Refute this OSAS argument for me

[WesleyF]

Argument -

*"Jesus said that “I give them eternal life”. What is so eternal about eternal life, if I can lose it once I have gained it?

In other words, if I am saved and have eternal life in me, then I have ETERNAL life in me, or life in me for eternity. If something is eternal, it can never be lost."*

How would you respond to this?

 

[Deb_H]

its eternal … you do not loose eternal life … you MAY however choose not to continue walking with the Lord and end up with your eternal life spent not with Him but without Him …

you are confusing eternal live with where that eternal life is spent .

 

[Della]

Argument -

"Jesus said that "I give them eternal life". What is so eternal about eternal life, if I can lose it once I have gained it?

In other words, if I am saved and have eternal life in me, then I have ETERNAL life in me, or life in me for eternity. If something is eternal, it can never be lost."

How would you respond to this?

Jesus doesn’t guarantee salvation here. He’s saying that to those who do God’s will he, Jesus, will give eternal life. We can decide not to do God’s will at any point in our lives.

We cannot isolate verses like this and then say: “Aha! This says it all!” when that is not the intention of the author, nor consistent with the whole of Scripture and Sacred Tradition from which is sprang.

 

[CWBetts]

Eternal does not mean “everlasting.” It means separated from time. At no point int his life to we experience eternal life. That will not happen until heaven. During this life we are anchored in time, and so we are always moving towards the eternal, but we will not be granted that until we shed this mortal coil.

 

[panevino]

Rom11:22 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 graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.

 

[Pax]

Argument -

"Jesus said that "I give them eternal life". What is so eternal about eternal life, if I can lose it once I have gained it?

In other words, if I am saved and have eternal life in me, then I have ETERNAL life in me, or life in me for eternity. If something is eternal, it can never be lost."

How would you respond to this?

I would refute the OSAS argument by pointing out that eternal life is given to us as an inheritance[Acts 20:32, Eph 1:13-14, Col 1:11-12, Col 3:24, and Heb 9:15]. Then I would cite all of the passages that show how it is that we can lose that inheritance such as 1 Cor 6:9-20, Gal 5:19-26, and Eph 5:5-10. Beyond that, I would point out that there are easily over 65 passages of scripture that deny the teachings of OSAS, and that every argument in favor of OSAS can be dismantled. The last two points are only effective if you are prepared to back them up, or to take an argument they present and research the refutation, and then get back to them.

I hope this helps.

 

[snowlake]

What is OSAS?

 

[Pax]

Once Saved Always Saved.

 

[MarcoPolo]

Remember, the curious lawyer who asked Jesus “What must I do to INHERIT eternal life?” We can move in and out of positions of inheriting it, but once we enter eternal life, then yes your friend it correct at that point it’s eternal. Remember the parable of the Prodigal Son when the one son squanders his inheritance only to return and regain it. The “father” in the parable said that the son was dead and alive “again.” Look at how Scripture so often refers to “eternal life” as something “inherited” or that it is “in the age to come” or some other future tense.

 

[scriabin]

The adjective “eternal” qualifies “life” not the object, “gift.”

It is not the eternal gift of eternal life; but the gift (which we can lose of our own choosing, i.e. mortal sin) of eternal life.

A poster on the forums once described it like “the everlasting gobstopper” from the old movie, “Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory.” The everlasting gobstopper was a piece of candy that lasted forever. Its flavor lasted forever and it could not be chewed away or sucked dry. A child was given the gift of this everlasting, eternal piece of candy but I think (I can’t remember the movie that well) the child spit it out and lost it.

The gift of eternal, everlasting candy was not an eternal gift that couldn’t be lost.

Similarly, the “gift of eternal life” doesn’t necesarily translate into the “eternal gift of eternal life.”

 

[Jim_Dandy]

You can search through the annals of early Christianity and never find OSAS. It appears in the historical record with Calvinism in the 16th century. It is the “P” in TULIP, “Perserverance of the Saints” (if you’re one of the “elect,” you can’t lose your salvation). TULIP is an acronym of Calvin’s teaching.

The Westminster Confession of Faith, a confession of Calvinism, teaches Perseverance of the Saints in Chapter 17 and Assurance of Grace and Salvation in Chapter 18. The Baptists modified the doctrine and made OSAS apply to everyone. A few other denominations have adopted it.

The idea can be traced to Martin Luther’s letter, dubbed by scholars Let Your Sins Be Strong:

–quote-- No sin can separate us from Him, even if we were to kill or commit adultery thousands of times each day. --unquote–

Jesus and the Apostles didn’t teach it. Therefore, OSAS is not part of original, authentic Christianity. It’s a man-made doctrine that originated in the 16th century.

OSAS results from twisting Scripture.

 

[Tomster]

Some initial thoughts.

Salvation is a gift from God.

Salvation is eternal freedom of the soul from the bond of sin.

Salvation is the attainment of everlasting union with God.

Jesus, the Emancipator, freed man from the bond of sin, by His atonement.

Jesus wills all men to be saved, but not against their will.

Jesus instituted means by which man may be supernaturalized. Thus he passes from spiritual slavery to freedom, to citizenship in the Kingdom of God.

Jesus demands payment for personal salvation. His price is faith, expressed in works.

 

[Tomster]

Argument -

"Jesus said that "I give them eternal life". What is so eternal about eternal life, if I can lose it once I have gained it?

In other words, if I am saved and have eternal life in me, then I have ETERNAL life in me, or life in me for eternity. If something is eternal, it can never be lost."

How would you respond to this?

My reply would be: "You are not saved, my friend, though I hope you will be. St. Paul warns you and me, as he warned his “beloved,” who were “obedient,” to “work out your salvation with fear and trembling” (Phil. 2:12)

Those who adhere to OSAS will quote John 3:15, “Whosoever believeth in Him may not perish, but may have life everlasting.”.

They quote correctly, but their interpretation of the text is incorrect. Scriptures tells us that the devils have faith; they believe that there is a God; that Jesus is the Son of God; that He is their Judge (Matthew 8:29). St. James says in 2:19 that “The devils also believe and tremble.” According to their interpretation of St. John 3:15 the devils by believing are saved.

 

[JonNC]

You can search through the annals of early Christianity and never find OSAS. It appears in the historical record with Calvinism in the 16th century. It is the “P” in TULIP, “Perserverance of the Saints” (if you’re one of the “elect,” you can’t lose your salvation). TULIP is an acronym of Calvin’s teaching.

The Westminster Confession of Faith, a confession of Calvinism, teaches Perseverance of the Saints in Chapter 17 and Assurance of Grace and Salvation in Chapter 18. The Baptists modified the doctrine and made OSAS apply to everyone. A few other denominations have adopted it.

The idea can be traced to Martin Luther’s letter, dubbed by scholars Let Your Sins Be Strong:
–quote-- No sin can separate us from Him, even if we were to kill or commit adultery thousands of times each day. --unquote–

Jesus and the Apostles didn’t teach it. Therefore, OSAS is not part of original, authentic Christianity. It’s a man-made doctrine that originated in the 16th century.

OSAS results from twisting Scripture.

Hi Jim,
When you say it can be traced to Luther’s letter to Melanchthon, are you saying or have evidence that Calvin had access to the letter? If so, when and how did Calvin reference it in his creation of Perseverence of Saints?

Jon

 

[Jim_Dandy]

Hi Jim,
When you say it can be traced to Luther’s letter to Melanchthon, are you saying or have evidence that Calvin had access to the letter? If so, when and how did Calvin reference it in his creation of Perseverence of Saints?

Jon

Hi, Jon,

I didn’t mean to imply that Calvin had read Luther’s letter to Philip Melanchthon and based his teaching upon it. I have no idea whether Calvin read Luther’s letter or not. What I meant was that the idea was not new in Protestantland; the witness to that is Luther’s earlier letter. Sorry for any confusion. Thanks for writing. Peace be with you, Jim

 

[WesleyF]

Similarly, the “gift of eternal life” doesn’t necesarily translate into the “eternal gift of eternal life.”

You make a very good point here. I like it.

As I was reflecting upon this I realized the following.

Eternal life = Jesus himself (“I am the way, the truth and the life”)

So “what’s so eternal about eternal life” can be answered by saying that Jesus is eternal.

“I give them eternal life” = “I give them my own (eternal) self”
That does not mean “I give them my own self for eternity”

Whether I shall have Jesus in me for eternity is another question altogether. So I think this particular OSAS argument is refuted.

 

[Zooey]

Eternal does not mean “everlasting.” It means separated from time. At no point int his life to we experience eternal life. That will not happen until heaven. During this life we are anchored in time, and so we are always moving towards the eternal, but we will not be granted that until we shed this mortal coil.

I think people often mistake the nature of eternity; they think it means “an extremely long time that never ends”, rather than making the distinction noted here by CWBetts.

Some initial thoughts.

Salvation is a gift from God.

Salvation is eternal freedom of the soul from the bond of sin.

Salvation is the attainment of everlasting union with God.

Jesus, the Emancipator, freed man from the bond of sin, by His atonement.

Jesus wills all men to be saved, but not against their will.

Jesus instituted means by which man may be supernaturalized. Thus he passes from spiritual slavery to freedom, to citizenship in the Kingdom of God.

Jesus demands payment for personal salvation. His price is faith, expressed in works.

I bolded this part, because this is the point I make over & over: God is** not** going to drag people, kicking & screaming, into Heaven.:nope::nope:
We have free will. God lets us use it.* Even when we break His heart*.

 

[JonNC]

Hi, Jon,

I didn’t mean to imply that Calvin had read Luther’s letter to Philip Melanchthon and based his teaching upon it. I have no idea whether Calvin read Luther’s letter or not. What I meant was that the idea was not new in Protestantland; the witness to that is Luther’s earlier letter. Sorry for any confusion. Thanks for writing. Peace be with you, Jim

And peace also with you, Jim.

Thanks for the clarification. I think if you read Luther’s letter to Melanchthon, you’ll find that he is not advocating perseverence of saints (OSAS). Remember, this was a personal letter, not a doctrinal statement, to a theologian with whom he shared, for the most part, a mutual agreement. So, it would have been unnecessary to fully state doctrine, which fully includes the need for repentance and confession, and earnest effort to “go and sin no more”.
The doctrinal statement which both of them agreed on says:

Article XII: Of Repentance.

1] Of Repentance they teach that for those who have fallen after Baptism there is remission of sins whenever they are converted 2] and that the Church ought to impart absolution to those thus returning to repentance. Now, repentance consists properly of these 3] two parts: One is contrition, that is, 4] terrors smiting the conscience through the knowledge of sin; the other is faith, which is born of 5] the Gospel, or of absolution, and believes that for Christ’s sake, sins are forgiven, comforts 6] the conscience, and delivers it from terrors. Then good works are bound to follow, which are the fruits of repentance.

7] They condemn the Anabaptists, who deny that those once justified can lose the Holy Ghost. Also those who contend that some may attain to such 8] perfection in this life that they cannot sin.

bookofconcord.org/augsburgconfession.php#article4

An interesting article regarding Luther’s letter to Melanchthon:
tquid.sharpens.org/sin_boldly.htm

Jon

 

[theoldman]

Argument -

"Jesus said that "I give them eternal life". What is so eternal about eternal life, if I can lose it once I have gained it?

In other words, if I am saved and have eternal life in me, then I have ETERNAL life in me, or life in me for eternity. If something is eternal, it can never be lost."

How would you respond to this?

If you are quoting John 10: 18 or thereabouts Jesus is talking about the elect (his sheep). those that are not of the elect do not hear his voice. Those that are of the elect (his sheep) here his voice and he gives them eternal and they shall never perish. Sounds like OSAS to me

 

[CWBetts]

If you are quoting John 10: 18 or thereabouts Jesus is talking about the elect (his sheep). those that are not of the elect do not hear his voice. Those that are of the elect (his sheep) here his voice and he gives them eternal and they shall never perish. Sounds like OSAS to me

You are mistaken. OSAS can not be supported from the Scriptures. What of the Prodigal Son (squanders his inheritance, but is welcomed back by the Father), or the unjust steward (is forgiven, but then fails to forgive, an is canst into prison–hell)? OSAS is a heresy that wa not even believed by the original reformers. It is a new innovation indeed.