OSAS- Once Saved Always Saved

[spedteacherita]

I’ve seen this term used often in the Non-Catholic Religions forum and I’m curious as to how people define this.

My understanding of OSAS is that a person who becomes a Christian (is “saved”) does not have to do anything from then on…that’s an extreme position but I’ve known people who subscribe to this philosophy.

As a Lutheran I don’t agree with this position. I know that we must be penitent for our sins, confess them to our Lord, be in the Word, get baptized, and regularly take the Lord’s Supper as well as part of corporate worship. Those are a lot of things to do but those are all done as a result of the Holy Spirit working in my life through Christ and because of Christ’s final sacrificial atonement on the cross.

How do you and/or your denomination define/describe OSAS? Very curious here.

***Don or Jon or any other conservative Lutheran - feel free to add or take away. Sometimes my mind doesn’t express as clearly as it used to.

Blessings, all!

Rita

 

[benhur]

I’ve seen this term used often in the Non-Catholic Religions forum and I’m curious as to how people define this.

My understanding of OSAS is that a person who becomes a Christian (is “saved”) does not have to do anything from then on…that’s an extreme position but I’ve known people who subscribe to this philosophy.

As a Lutheran I don’t agree with this position. I know that we must be penitent for our sins, confess them to our Lord, be in the Word, get baptized, and regularly take the Lord’s Supper as well as part of corporate worship. Those are a lot of things to do but those are all done as a result of the Holy Spirit working in my life through Christ and because of Christ’s final sacrificial atonement on the cross.

How do you and/or your denomination define/describe OSAS? Very curious here.

***Don or Jon or any other conservative Lutheran - feel free to add or take away. Sometimes my mind doesn’t express as clearly as it used to.

Blessings, all!

Rita

Hi s,

never heard OSAS defined that way. I understood that whatever one must do after salvation, we will do by His good graces. The part that really defines it is that we can choose to depart, jump out of His hand, yet He keeps us from desiring that, that nothing can separate us , or take us out of His hand. He is able to grace us to endure to the end. The doctrine is also known that if someone does "depart from the faith , that they were never of us, as John states in his epistle. At the very least, they never were “good soil”, which is a must for any believer to as you say, kind of run the race to completion.

great saints and scholars have debated this endlessly… so I kind of believe in both sides …lol

Blessings

do not remember if predestination is part of it…and there I believe in both sides again

Like you get to the pearly gates and the sign says, " Well done , for you have chosen wisely on whom to serve ( ala jeremiah quote). You get thru the gate , and the other side of the sign says, “For you have been predestined since before the foundation of the world”.

 

[drblank1]

I like the term “If saved, always saved.”

 

[Lenten_ashes]

Hi s,

never heard OSAS defined that way. I understood that whatever one must do after salvation, we will do by His good graces. The part that really defines it is that we can choose to depart, jump out of His hand, yet He keeps us from desiring that, that nothing can separate us , or take us out of His hand. He is able to grace us to endure to the end. The doctrine is also known that if someone does "depart from the faith , that they were never of us, as John states in his epistle. At the very least, they never were “good soil”, which is a must for any believer to as you say, kind of run the race to completion.

great saints and scholars have debated this endlessly… so I kind of believe in both sides …lol

Blessings

do not remember if predestination is part of it…and there I believe in both sides again

Like you get to the pearly gates and the sign says, " Well done , for you have chosen wisely on whom to serve ( ala jeremiah quote). You get thru the gate , and the other side of the sign says, “For you have been predestined since before the foundation of the world”.

Some scriptures seem to support it - many others contradict it.

I tried to believe in it as a Protestant. But just too much scriptural evidence that I saw that opposes this position. (sorry Dr. White and Matt Slick, you are not convincing lol)

I think it’s reasonable to have assurance you are “saved” so long as you are walking with the Lord. But I’ve seen so many who appeared to be true Christians - can quote scripture left and right, then later backslidden badly and it muddies the waters as to who is true and who isn’t. I just don’t see how a scripture quoting machine can be backslidden forever and/or lack the fruit of the Spirit and call it rocky soil as the problem. Must have been good soil if they got that far, imo.

 

[Lenten_ashes]

I like the term “If saved, always saved.”

Sounds like the Catholic understanding of predestination.

Election is very scriptural. But only God knows who is heaven bound.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

I’ve seen this term used often in the Non-Catholic Religions forum and I’m curious as to how people define this.

My understanding of OSAS is that a person who becomes a Christian (is “saved”) does not have to do anything from then on…that’s an extreme position but I’ve known people who subscribe to this philosophy.

As a Lutheran I don’t agree with this position. I know that we must be penitent for our sins, confess them to our Lord, be in the Word, get baptized, and regularly take the Lord’s Supper as well as part of corporate worship. Those are a lot of things to do but those are all done as a result of the Holy Spirit working in my life through Christ and because of Christ’s final sacrificial atonement on the cross.

How do you and/or your denomination define/describe OSAS? Very curious here.

***Don or Jon or any other conservative Lutheran - feel free to add or take away. Sometimes my mind doesn’t express as clearly as it used to.

Blessings, all!

Rita

Basically, the logic is as follows: If you believe that you can lose salvation, then it makes no sense to speak of being justified by faith alone, since your works clearly affect your salvation/justification. So the Lutheran position, by rejecting OSAS, is inconsistent on their view of salvation. This is why many Protestants hold to OSAS, and in doing so many go to the extreme of saying they can live however they please.

 

[drac16]

It’s the belief in which Jesus will not lose a single person whom the Father has given to Him. The Father draws a person [to Christ], Christ saves him/her and the Holy Spirit conforms him/her to the image of Christ. The Gospel is a trinitarian message. I believe that if we were to depend upon our own strength to believe and do good deeds, none of us would succeed (i.e. we would all go to Hell). The only way one can be saved is by grace, it’s not because a saved person is inherently superior to an unbeliever.

The question that you need to ask before you say that OSAS is wrong or right is this: Will Jesus succeed in saving all that the Father gives him?.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

It’s the belief in which Jesus will not lose a single person whom the Father has given to Him.

Jesus said (John 17:12):
While I was with them, I kept them in your name, which you have given me. I have guarded them, and not one of them has been lost except the son of destruction, that the Scripture might be fulfilled.
Jesus explicitly says He lost one of those whom the Father has given Him, so your claim is unbiblical.

The Father draws a person [to Christ], Christ saves him/her and the Holy Spirit conforms him/her to the image of Christ. The Gospel is a trinitarian message.

Indeed, but since salvation is a relationship, that relationship can be harmed by your actions. That’s precisely what Adam did, breaking fellowship with the Trinity. St Paul says it pretty plainly, “if we deny him, he also will deny us” (2 Tim 2:12).

I believe that if we were to depend upon our own strength to believe and do good deeds, none of us would succeed (i.e. we would all go to Hell). The only way one can be saved is by grace, it’s not because a saved person is inherently superior to an unbeliever.

Agreed, but somewhat irrelevant. Grace can be resisted, which is precisely why Christians are able to turn to sin!

The question that you need to ask before you say that OSAS is wrong or right is this: Will Jesus succeed in saving all that the Father gives him?.

According to the Scriptures, not all the Father gives Jesus will be saved in the end. Period. Now, if you believe you must regularly ask for forgiveness whenever you sin throughout the week, this means your actions affect your relationship with God, and that these sins are not pre-forgiven, but rather must be asked for on regular basis. The Our Father prayer, which we are to pray regularly, has us ask the Father to “forgive us our trespasses,” which is ridiculous if we are OSAS.

 

[Cathoholic]

spedteacherita.

OSAS is a false teaching that once someone is IN Christ, they infallibly cannot choose to separate themselves from Christ definitively.

Lutherans and Catholics stand shoulder to shoulder in condemning this phony tradition of men.

There are bait and switch games proponents of OSAS have to use to try to make the tradition seem convincing. (This is not done out of malice I am convinced. I think the followers of the OSAS tradition mean well and are mistakenly sincere.)

OSAS has other variations such as “Eternal Security” and “Perseverance of the Saints”.

You will find differing definitions on these variations depending upon which OSAS follower you are talking to (which in and of itself should send up red flags)

There are many partial truths with OSAS. We will probably see some of them here on this thread.

God bless.

Cathoholic

 

[ATraveller]

I like the term “If saved, always saved.”

I have never heard of this before. It’s much better. There needs to be a campaign to replace the awful, easily misunderstood OSAS phrase.

Basically, the logic is as follows: If you believe that you can lose salvation, then it makes no sense to speak of being justified by faith alone, since your works clearly affect your salvation/justification. So the Lutheran position, by rejecting OSAS, is inconsistent on their view of salvation. This is why many Protestants hold to OSAS, and in doing so many go to the extreme of saying they can live however they please.

I don’t know about that. If a person is truly saved they would be transformed and good works would be evidence of it. It is unfortunate some do not repent but most would understand OSAS along these lines:
youtube.com/watch?v=V3elNE7mZXY

 

[James248]

I have never heard of this before. It’s much better. There needs to be a campaign to replace the awful, easily misunderstood OSAS phrase.
I don’t know about that. If a person is truly saved they would be transformed and good works would be evidence of it. It is unfortunate some do not repent but most would understand OSAS along these lines:
youtube.com/watch?v=V3elNE7mZXY

And if that person sins? He still needs to repent.

 

[MaryT777]

I like the term “If saved, always saved.”

That saying begs the question of how to define “IF saved.” How does one know IF they are saved by that definition.

Mary.

 

[ATraveller]

And if that person sins? He still needs to repent.

I don’t know many who would think there is no need to repent or Christians can’t sin. It’s not universal but some ‘non-denominational’ churches, which is probably the first thing that comes to mind with OSAS, practise confession by confessing their sins to others, accountability partners, pastors, small groups and etc. and explicitly teach the need to rebuke, upholding one another, continually renewing our minds, and etc. Not all of them are happy-clappy prosperity ‘gospel’ types some may believe them to be. They do exist and they do need to be rebuked.

That saying begs the question of how to define “IF saved.” How does one know IF they are saved by that definition.

Mary.

If they’re saved they would bear fruits. That video link I posted may give you a sense of what is meant.

 

[MaryT777]

I don’t know many who would think there is no need to repent or Christians can’t sin. It’s not universal but some ‘non-denominational’ churches, which is probably the first thing that comes to mind with OSAS, practise confession by confessing their sins to others, accountability partners, pastors, small groups and etc. and explicitly teach the need to rebuke, upholding one another, continually renewing our minds, and etc. Not all of them are happy-clappy prosperity ‘gospel’ types some may believe them to be. They do exist and they do need to be rebuked.
If they’re saved they would bear fruits. That video link I posted may give you a sense of what is meant.

I will review the video link you posted. The problem is some see many non Christians bearing good fruits while their Christian counterparts are engaging in serious sin. That is why my sister is an Atheist.

I do think CS Lewis addressed this in his book “Screwtape Letters.” A trick of the devil is to show that many people in Churches are not examples of exemplary behavior. However we know the Church is a hospital for sinners. Definitely a good read.

Then I have heard Christians that say someone is " backslidden" or was never “really saved” if they end up in adulterous relationships or other what some consider “serious sin.”

I appreciate your post.

Mary.

 

[LatinRight]

Like you get to the pearly gates and the sign says, "Well done , for you have chosen wisely on whom to serve ( ala jeremiah quote). You get thru the gate , and the other side of the sign says, “For you have been predestined since before the foundation of the world”.

God bless Benhur and every readers of the CAF.

I like your quote.

Only those will ever goes through the pearly gates, and infallibly every one of them, who have been predestined since before the foundation of the world.

God bless.

LatinRight

 

[ATraveller]

I will review the video link you posted. The problem is some see many non Christians bearing good fruits while their Christian counterparts are engaging in serious sin. That is why my sister is an Atheist.

I do think CS Lewis addressed this in his book “Screwtape Letters.” A trick of the devil is to show that many people in Churches are not examples of exemplary behavior. However we know the Church is a hospital for sinners. Definitely a good read.

Then I have heard Christians that say someone is " backslidden" or was never “really saved” if they end up in adulterous relationships or other what some consider “serious sin.”

I appreciate your post.

Mary.

Bearing good fruits is also bearing witness. And obviously that does matter but yet it seems like it isn’t stressed enough and sometimes the OSAS line isn’t helpful.
I didn’t become an atheist but I became very bitter and resentful of other Christians guilty or not growing up knowing about some egregious sins committed. It took me a lot of time to put that aside and still have to fight it off. No matter how much I was told and reminded myself humanity is fallen and of my own sins, the actions of others overrides any effects of the rational part of a person, at least that was my experience. Satan really knows how to sow resentment and division. I pray she can eventually overcome the effects of what has happened and what’s happening now.

 

[fhansen]

I like the term “If saved, always saved.”

So do I. The problem with OSAS is that it’s based on the presumption that one can know with absolute certainty that one is saved.

 

[Michael85]

I have come across two versions of once saved always saved. The first is essentially what it says: once you believe in Jesus as your Saviour, you don’t have to repent of any of your sins or change your life. No matter what you do after that point in time, you are guaranteed heaven. I think this is what is referred to as “easy-believism”. I encountered this view while (briefly) attending an Indpendent Fundamental KJV Only Baptist church. I used to go out “soul-winning” (door-to-door evangelism) with another guy from that church, and during the presentation he would turn to Acts 16:31 and ask them to read it: “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved”. He then went on to ask the person if they had to go to church, confess their sins to a priest, and repent of their sins in order to be saved. The answer he was expecting was ‘no’. I remember seeing his outline for door-to-door preaching and after someone prayed the ‘sinner’s prayer’ they were to be told that they had two choices - to live like the world or to live for Christ. Both choices, he said, would lead to heaven but living for Christ meant that you’d have more rewards.

The Reformed church that I attended for the past 4 years also taught once saved always saved, aka perseverance of the saints (the ‘P’ in the TULIP). However, they said that you did have to follow the law, but out of love for God, not in order to be saved. They would say that you don’t have the choice to live like the world, but that the Holy Ghost will indwell you and help you to live a good life. They held to the ‘never saved in the first place’ kind of OSAS, in the case of someone falling away. I remember asking the pastor about the verse that says we have to forgive others if we want God to forgive us, and he said that if you’re not forgiving others, you should be questioning whether you’re truly saved. I think that is how they approach all issues of sin from the position of losing one’s salvation. They also believe in unconditional election, meaning that God predestined you to be saved and enabled you to believe, so He will keep you from losing your salvation.

Both versions have problematic verses in the Bible, and I’ve heard Protestant apologists ‘explain away’ these verses so that they don’t mean what they say they mean. I think they may be interpreting these verses in the light of OSAS, which is very problematic.

 

[LatinRight]

So do I. The problem with OSAS is that it’s based on the presumption that one can know with absolute certainty that one is saved.

God bless Fhansen and every readers of the CAF.

I don’t mean to invade your privacy.

I’m sure God performed on you a heart transplant operation (Ez.36:26-27) and you know it with absolute certainty.

Do you think Fhansen, God performs the same heart transplant operation on the reprobates as well who are predestined to hell from all eternity for their vehement rejection of God and His grace?

Don’t need to answer the question because we all know the answer.

God bless.

LatinRight

 

[fhansen]

God bless Fhansen and every readers of the CAF.

I don’t mean to invade your privacy.

I’m sure God performed on you a heart transplant operation (Ez.36:26-27) and you know it with absolute certainty.

Do you think Fhansen, God performs the same heart transplant operation on the reprobates as well who are predestined to hell from all eternity for their vehement rejection of God and His grace?

Don’t need to answer the question because we all know the answer.

God bless.

LatinRight

No one knows the answer with the certainty you espouse LR; they only presume to. And heart transplants can still fail BTW; and we can’t foretell which ones will and which won’t. But only those patients who make it to the end with their new hearts intact proceed to heaven. The others, with heart failure, were “reprobate” regardless of what they thought earlier in life.

Incidentally God would never be so mean and petty as to create beings whose destinies were predetermined to be eternal torment. If He was, you wouldn’t want to spend eternity with Him anyway.