Once Saved Always Saved??

 

Some say that eternal security  means that  "Once Saved Always Saved" or OSAS for short  is true for that is what  eternal security is. I contend and hope to demonstrate that on the contrary  OSAS is a counterfeit based on a doctrinal plank rather than a relationship with a Person.  The difference between a doctrinal plank and a relationship, any doctrinal plank, mark you, I contend to be absolutely crucial. It determines whether one is being led by the Holy Spirit or not.  As for the issue at hand, look at Hebrews 6:4-8. It warns that those who have been enlightened (can any but the born again be enlightened?), if they fall away cannot be renewed to repentance, thus there is a dire warning that if even the Born Again wander too far away from the Person who is Christ, known through His Holy Spirit  they will be lost.



As for the tree bearing  no fruit which is cut out and burned Jesus said ABIDE IN ME. Who was he saying that to?  Not to us? OF course he was saying it to his disciples, ALL of us.  He said it to us. THIS IS THE CONTEXT.  However  this abiding is not hard for his yoke is easy his burden is light and his commandments are not  burdensome. Trying to abide in him by forced works of legalism is to fall away from him, for Paul rebuked the Galatians, the oh, so devout and serious Galatians as having forsaken Christ for the Law.  Thus I hope to make it clear that denying Once Saved Always Saved is not to advocate legalism, rather it is to. highlight the deadly nature of legalism 

Staying with Christ (abiding in him) is not the same thing as believing a doctrine. It is a relationship, and the depth and reality of it  shows by our fruit, so if we know and love the lord we will show good fruit. After all  it says in I John, "how can you love God who you have not seen when you do not love your brother who you do see"  and  "he who says he loves God but loves not his brother is a liar"

 And if our relationship does not matter (that is what you are saying when you say fruit does not matter and that is what you are saying when you assert OSAS because you reduce faith to mere assent to a doctrine), why are we constantly warned to quench not the Spirit? Why does scripture say TO CHRISTIANS ( read Hebrews  a letter addressed to Jewish Christians who were in danger of falling away back to the Law) "TODAY IF YOU HEAR HIS VOICE HARDEN NOT YOUR HEART"?  And why did Paul call the Galatians FOOLS because they had forsaken  Christ for the Law? If Once Saved Always Saved is true and fruit have no bearing on our relationship with God, their legalism simply did not matter, so again I ask why did Paul the Apostle rebuke them.

The need for fruit does not require forced works to earn anything, but they do show that we have continued to receive the Free gifts that the Spirit bestows to those who abide in , or in modern terms stayed with,   Him

I recently heard a christian, the late Dave Hunt refute OSAS . To him i would say

If Hebrews 6:4ff does not mean a believer can fall away to be damned what does the burning of verse 8 mean? after all such a person has tasted of the heavenly gift has been enlightened and been a partaker of the Spirit. So they MUST have been born again. But then what is the burning if they fall away to such a degree that repentance is impossible ? Purgatory? if he thinks that staying a christian, if Once Save Always Saved is false, is a work he could boast about (whereby he rejects any denial of OSAS) , why should his becoming a christian, of his own free choice not be a work to boast of either? if he chose because he could then perhaps he should boast of it i could not choose. i still cant- except the lord persuade me to change my mind on any matter, one step at a time, and i repent. Nothing to boast of here.

My will is free for i am responsible, but as i sinner my will is busily choosing evil because i am evil. The solution is that my Wonderful Counsellor speak to me one on one and persuade me to change my mind.

This is living experiential one on one personal relationship; and everything in the Christian life comes down to this. It is in fact the sine qua non

If I refuse this, if I refuse to have it out with the Lord the Spirit, my Counsellor and Healer and therefore harden my heart to his voice them i will eventually fall away to be lost, and this because there is no purgatory so the burning of Hebrews 6:8 speaks of hell and nothing else.

This is a warning not a threat. The solution is to cry out to the Lord in prayer and to hear from him direct, by His Spirit

OSAS is false OSAS is dangerous, because it offers a false security, that of a doctrinal plank and not a personal relationship. go to Christ the living person - as opposed to the doctrinal plank - and stay with Him, chiefly in prayer. Did MR Hunt not know the difference between these two?

I submit that the difference between faith and presumption is relationship with Christ. Without it my assurance that I am saved, if I have any, and many do not) is presumption.

Stay with Christ. Stay with him today as long as it is today, and by doing so you are resting in the true eternal security, which is a direct personal relationship with Christ Himself by His Spirit

"Climate Change" is junk science 1

There is an enormous bulk of rational scientific refutations of the theory that global warming is caused by man, and that CO2 is the control knob for the climate

In fact there is so much information out there that the warmists, who refuse to even look at it, can only show their intrinsic dishonesty.

They would tax you back to the stone age, have you die of cold in the winters  because they boast that energy prices will and should go sky high. and they think that reducing CO2 emissions  to zero would have any more effect than to reduce  the temperature by .001 of a degree

But then i hold the greens to be agrarian fantasists who never cared to understand that life in agrarian economies was usually nasty brutish and short. and in politics any fantasist is a dangerous fanatic

This  is merely  one of the many videos i have seen on this matter.

CO is plant food. To call it a pollutant only shows gross ignorance of basic science


https://youtu.be/GXBBNcAvCsU.

but my case, though i am gratified to know that science properly done confirms my case, was not based on science.

I am a history buff,

I knew from my own reading that there was a medieval warm period which was warmer than  today.

Greenland was called green because it was when discovered by Viking explorers, .and they settled the place for several centuries, but it was abandoned when the little ice age which was at its deepest in 1700 made  settlement there impossible.

in fact they grew barley there. in a land where the settlement is now under permafrost.

Ergo the world was warmer then than now.

Why, I ask, did Michael Mann and his ilk have to tell lies about human history which is attested to by written records?

The lie was to remove the Medieval warm period from  history, to ignore the Little ice age in order to get the flat line required for  allegedly dramatic temperature rise required the hockey stick.

I hold this against them. I reject their claims and can do so for this alone. they are liars

there is so much more to write.

They used to call it global warming until the globe stopped  warming. Then they changed to name to "Climate Change". This is a deceitful trick, for climate always changes, and Man's influence on it is negligible.

But falsifying of the past is the arsenal of the warmists and their data tampering.

Tony Heller, also on youtube  has pointed out that the 1930's were hotter than now, and that the trend  is that  days over 100 degrees F is in fact declining. no one has dropped dead in a heat wave this year. but they did by the hundreds  back in the 1930's