C
CWBetts
Guest
OSAS basically says that once a person “accepts Jesus as hi personal Lord and Savior” he will not go to Hell, regardless of past or future sins
- Status
K
kalt
Guest
I’ve heard two version on this forum. Some who believe in OSAS believe that they are saved no matter what. When asked what would happen if they commit a horrific sin and die unrepentant they give one of two answers. The first version is that someone who is OSAS would not commit “bad” sins. That would be a sign that they were never really saved. The second version goes that one who is OSAS would never die unrepentant and that even if they are killed while murdering, they would be sorry just before they died, even if the death is instantaneous.*I have heard that also, and as Catholics, our sins are ‘covered’ with Jesus’ blood, one time. Jesus’ sacrifice was what was needed to reconcile God with mankind, and give mankind the HOPE of salvation. I always tend to come into a snippit of what a Protestant preacher is saying on a radio program, for example–and never hear the beginnings of the talk or what. Can this person actually think that we are not responsible for our actions? Are we responsible for our eternal destiny? To a degree, yes…I think that if we willingly reject Christ, it will lead us down a dark path…But, we are not responsible for the ultimate cleansing of mankinds’ sins. We are not responsible for salvation BEING POSSIBLE. That is where perhaps the rub is…do Protestants who preach OSAS, believe that salvation is always possible, or do they mean, we are saved no matter what we do? *
*Jesus’ death on the cross, the ULTIMATE sacrifice is enough. As humans, we cannot earn heaven. As much as might misunderstand OSAS, non Catholics often believe that Catholics believe our ‘good works’ will get us a place in heaven. No, we don’t believe that. FOR THE RECORD!We do believe however, that faith without works IS dead. If you say you love Christ, your life SHOULD reflect that. If you say you love Christ, but are bitter, angry, murder people, steal, lie…cheat…etc…your words are dead. They are meaningless, dare I say.
If I tell my husband I love him madly, but cheat on him–are my words meaningless? He would think so.
*
So, I think we’re getting closer to making sense of things here…MICK–are we to you?
Both version mean, though, that salvation is guaranteed and can’t be lost.
I have no idea if this is the official version of the OSAS theory. It seems that there is nothing like the CCC to check. I’m thinking that there are probably more than 2 versions of OSAS out there.
K
kalt
Guest
What did those churches say about sin by the saved?
K
kalt
Guest
The poster you are taking the stick to (this time) belonged to chruches that believed in the OSAS theory. She knows what it’s about and rejects it. Her saying that OSAS is ridiculous is her experienced opinion which is validly shared here.Yes, you are.
Here’s another very recent Catholic interpolation.
Such final judgments make dialogue at least very difficult if not impossible.
Well, I’ll leave you to consider and reflect upon the content of this thread. I’ve laid out the case as best I can and now I must let it rest. I’d like to make it clear that I am not a believer in OSAS and never have been. I converted to Evangelical Christianity nine years ago at which time my worldview hovered somewhere between agnosticism and deism and during my time in the Evangelical world I always aligned myself with the Arminan view. But I have looked cautiously and carefully at Calvinism and within the parameters of Evangelical Christianity I think it is the most logical stance and that it has the most biblical support. I do not consider it to be stupid or ridiculous or anything to be laughed at, as do some Catholics here, and I feel prompted to suggest that such gratuitously angry attitudes when publicly manifested do little to aid Christian Unity.
But I’m glad to be able to say that there are other Catholics who engender a very different spirit into the proceedings and that you are one of them. You are a credit to your faith and the Lord you serve.
Respectfully,
Mick
I don’t believe that her goal was to continue a discussion of the merits of the OSAS theory. She believes it has no merit.
You said you’ve explained it to the best of your ability. Here’s hoping that someone else can pick up where your knowledge ends and make sense of what seems utterly senseless to those who don’t beleive in it.
K
kalt
Guest
No, no, silly. You’re supposed to accept any ridiculous theory that comes along - or at least appear to in writing on this forum - or else you’ll look rigid and hard-headed. And other people might not like you because you have the guts to post what you know is true.
There was nothing wrong with the quoted line, and the rest of your post was informative.
C
CWBetts
Guest
The Blood of Christ wased away all sins, so sinning really didn’t have any effect on your status as saved/unsaved. We were to avoid sin because the Bible said so, but if we fell into sin, it was no big deal, just repent and hit the SPiritual “reset button” The biggest effect that sin had was your social status in the church. For example, if it was believes that you “weren’t right with God” then you were treated like you weren;t even there. ANd how could you tell if you were “right with God”? If you offended Him, he would withold all blessings. It was very much a “health and wealth” Gospel.
K
kalt
Guest
Yeah, what she said.CW! I love how you just explained that…I know that, but sometimes don’t manage to articulate it well. Thank you, I’m stealing that if you don’t mind.
K
kalt
Guest
Do they elaborate on that? Or do people just accept it at face value? Do they ever discuss what happens when someone sins and isn’t repentant?
C
CWBetts
Guest
You have to understand, they believe any judgement based on werks, which is pretty much all judgement metioned in the Scriptures, is just about rewards in heaven. If someone falls into sin and isnt repentant, then they will lose on on "crowns"but they can in no way loose their salvation. In retrospect, I can’t believe I ever bought into this nonsense.
W
whatevergirl
Guest
*As Catholics, we are to stand for Truth…but with charity. I don’t see anyone not being charitable in this thread, and I don’t think anyone presupposes that we should accept theories we don’t agree with. At some point though, if someone disbelieves what you have to say, (you not being you kalt, but you in general) what can you do? Even Christ said to walk away, and shake the dust from your feet. There are always others who will listen to what you have to say.No, no, silly. You’re supposed to accept any ridiculous theory that comes along - or at least appear to in writing on this forum - or else you’ll look rigid and hard-headed. And other people might not like you because you have the guts to post what you know is true.
There was nothing wrong with the quoted line, and the rest of your post was informative.
My intent was mainly to see what the shooter thought…I mean, how tragic that he never learned Truth. Maybe he wouldn’t have gone through with murdering people and taking his own life, had he known it. He seemed to assume he was going to be seeing Jesus. His words were too nonchalant about that, come to think about it.
I appreciate everyone’s comments. *
W
whatevergirl
Guest
*Can you clarify ‘just rewards in heaven?’ Do you mean that those who believe in OSAS traditionally think that there will be different “levels” of heaven, depending on the works a person does? *
C
CWBetts
Guest
That is what I was taught
W
whatevergirl
Guest
What Scripture was used to teach you this? No rush in answering, whenever you get a minute to show me a few Biblical verses, I’d appreciate it.
C
CWBetts
Guest
THey used the same verses to justfy this that we use for Purgatory. ALso keep in mind that for me this was quite some time ago. I joined when I was 21, and was disgusted by the time I was 25. I am now 38.
K
Kalos
Guest
hi Whatever:*As Catholics, we are to stand for Truth…but with charity. I don’t see anyone not being charitable in this thread, and I don’t think anyone presupposes that we should accept theories we don’t agree with. At some point though, if someone disbelieves what you have to say, (you not being you kalt, but you in general) what can you do? Even Christ said to walk away, and shake the dust from your feet. There are always others who will listen to what you have to say.
My intent was mainly to see what the shooter thought…I mean, how tragic that he never learned Truth. Maybe he wouldn’t have gone through with murdering people and taking his own life, had he known it. He seemed to assume he was going to be seeing Jesus. His words were too nonchalant about that, come to think about it.
I appreciate everyone’s comments. *
I’d like to add a few thoughts to your thread. I already posted about this on another thread. (please see “Faulty doctrine in the news” - Apologetics)
i know your thinking; How could a Christian who goes to a church commit such an ugly crime? My theory is that it started with a lot of self pity and envy and an overbearing personality that couldn’t make freinds. The other tradgedy is that no one in his church seems to have reached out to him and his pastor seems to have been missleading. This guy let these sins take root in his life. He started hating on others. This can often let a demon in. Turned out to be a demon of murder. Yes, Christians can be influenced by demons. The devils will always try to convince you of their lies. This is how they tricked Adam and Eve. He told Eve that they would not die but God had said they would and they did, yet i think that i will still see them in heaven. Well what about Acts Ch.5? Ananias and Sapphira died without a chance to repent. We know they were church members and assume they were saved. Did God banish them to hell because of this one misstake? Notice that Peter asked, “Why hath Satan filled thine heart…” I believe it is possible that they will be in heaven. Here’s why:
What most people don’t understand is that salvation is not a “sin” question but a “Son” question. You see, 1Jn. 2:2 says that Christ died for the sins of the whole world, not just for ours. So sins have been taken out of the way. People don’t go to Hell because of sin, but because they reject the Gospel of Christ. Yet, if we presume upon God and knowingly and intentionally continue in sin, thinking it is forgiven, as it says in Heb. 10, there “remaineth no more a sacrifice for sins…” Grace is never a license to sin. Neverthe less, I believe in the security of the believer. As St. Jude said, “Now unto Him that is able to keep you from falling and to present you faultless before the presence of His glory with exceeding joy.” This is the savior i know and trust. I’m trusting that He is holding on to me more than my ability to hold on to Him. What about you, is this the Jesus you know?
B
brkn1
Guest
I agree that your church requires personal ‘graced-works’ to access and ‘hopefully’ obtain salvation evetually. Your theolgy is described as being ‘potentialist’ when it comes to salvation. You can not honestly thank God for salvation, since you can not even be sure that you will end up saved. You can only thank God for the opportunity to possibly be saved by grace, if you do not mess up as humans sometimes do. Your addition of cooperative works to God’s grace are what your hope and faith must rest upon. There will be some basis for later boasting in your own salvation-maintaining works, if you should succeed.
The only Person that can purge any of your sin is Christ and what He did for you.
I do not believe in limited atonement. Christ’s Sacrifice is more than sufficient for all that might come to saving faith in Him. Jesus Christ is the only Way to be saved though. God the Father is said to be the One Who gives and brings those saved to Christ by the Holy Spirit. You can’t just dismiss that part of Scripture.
You deny the certainty of true faith by your logic. You place it in the same category as what the world understands as ‘hope’, which has a sense of gambling to it.
A sure hope is what true faith is. God said it, so you accept it, even if you do not fully understand it. God values such faith in His Word most highly, since it glorifies and honors Him.
Such hopeful confidence can not be considered true saving faith either, according to OSAS believers.
I’m curious if anyone here can give a Catholic explanation of those verses in my post #16? It has to do with osas ---->(Philipians 1:5,6). Thanks.
N
NotTooSmart
Guest
Hello:
First of all I would like to say that I do not adhere to Eternal Security (I like to use the term they use instead of a pejorative). Nevertheless I have talked quite a bit to some who do and think I understand the doctrine fairly well. That being said, when this is presented correctly and in balance, it is not a doctrine that I oppose. It is just a doctrine I lack evidence to buy into. Perhaps this is my tradition which is not Calvinistic.
Concerning the hypothetical.
The Calvinists that I know would never declare with certainty that this person is in heaven. Most likely at a later point he repented; which would be evidence that he did not lose his salvation, rather his salvation led him to repentance (this seems reasonable). Perhaps he was never saved in the first place (hmm I have heard this…still chewing on it though, but perhaps).
I personally believe that we can never know with 100% certainty whether someone else is in heaven with the Lord (although we certainly can comfort a grieving family by saying their loved one is with the Lord if we believe this to be true). I believe that the only 100% certainty we can have is with our own salvation right now (if I died right now I know I would be with the Lord).
I believe that this certainty is not based upon how good I may or may not have been. Instead this certainty is based upon my relationship with Jesus Christ, which in turn is based upon His death and His resurrection. As a pastor friend once said, although I do not believe in eternal security, I do believe in very security and that you can be very secure in the loving arms of our Lord.
First of all I would like to say that I do not adhere to Eternal Security (I like to use the term they use instead of a pejorative). Nevertheless I have talked quite a bit to some who do and think I understand the doctrine fairly well. That being said, when this is presented correctly and in balance, it is not a doctrine that I oppose. It is just a doctrine I lack evidence to buy into. Perhaps this is my tradition which is not Calvinistic.
Concerning the hypothetical.
The Calvinists that I know would never declare with certainty that this person is in heaven. Most likely at a later point he repented; which would be evidence that he did not lose his salvation, rather his salvation led him to repentance (this seems reasonable). Perhaps he was never saved in the first place (hmm I have heard this…still chewing on it though, but perhaps).
I personally believe that we can never know with 100% certainty whether someone else is in heaven with the Lord (although we certainly can comfort a grieving family by saying their loved one is with the Lord if we believe this to be true). I believe that the only 100% certainty we can have is with our own salvation right now (if I died right now I know I would be with the Lord).
I believe that this certainty is not based upon how good I may or may not have been. Instead this certainty is based upon my relationship with Jesus Christ, which in turn is based upon His death and His resurrection. As a pastor friend once said, although I do not believe in eternal security, I do believe in very security and that you can be very secure in the loving arms of our Lord.
C
CWBetts
Guest
This is not to be found in the Scriptures anywhere! Even Paul did not believe in OSAS. IF I died right now, I would be resonably sure that I would go to heaven after purification, but to say that I am 100% sure is presumption don’t you think?
N
NotTooSmart
Guest
Well a Scriptural case can be made for Calvinism, I will grant that. It is not like there are absolutely 0 Scriptures that can be found that are used to support it.
But the reason why I don’t buy into it for myself is that I just don’t get the sense in reading the whole of the New Testament that the authors were five point Calvinists. There just are too many NT passages that a Calvinist just would not word the way that the NT words them in order for me to be comfortable with Calvinism. So no, I do not believe that Paul was a Calvinist (hmm that sounds rather anachronistic to me).
No I do not believe it is presumption for the believer to know the state of his/her soul in the present tense (These things I have written in order that you may know you have eternal life). Instead I believe that this quiet assurance is something that God wants for His children.
With my earthly family, I do not want my children to be insecure in the knowledge that they are my children (well they are grown now). I believe it is the same way with the family of God.
G
Gerry_Hunter
Guest
Technical note: In Catholic theology, “presumption” means assuming that one can achieve salvation on one’s own, through one’s own efforts, without the need of God’s grace, or Christ’s work. So “presumption” is not one of the problems with OSAS,
Blessings,
Gerry
Blessings,
Gerry
- Status