OSAS you got a BIG PROBLEM

  • Thread starter Thread starter rinnie
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
“Where angels fear to tread”…the parable ISN’T about the son…either son…the parable is about the Father’s goodness and faithfulness. Jesus is saying “This is what God is like.” To move the focus away from the love and faithfulness of the Father is to miss the whole point of the story…IMO.

:twocents:
Hi Pub, How is it going. Got a question you said the parable isn’t about either son. Then why would the example be about 2 sons that went different ways?

While yes I agree, and do not find anyone who would disagree with you that this is absolutely about forgiveness, and the love and faithfulness our Father has for us, does it not also reflect on our need to repemt?

If you want to see the Love and Faithfulness OUR FATHER has for us, you need to look no further then the Cross.

But I do not see this not to show ONLY how much God loves us, I see this as the Father Seeing the SON come home and repenting. Because if this is only about how much Gods loves us, what about the People who Choose to not accept God and reject him? Does that change the Fathers love for them? Does that mean if you refuse to repent and obey God that you will still enter heaven? Because if its only about GODS love then were are all getting in, Correct?

But back to the question at hand, maybe you can answer it. Was the SON SAVED before he left the Fathers House? Simple Yes or No?
 
They call it the “Golden Chain of Salvation”. Those whom he justifies, he sanctifies, and those He sanctifies, he glorifies.

Even Catholics agree we are saved in baptism, which replaces circumcision as the initiation rite to the Covenant.

That is part of the OSAS package.

Yes, he was saved because he was born into the covenant. He was already a member of the Father’s house. He strayed, and God disciplined him as He does with all His sons, and, as the Father desired, he returned to the place he always belonged.
Agreed, Yes he WAS saved because he was born into the covenant. The same as we are saved into the New Covenant Baptism.

But the question remains OSAS. How can that be possible? As I explained previously I cannot see OSAS in either the OC or the New Covenant.
 
That is my point it is a argument against. I have not found ONE person who can say this is NOT an argument against, thats my point.
I have. Dispensationalists simply throw this out, along with most everything Jesus said about salvation. They say that these are Jesus’ teaching to the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel, and do not apply "this side of the Cross’. They say that the Pauline writings are the best systematic treatment of what is needed for salvation.

Since the Jews were under another covenant, they had different guidelines. Do you have another arguement that does not include Jesus’ teaching that was meant only for Jews?
 
I have. Dispensationalists simply throw this out, along with most everything Jesus said about salvation. They say that these are Jesus’ teaching to the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel, and do not apply "this side of the Cross’. They say that the Pauline writings are the best systematic treatment of what is needed for salvation.

Since the Jews were under another covenant, they had different guidelines. Do you have another arguement that does not include Jesus’ teaching that was meant only for Jews?
Still makes no sense. Look at this in another way. You are missing my question. Lets say its ONLY for the Jews. Which may I add I do not agree. But lets say I DO.

Explain this to me then. SO Jesus said, Because this son of mine was DEAD but has come back to LIFE AGAIN, he was LOST but now has been found. So how do they explain that? Can only Jews be dead and come back to life. Can only Jews be lost and then be found?

ANd what does dead and come back to life mean?
 
I have. Dispensationalists simply throw this out, along with most everything Jesus said about salvation. They say that these are Jesus’ teaching to the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel, and do not apply "this side of the Cross’. They say that the Pauline writings are the best systematic treatment of what is needed for salvation.

Since the Jews were under another covenant, they had different guidelines. Do you have another arguement that does not include Jesus’ teaching that was meant only for Jews?
Also if this parable is meant only for the Jews why does it start out the tax collectors and sinners were ALL drawing near to listen to him. Does being a Jew all it requires to be a sinner?:eek: I think not.
 
Here I go, despite my promises to myself that I won’t do it, jumping in where angels fear to tread.🤷

First, I am not a believer in OSAS.

Second, I don’t think the parable of the Prodigal Son is a particularly apt argument against OSAS. Metaphorical stories, while they may lead us to truth, are not necessarily good examples of truth. In the parable, the son was never really dead, he was merely separated from his family in a way that might be thought of as death – completely and totally cut off with little or no expectation that he would ever return. His return made it possible for his family – except, perhaps, his brother – to rejoice that he would no longer be thought of as dead. He was restored to the family.

If one wanted to make a case for OSAS, it might be found in Luke 15:31, “Son, you are always with me, and all that is mine is yours,” as the father speaks to his other son who is disgusted with the welcome given to his errant brother. Look at those words “always” and “all.” It sounds like an eternal promise with no ifs, ands, or buts about it. But one verse out of many is hardly a firm base for theology. Just a few thoughts.
JL: Yes one son remained in his father’s house, always, from his birth. Yet the other LIVING son WAS with him (in his father’s house) and LEFT, by his own free will, wasting AND losing his inheritance on sin. He repented returning to his father’s house confessing he sinned. Had the waster not repented, and returned confessing he sinned, he would have REMAINED outside his father’s house forever.

Lk15:21 And the son said unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and in thy sight, and am NO MORE WORTHY TO BE CALLED THY SON.

Lk15:24 For this my son WAS DEAD, and IS ALIVE AGAIN; he WAS LOST, and IS FOUND. And they began to be merry.
 
I don’t think the parable of the Prodigal Son is a particularly apt argument against OSAS. Metaphorical stories, while they may lead us to truth, are not necessarily good examples of truth. In the parable, the son was never really dead, he was merely separated from his family in a way that might be thought of as death – completely and totally cut off with little or no expectation that he would ever return. His return made it possible for his family – except, perhaps, his brother – to rejoice that he would no longer be thought of as dead. He was restored to the family.
JL: Death can not only refer to the death of the body when the living soul departs and man is cut off or separated from earthly life, see Lk16:19-31 Lazarus and the rich man. Death also refers to the death of the soul when the soul is cut off or separated from God,

[Ezk18:4…the soul that sins will die,

Eph2:1 As for you, you were DEAD in your transgressions and sins,

Col2:13 When you were DEAD in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, HAVING FORGIVEN US all our transgressions,].

[1Tim 5:6 But the widow who lives for pleasure is dead even while she lives.

[1Jn3:14 We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love our brothers. Anyone who DOES NOT LOVE REMAINS IN DEATH. 15 Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that NO MURDERED HAS ETERNAL LIFE IN HIM.

[Mt8:22 But Jesus told him, “Follow me, and LET THE DEAD BURY THEIR OWN DEAD.”]

We are DEAD, bodily or spiritually or BOTH, but it does not mean NO LIFE, as we see in many scriptures, especially Mt10:28 and Lk16:19-31.
 
Even if this passage could be applied to converts (which they say it does not) then they would just say that perseverance of the saints applies. God had already saved the boy, so he would have returned no matter what. This is part of God’s irresistable grace. He would not have died in a state of separation from the father. He could not, because God would see to it that he returned.
JL: If they would say, “he would have RETURNED no matter what”. I would say, he had to LEAVE first. If he RETURNED to a state of salvation he had to have first lost salvation to RETURN. Even if God FORCED him back. Also if God’s grace is irresistalbe how could he have resisted and left in the first place?
 
This one is very easy for a dispensationalist to get out of. You see, Jesus did not really have a lot to say about the doctrine of salvation. He was sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. This parable is directed toward those Jews who are circumcised under the old covenant. You see, Rinnie, although everything in Scripture was written “for” you, not all of it is written “about” you. This parable can’t be applied to converts “this side of the cross”. Converts were never part of the household of God.
JL: My response to dispensationalist would be, where is your scriptural evidence? Didn’t Jesus come to save Jews and Gentiles? Is there more than ONE OLIVE TREE, are Gentiles not grafted into that ONE olive tree? Yes Jesus preached only to the Jews, that was his mission. But the gospel he preached was the same gospel preached to the Gentiles.

[Rms11:15 For **if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, WHAT SHALL THE RECEIVING OF THEM BE, but life from the dead? 16 For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and IF THE ROOT BE HOLY, SO ARE THE BRANCHES. 17 And if some of the branches be broken off, AND THOU BEING A WILD OLIVE TREE, WERT GRAFTED IN among them, **AND WITH THEM ** PARTAKEST OF THE ROOT and fatness OF THE OLIVE TREE; 18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, THOU BEAREST NOT THE ROOT, but the root thee. 19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in. 20 Well; BECAUSE OF UNBELIEF THEY WERE BROKEN OFF, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: 21 For IF GOD SPARED NOT THE NATURAL BRANCES, take heed lest he also spare not thee. 22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. 23 And they also, IF THEY ABIDE NOT STILL IN UNBELIEF, SHALL BE GRAFTED IN: for GOD IS ABLE TO GRAFT THEM IN AGAIN. 24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, AND WERT GRAFTED contrary to nature INTO A GOOD OLIVE TREE.: HOW MUCH MORE SHALL THESE, which be THE NATURAL BRANCES, BE GRAFTED INTO THEIR OWN OLIVE TREE? 25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, UNTIL the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. 26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: 27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. 28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the father’s sakes. 29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. 30 For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief: 31 Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy. 32 For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.]

There is only ONE olive tree whose roots are holy and we have been grafted into that ONE OLIVE TREE. When God converts all Israel, they will be grafted back into that SAME, ONE, OLIVE TREE, with the ONE people of God. In the ONE BODY AND BRIDE OF CHRIST, THE CHURCH.

[Eph3:4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) 5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; 6 **THAT THE GENTILES SHOULD BE FELLOWHEIRS, and BE OF THE SAME BODY, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:] CONTINUED:
 
CONTINUED:

[Eph2:11 Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; 12 **That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens FROM the commonwealth of ISRAEL, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: 13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. 14 For HE IS OUR PEACE, WHO HATH MADE BOTH ONE, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; 15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for TO MAKE IN HIMSELF of twain ONE NEW MAN, so making peace; 16 And that he might RECONCILE BOTH unto God IN ONE BODY by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: 17 And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh. 18 For through him we BOTH have access by one Spirit unto the Father. 19 **Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but FELLOWCITIZENS with the saints, and OF THE HOUSEHOLD OF GOD **; 20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; 21 In whom ALL THE BUILDING fitly framed together GROWETH UNTO AN HOLY TEMPLE IN THE LORD: 22 In whom ye also are BUILDED TOGETHER for AN HABITATION OF GOD through the Spirit.] I see NO evidence there are two people of God. When God converts all Israel they will be baptized into the ONE BODY OF CHRIST the Church.

[1Cor12:13 For **by one Spirit are we ALL BAPTIZED into ONE BODY, WHETHER we be JEWS or GENTILES , whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.] By the Spirit are ALL BAPTIZED into one BODY, the Church.

Gal3:26 For YE ARE ALL CHILDREN OF GOD BY FAITH IN CHRIST JESUS. 27 For AS MANY OF YOU AS HAVE BEEN BAPTIZED INTO CHRIST have put on Christ. 28 THERE IS NEITHER JEW NOR GREEK, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for YE ARE ALL ONE IN CHRIST JESUS. 29 And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye ABRAHAM’S SEED, and HEIRS according TO THE PROMISE.

[Eph2:11 Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; 12 **That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens FROM the commonwealth of ISRAEL, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: 13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. 14 For HE IS OUR PEACE, WHO HATH MADE BOTH ONE, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; 15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for TO MAKE IN HIMSELF of twain ONE NEW MAN, so making peace; 16 And that he might RECONCILE BOTH unto God IN ONE BODY by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: 17 And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh. 18 For through him we BOTH have access by one Spirit unto the Father. 19 **Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but FELLOWCITIZENS with the saints, and ]OF THE HOUSEHOLD OF GOD **; 20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; 21 In whom ALL THE BUILDING fitly framed together GROWETH UNTO AN HOLY TEMPLE IN THE LORD: 22 In whom ye also are BUILDED TOGETHER for AN HABITATION OF GOD through the Spirit.] I see NO evidence there are two people of God. When God converts all Israel they will be baptized into the ONE BODY OF CHRIST the Church.

Gal3:26 For YE ARE ALL CHILDREN OF GOD BY FAITH IN CHRIST JESUS. 27 For AS MANY OF YOU AS HAVE BEEN BAPTIZED INTO CHRIST have put on Christ. 28 THERE IS NEITHER JEW NOR GREEK, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for YE ARE ALL ONE IN CHRIST JESUS. 29 And if ye be Christ’s, THEN ARE YE ABRAHAM’S SEED, and HEIRS according TO THE PROMISE.

Hb9:14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? 15 And for this cause HE IS THE MEDIATOR OF THE NEW TESTAMENT, that by means of death, FOR THE REDEMPTION OF THE TRANSGRESSIONS that were UNDER THE FIRST TESTAMENT, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

Hb10:4 For IT IS NOT POSSIBLE that the blood of bulls and of goats SHOULD TAKE AWAY SINS.

Speaking of the OT righteous Hb11:39 And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, RECEIVED NOT THE PROMISE: 40 God having provided some better thing for us, THAT THEY WITHOUT US SHOULD NOT BE MADE PERFECT.
 
JL: I see no evidence, for DISPENSATIONALISM it is a tradition of men made a doctrine of God.

CHANGE OF AUTHORITY OR HIERARCHY MT21:33 Hear another parable: There was a certain householder, which planted a vineyard, and hedged it round about, and digged a winepress in it, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and went into a far country: 34 And when the time of the fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the husbandmen, that they might receive the fruits of it. 35 And the husbandmen took his servants, and beat one, and killed another, and stoned another. 36 Again, he sent other servants more than the first: and they did unto them likewise. 37 But LAST OF ALL HE SENT UNTO THEM HIS SON, saying, They will reverence my son. 38 But when the husbandmen saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance. 39 And they caught him, and cast him out of the vineyard, and slew him. 40 When the lord therefore of the vineyard cometh, WHAT WILL HE DO UNTO THOSE HUSBANDMEN? 41 They say unto him, HE WILL miserably DESTROY THOSE wicked men, AND will LET OUT HIS VINEYARD UNTO OTHER HUSBANDMEN, which shall render him the fruits in their seasons. 42 Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: THIS IS THE LORDS DOING, and it is marvellous in our eyes? 43 THEREFORE SAY I unto you, THE KINGDOM OF GOD SHALL BE TAKEN FROM YOU, AND GIVEN TO A NATION BRINGING FORTH THE FRUITS THEREOF. 44 And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder. 45 And **WHEN THE CHIEF PRIESTS AND PHARISEES had HEARD HIS PARABLES, THEY PERCEIVED that HE SPAKE OF THEM. **46 But when THEY SOUGHT TO LAY HANDS ON HIM,THEY FEARED THE MULTITUDE, BECAUSE THEY TOOIK HIM FOR A PROPHET.

[Mich5:2 But thou, **Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting. 3 THEREFORE WILL HE GIVE THEM UP, UNTIL the time that SHE WHICH TRAVAILETH HATH BROUGHT FORTH: then THE REMNANT OF HIS BRETHREN SHALL RETURN UNTO THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL.] Natural Israel is given up, until she, which travaleth, THE CHURCH, hath brought forth the total number of Gentiles, Rv12:1-2. Then the remnant of natural Israel shall RETURN as the children of spiritual Israel, THE CHRUCH. For a more clear translation see the Amplified Bible biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Micah%205:1-4&version=AMP
 
Still makes no sense. Look at this in another way. You are missing my question. Lets say its ONLY for the Jews. Which may I add I do not agree. But lets say I DO.

Explain this to me then. SO Jesus said, Because this son of mine was DEAD but has come back to LIFE AGAIN, he was LOST but now has been found. So how do they explain that? Can only Jews be dead and come back to life. Can only Jews be lost and then be found?

ANd what does dead and come back to life mean?
The young man separated himself from his inheritance. He took what he wanted, and went away. He did not intend to come back. From the point of view of his father, his son was now dead to him. The father could no longer count on a successor in that son, or one to carry on his line. In Judaism, the land and property follow the sons. If a son chooses to leave, then the household loses inheritance.

Clearly the son was not physically dead. It can be said he was spiritually dead, since he was separated from the faith and household into which he was circumcised by covenant. To be outside the covenant is to be dead to it.
 
The young man separated himself from his inheritance. He took what he wanted, and went away. He did not intend to come back. From the point of view of his father, his son was now dead to him. The father could no longer count on a successor in that son, or one to carry on his line. In Judaism, the land and property follow the sons. If a son chooses to leave, then the household loses inheritance.

Clearly the son was not physically dead. It can be said he was spiritually dead, since he was separated from the faith and household into which he was circumcised by covenant. To be outside the covenant is to be dead to it.
Hi guan, thats not going to work. You said that once someone leaves the household he loses his inheritnace,.

Go back to the story it says he TOOK his inheritance, the Father divided the property between them and he took off and squandered his on a life of sin.

THe story continues that he freely spent everything. Now the SON came back and said Father I SINNED against YOU and against Heaven. Now back to the point of the story this son of mine WAS dead and has COME TO LIFE AGAIN.

OSAS again may I ask, how is this possible. Was the Son saved before he left the Fathers House? That is the question? If the answer is NO, then how can he come back to life again. If the question is yes, and then he fell from grace, repented and then was SAVED AGAIN. OSAS is a impossibliity according to this story.😃

I agree with you that clearly it can be said that once one separates himself from his faith he is indeed spiritually dead.

The question also remains who is the Father in this story. I believe it is clear it is God the Father.
 
The accomplishments and career of President Barack Obama are merely the latest chapter in his amazing life. Discover the information you don’t know about Mr. Obama in this biography, now.

obama stickers
 
Hi Pub, How is it going. Got a question you said the parable isn’t about either son. Then why would the example be about 2 sons that went different ways?

While yes I agree, and do not find anyone who would disagree with you that this is absolutely about forgiveness, and the love and faithfulness our Father has for us, does it not also reflect on our need to repemt?

If you want to see the Love and Faithfulness OUR FATHER has for us, you need to look no further then the Cross.

But I do not see this not to show ONLY how much God loves us, I see this as the Father Seeing the SON come home and repenting. Because if this is only about how much Gods loves us, what about the People who Choose to not accept God and reject him? Does that change the Fathers love for them? Does that mean if you refuse to repent and obey God that you will still enter heaven? Because if its only about GODS love then were are all getting in, Correct?

But back to the question at hand, maybe you can answer it. Was the SON SAVED before he left the Fathers House? Simple Yes or No?
Simple “yes” or “no” isn’t an answer…he was STILL his Father’s son even while he ate with the pigs…the story concerns the faithfulness and love of the Father. The son who stayed at home had become angry and bitter at how the Father bestowed his love to the son “that was dead”…was the son who harbored such anger, jealousy and “hatefulness” “saved”?

The parable has nothing to do with “OSAS”…to read it into the parable looses the impact of the amazing depth and love the Father had for both sons…IMO.

Of course, you may ascribe any meaning you wish to the parable…
 
Simple “yes” or “no” isn’t an answer…he was STILL his Father’s son even while he ate with the pigs…the story concerns the faithfulness and love of the Father. The son who stayed at home had become angry and bitter at how the Father bestowed his love to the son “that was dead”…was the son who harbored such anger, jealousy and “hatefulness” “saved”?

The parable has nothing to do with “OSAS”…to read it into the parable looses the impact of the amazing depth and love the Father had for both sons…IMO.

Of course, you may ascribe any meaning you wish to the parable…
Hi Pub, no one is saying he ever quit being his Father’s Son when he was in a state of sin.

Again please explain Let us celebrate with a feast, this Son of mine WAS dead and has come back to life AGAIN. What does that mean?
 
What does that mean?
rinnie, my thoughts went directly to you this morning. An old friend of mine called and I didn’t speak to her, for I wasn’t home. However, Char said to me; Ellie called, and wanted us to come over for a visit and see her GOATS:D

Peace
 
Hi Pub, no one is saying he ever quit being his Father’s Son when he was in a state of sin.

Again please explain Let us celebrate with a feast, this Son of mine WAS dead and has come back to life AGAIN. What does that mean?
My own opinion of the matter is that while the son was far off living his life…the Father was still loving him…looking for him each and every day…and when “he saw him a long way off”…the Father ran to him. The son was not “dead” to the Father…the son was “dead” to the life the Father had for him…both sons had issues…one son sqandered his “birthright” as a son of the Father…the other “squandered” his “birthright” at home, being found to be angry and jealous that the Father would still love the son that left home.

The story isn’t about the state of the son who left…OR is it about the state of the son who staryed…BUT about the love and faithfulness of the Father…who evidently knew the son would return home since he looked for him each day so he could run to greet him when he returned.

I’m not sure that the story is talking about “mortal sin”…or “venial sin”…but the deep love of the Father for his children…to miss that point is to miss the whole point of the story.

You wish to read other things into the story…that’s fine…but it has nothing to do with OSAS…“states of sin” or the such…it’s part of the parables Jesus told about the love of the Father…it fits right along side the “Shepherd left the 99 sheep to find the one lost lamb”…or the woman “who swept her whole house to find the one lost coin”

The stories are saying…“This is what God is like…a faithful loving Father that you do not have to fear coming to…you will be received with joy…God is like a Shepherd…who will carry you back to the fold when He finds you…God is as thorough as a woman who will clean her whole house to find the one lost coin.”

The author of Luke is speaking toward God’s love and mercy…not directly to the “sin” of either son…and THAT for me is the most wonderful thing about these stories…God searches for “that which was lost”…“that which was dead”…and rejoices when we are found…or when we come home…

To read OSAS or “state of sin” into these very profound simple stories…is to loose sight of the love and faithfulness of the Father in our lostness…

If you find your “take” on the parables more compelling…I’m good…I just don’t see how the title of your thread has any bearing on the parable…OSAS is not a “BIG PROBLEM” in this parable…it’s not addressed at all.🤷
 
rinnie, my thoughts went directly to you this morning. An old friend of mine called and I didn’t speak to her, for I wasn’t home. However, Char said to me; Ellie called, and wanted us to come over for a visit and see her GOATS:D

Peace
:rotfl:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top