles use a different word for this) until the last penny (farthing, scheckel) is paid … so one MIGHT argue that the “wicked but forgiven servant” did NOT lose his salvation
but yet suffered in Purgatory until the debt was satisfied. Saved, yet as through fire 1 Corinthians 3:15. But if there is only still eternal punishment even AFTER that last penny of justice is paid … then the wicked servant indeed HAD salvation and LOST it.
Either way it is good for us not to sin by presumption and to “work out our salvation in fear and trembling” Phillipians 2:12 as St. Paul said - never losing confidence in GOD’s part of things or His desire that “none shall be lost but that all should come to salvation”
(I wrote these down quickly … check them against Google for the chapter and verse).
hope these help. Besides scripture (which can be like agreeing to play in the Protestant’s ballpark - even though the New Testament was written just by Catholics
) consider
adjusting your presentation with a Persuasive Model. See below.
The wicked servant parable (if you could read it quickly then remark - how are we to
reconcile this passage from holy scripture with our propsition?) is thought provoking as surely seems to speak of heaven and judgement … and even if one insists that it was just an obscure parable meant ONLY to instruct 1st century Jews … Jesus’ words “my Father will treat you in the same way if you do not forgive your brother from your heart.”
puts it firmly in the genre of Jesus’ “The Kingdom of heaven is like …” parables.
Matthew 18:21 Then Peter approaching asked him, “Lord, if my brother sins against me, how often must I forgive him? As many as seven times?”
22 Jesus answered, "I say to you, not seven times but seventy-seven times.
23 That is why the
kingdom of heaven may be likened to a king who decided to settle accounts with his servants.
24 When he began the accounting, a debtor was brought before him who owed him a huge amount.
25 Since he had no way of paying it back, his master ordered him to be sold, along with his wife, his children, and all his property, in payment of the debt.
26 At that, the servant fell down, did him homage, and said, ‘Be patient with me, and I will pay you back in full.’
27 Moved with compassion the master of that servant let him go and forgave him the loan.
28 When that servant had left, he found one of his fellow servants who owed him a much smaller amount. He seized him and started to choke him, demanding, ‘Pay back what you owe.’
29 Falling to his knees, his fellow servant begged him, ‘Be patient with me, and I will pay you back.’
30 But he refused. Instead, he had him put in prison until he paid back the debt.
31 Now when his fellow servants saw what had happened, they were deeply disturbed, and went to their master and reported the whole affair.
32 His master summoned him and said to him, 'You wicked servant! I forgave you your entire debt because you begged me to.
33 Should you not have had pity on your fellow servant, as I had pity on you?’
34 Then in anger his master handed him over to the torturers until he should pay back the whole debt.
35 So will my heavenly Father do to you, unless each of you forgives his brother from his heart."
In verse 27 the servant gains forgiveness and “salvation”; in verse 34 he loses the forgiveness and “salvation” AT LEAST until he should pay back the full debt.
If he should then get his forgiveness and salvation “back” - he has still nonetheless lost his salvation for a TIME. And that TIME of being “saved, yet as through fire” would have been a purifying place that satisfied justice before re-issuing the benefits of salvation.
Of course if there is no Purgatory for some of the saved - then the wicked servant was sent to hell and had indeed lost his salvation - disproving the theory of “once saved always saved” at least in THAT case. And Jesus ended the parable by telling us it applied to US too.
1 Corinthians 3:11 for no one can lay a foundation other than the one that is there, namely, Jesus Christ.
12 If anyone builds on this foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, or straw, 13*** the work of each will come to light, for the Day will disclose it.*** It will be revealed with fire, and the fire (itself) will test the quality of each one’s work.
14 If the work stands that someone built upon the foundation, that person will receive a wage. 15 But*** if someone’s work is burned up, that one will suffer loss; the person will be saved, 8 but only as through fire.
Philippians 2:12 So then, my beloved, obedient as you have always been, not only when I am present but all the more now when I am absent,
work out your salvation with fear and trembling. 12
WITH CHARITY - as if you are learning this for the first time yourself. Journey with those you are trying to persuade. And of COURSE persuade ONLY to the truth! 
A great principle of persuasion was the method in which William Shakespeare structured his famous Mark Anthony speech in his play Julius Caesar. Anthony begins with a hostile audience … and ends with an audience hostile to HIS enemies (the assassins of Caesar).
How did he do it? The structure was this.
A nice greeting and invitation - “Friends, Romans, Countrymen, lend me your ears …”
**A restatement of the opponents’ case summary, fairly - (**He recounted Caesars assassination, but in detail the assassins’ reasons for doing it - never calling them assassins … but “honorable men”
He qualifies his assent: “If such charges were true … it was a grievous thing (a crime) …”
Noting the importance of the subject and getting it right: “and grievously hath Caesar paid for it!”
THEN BEGINS TO QUESTION ASPECTS of the opponents’ case. - Caesar’s so-called ambition … he reminded people that Caesar had been offered a crown and refused it.
Then recounts some other decidedly NOT ambitious events in Caesar’s life “ambition should be made of sterner stuff …”
and calls the “assassins” honorable men again, this time with an air of confusion.
Finally Anthony pins his "decsion’ (as if he’d been considering the case as a neutral) on a piece of evidence. Caesar’s will. THAT would tell us if he was ambitious or not.
When the will is read, revealing the Caesar (of the play at least) was leaving his wealth to Rome instead of his kin … the crowd turns on the assasins and becomes Anthony’s.
This model can be followed a bit for preparing a persuasive speech. A “We” feeling and “are examining the truth of the matter” neutralizes hostility and lowers people’s filters.
In your case “we Christians” or “we believers” must examine the truth of such important
matters in all its details.
Above were a couple “objections” to the “stated truth of the doctrine once saved always saved”. That is … **heaven **was permanent, but people (and Angels) have gotten kicked out according to the Bible.
