Is OSAS true

[EricH]

Free will is self-evident and assumed on every page of Scripture. We all live as if we have freedom of choice because this is reality if we are in the personal image of God and responsible for our choices.

This statement really does not prove much other than to communcate that you feel free-will is in scripture (even though you have not defined it or shown it)

[Massorite]

Re 3:5 He that over cometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.

This verse is always brought up to say that someone can have their name blotted out. It is not that at all. It says I will not blot out....

Who is this speaking to - those that overcome, the overcomer's, believers. And it is in actuality an encouragement and not a warning. It is telling them that they can be assured that they will not be blotted out of the book of life.

I can tell someone that their names will not be erased and still have no intention of ever erasing anyone's names.

In logic a statement does not necessarily imply the converse to be true. That is what is happening here. Because the Lord says that He won't blot the names out does not imply that He will blot any names out. Don't read more into what is said than what is said.

LT

The very fact that Jesus says that "I WILL NOT BLOT OUT YOUR NAME" shows that Jesus can blot out a name from the book of life. Why Moses tell God that if God wanted to He could BLOT out His name? Because God COULD if He wanted to Blot out a name.

In Exodus 32:33 " And the Lord said to Moses "Who Soever Has SINNED Against Me, Him Will I Blot OUT Of My Book. You are contradicting scripture, the very Words of God Himself when you say that Jesus is not talking about blotting out a name. Saved or not if you do not overcome and thereby sin against God your

name will be blotted out of the book of life. SALVATION IS ONLY GUARANTEED IF WE ENDURE IN CHRIST TO THE END OF OUR LIVES OR THE END OF THE WORLD.

Jesus is both talking about blotting out the names that are written into the book of life and giving assurance that a name will not be blotted out if they overcome the things of this world because the BIBLE is always talking to BOTH the SAVED and the UNSAVED. The verse is telling the unsaved what they get if they except Jesus and become one with Him.

I can tell by your post that you are a believer in OSAS. Which causes you to adjust scripture accordingly.

[larryt]

Re 3:5 He that over cometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.

This verse is always brought up to say that someone can have their name blotted out. It is not that at all. It says I will not blot out....

Who is this speaking to - those that overcome, the overcomer's, believers. And it is in actuality an encouragement and not a warning. It is telling them that they can be assured that they will not be blotted out of the book of life.

I can tell someone that their names will not be erased and still have no intention of ever erasing anyone's names.

In logic a statement does not necessarily imply the converse to be true. That is what is happening here. Because the Lord says that He won't blot the names out does not imply that He will blot any names out. Don't read more into what is said than what is said.

LT

The very fact that Jesus says that "I WILL NOT BLOT OUT YOUR NAME" shows that Jesus can blot out a name from the book of life. Why Moses tell God that if God wanted to He could BLOT out His name? Because God COULD if He wanted to Blot out a name.

In Exodus 32:33 " And the Lord said to Moses "Who Soever Has SINNED Against Me, Him Will I Blot OUT Of My Book. You are contradicting scripture, the very Words of God Himself when you say that Jesus is not talking about blotting out a name. Saved or not if you do not overcome and thereby sin against God your

name will be blotted out of the book of life. SALVATION IS ONLY GUARANTEED IF WE ENDURE IN CHRIST TO THE END OF OUR LIVES OR THE END OF THE WORLD.

Jesus is both talking about blotting out the names that are written into the book of life and giving assurance that a name will not be blotted out if they overcome the things of this world because the BIBLE is always talking to BOTH the SAVED and the UNSAVED. The verse is telling the unsaved what they get if they except Jesus and become one with Him.

I can tell by your post that you are a believer in OSAS. Which causes you to adjust scripture accordingly.

We are not saved BECAUSE we endure to the end. We ENDURE to the end BECAUSE we ARE saved.

Those that endure to the end show the evidence of salvation. Ex 32:33 is in the context of Moses saying that he does not want to live any longer if God is to destroy all of Israel and start over with Moses.

LT

[OneLight]

We are not saved BECAUSE we endure to the end. We ENDURE to the end BECAUSE we ARE saved.

LT

This is what it all seems to come down to.

For those that think we can lose our salvation it is all on the human, they are the source that maintains their own salvation.

For those that believe in Eternal Security it is God that maintains our salvation and his strength that carries us till the end, not our own.

I don

[larryt]

We are not saved BECAUSE we endure to the end. We ENDURE to the end BECAUSE we ARE saved.

LT

This is what it all seems to come down to.

For those that think we can lose our salvation it is all on the human, they are the source that maintains their own salvation.

For those that believe in Eternal Security it is God that maintains our salvation and his strength that carries us till the end, not our own.

I don

[OneLight]

Yes, it is what it all boils down to. I have highlighted the text I would like to address. I, for one, do believe that I could walk away from God if I so chose to. I could also refuse His pleading for me to turn back to Him. I also believe that I can do nothing to save myself from death, besides accepting the offer of salvation that Christ gave me. God has done everything there is for salvation, for there is no other way to be saved but through the redemptive works of Jesus Christ. None, period. We either accept it or reject it. If I am wrong, then God will inform me when He points my mistakes out to me.

Just because I believe that I can turn my back on God does not mean I can save myself or that my salvation has anything to do with me. It is all Him, but I have to be willing to accept what He did for me. Life speaks loudly of this in everything we do. An offer is made, one accepts or rejects the offer. This is the simplicity of the Gospel. It is not in my belief that God would create millions upon millions of people to populate the lake of fire. I can, however, believe that millions upon millions have made the choice not to accept the love offering God has given us through His Son.

I can think of no simpler way to say this ... You Father has a check for you, in your name only, to pay all you owe. It is in His hands and He wants to give it to you. You can either accept the check or refuse it. If you accept it, but do not cash it in, it is of no good to you. If you cash it in, then what the check was for, is yours.

To me, Eternal Security means that if I stay in Gods will, even though I stumble now and then, my salvation is Eternally Secure. I know that this is not what many say it is, because of OSAS being a spin-off from Eternal Security, but to me it is. If it confuses anyone and causes contempt, then I will refrain from using this term with them.

I understand what you are saying, but let me ask you this, since others have not answered.

Do you believe that you came to Jesus on your own power or did the workings of the Holy Spirit get you to the point that you could say "YES" to Jesus?

I believe that I could not have done it without the Holy Spirit power and help. If the Holy Spirit has the power to get me to the point of saying yes to the free gift, why would I think He does not have the power to keep me on the road once I have started down that road?

I agree that the Holy Spirit convicted me of my sins, and I accepted Christ as my Savior as a result. But be not confused, I also have the ability to choose whether or not I harden my heart to Him, even though this will never be my choice, as I foresee it. Yes, the Holy Spirit would continue to convict me of my sin until the day I die, if I did turn away. This is not the question. though, is it. The question is if I can turn from Him or not turn. Do not forget that He gave us the ability to choose which path we are to walk down.

[godrulz]

Exhaustive definite foreknowledge is not compatible with libertarian free will. Some assume a confusing compatibilistic or middle knowledge view of will, but this is not true free will. Modal logic and Scripture can show the problem, but it is an indepth study. Assuming simple foreknowledge does not make it legit.

I suppose we need to debate just what free will means, but not in this thread. I dont agree with your statement about definite foreknowledge. Since God is outside of time there is no before or after, and as thus God knows all, period.

God knows all that is knowable. The future is not there to know yet. He correctly knows it as possible, not actual. It is not a deficiency in omniscience to not know a nothing.

Then what God "knows" about the future could be wrong, is that what you are saying? Lets say that what God "thinks" is going to happen in regards to Satan is wrong, what happens then. If God cannot know the future as you say, then there is no way he can know for sure that He wins in the end.

Sorry, but the god you describe is not the God of the Bible, and is not a God worthy of worship

Ps. 139 affirms God's perfect past and present knowledge as well as is intentions for us in the future. The future is inherently indeterminate and open/unsettled (except what God choses to settle, but He is not omnicausal), so it is known as such. We can reject God's intentions for us. We do not want to use a poetic proof text about God's perfect knowledge/omnipresence to make a didactic teaching about the nature of the future and foreknowledge. You are going beyond the text based on a preconceived idea that is problematic.

This is not what Ps 139 says at all.

4 Before a word is on my tongue you know it completely, O LORD.

How can God know what will be on my tongue if he does not know the future?

16 your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be.

This verse clearly says that all our days were written before even one of them came to be. how can this be if God does not know what will happen in our future?

This Open Theism you are putting forth is a false teaching and is not consistent with the Bible.

A little fun about Open Theism...

http://www.carm.org/religious-movements/op...open-theism-say

It begs the question to assume that God is outside of time. This is NOT how He is presented in Scripture, nor is it logically defensible. Time is not a thing or place to be outside of. The biblical view for eternity is endless time, not timelessness (whatever that could mean to a personal being who must think, act, feel in sequence).

What God knows about the future is not wrong, since He knows it as possible vs actual until it becomes reality. He knows I may type this or that or a9-w3hgi9wgh93hjg-9erijgqejg9qerjg9gj, but He did not know which trillions of years ago before I freely brought this into existence by my creative free will. God is not a control freak who is unable to deal with changing contingencies unless He determines everything. This comes at the expense of love, freedom, relationship and is more akin to Islamic fatalism (Christian determinism is indefensible).

God knows for sure that He wins in the end because of His omnicompetence, not a supposed omnicausality or foreknowledge. God is omnipotent and Satan is finite. God has the ability to squash all creatures like a bug anytime He wants. The Star Wars dualism of equality between good and evil is not biblical. God ensures ultimate victory despite suffering, evil, etc. (due to free will) by His ability. I do not need prescience to know that I will win the battle against a house fly. You underestimate God to think is power is not sufficient without a crystal ball.

As well, it can be demonstratred that foreknowledge offers no providential advantage, since God would not be able to change the future even if He wanted to. If He saw you were going to get shot in the future, He could not change that since it would make His foreknowledge false. However, in real space-time, without prescience (but perfect present knowledge), He could intervene by His power to direct you away from the situation or thwart you. More times than not, you will get shot since freedom is irrevocable (though finite). The Holocaust is inexplicable with a deterministic view because it impugns the character of God.

The warfare vs blueprint model of sovereignty is seen in Scripture, especially the gospels.

To say that God is not worthy of worship without EDF shows your lack of understanding of these issues (power trumps foreknowledge).

Ps. 139 God sees our thoughts even before we verbalize them. This is past and present knowledge, not proof of remote EDF. He sees the Psalmists thoughts and words in real time, not in a crystal ball before his existence. You are also reading your preconceived idea into a proof text that is poetic, not didactic. Other themes and verses must be considered in this debate.

Are you suggesting that God wrote the days in everyone's books? Some are brutally raped and murdered, while others are kings and princes, while others are godly pastors? The poetic passage cannot be used to prove a blueprint assumption since other verses and common sense would counter that and support a warfare/risk model. God has intentions, but we can reject them in our lives (Lk. 7:30; Mt. 23 Jesus wanted to gather them, but they were not willing). Determinism makes God responsible for evil and should be rejected outright.

CARM is a Calvinistic site that might convince you, but will not persuade an informed Open Theist who has looked at all sides of the issue. They are prone to straw men caricatures, misunderstandings, misrepresentations, etc. They would also argue against other free will theism views like Arminianism. Their arguments can and have been countered. The issue is a paradigm more than a proof text.

If anything is unbiblical, it is TULIP and Calvinism.

[godrulz]

The Father draws all people yet all people will not be saved, can you answer as to why that is?

it is not polite to answer a question with a question

This was Jesus' favorite style with his religious opponents...good technique when someone is trying to trap you.

[Ovedya]

God knows all that is knowable. The future is not there to know yet. He correctly knows it as possible, not actual. It is not a deficiency in omniscience to not know a nothing.

Yes, but that is not knowing a nothing, it is not knowing the possibility of the thing, or the predictable outcome of a thing. Therefore, "knowing all that is knowable" within the confines of created time/space must be a purposeful limitation. There can only be two solutions that way I see your argument: Either God purposefully created linear time and then subjected Himself to it (and is therefore also as subject to the results of free agency as we are proposed to be), or God created something that is greater than Himself, something which he has no absolute power to control or influence. Either way God's omniscience, his omnipresence and his omnipotence is limited. If God is just as subject to time as we frail humans are than he has no power over time, He is limited in knowledge, and He is limited in forethought.

Humans "know all that is knowable" within the framework of discovery. New discoveries are being made daily by man in various realms, and new thoughts are conceived on the basis of what is knowable or perceivable. However, at the present time, that is, now, all that is knowable is known. To say that God is likewise limited to "all that is knowable" is bringing Him down to our level. For God to know only that which is knowable there is an implication that there is something that is not known by God. Therefore He must need to predict that which can be knowable based upon the present conditions.

So if I fell down into a pit in the dark and had sufficient time to first perceive my predicament and understand my surroundings, I could likely predict that, based upon my present knowledge of the universe, the pit will eventually come to an end. I cannot predict whether I will survive the fall, but reasonably after a period of time I could think that I probably wouldn't. However, none of these predictions have a 100% reliability. There is a possibility that the pit does not end. There is the possibility that, if the pit has an end, I could survive the fall. There is even the possibility, depending on how I deal presently with my situation, that I could slow my descent, stop, and climb back out of the pit.

The fact that God has given revelation to man throughout time, defies the possibility that He is limited in space and time. God gave Abraham a revelation and a promise. He gave the prophets revelations concerning future time, concerning the birth of Christ. He gave John the revelation of the New Jerusalem. Were God limited by time, with only present knowledge, he could not have given any of those revelations with a 100% certainly of their outcome. He could only have said, "This is what is likely to happen based upon my present knowledge of the situation." Either that, or God gave those revelations with the intent on influencing time, the political climates, cultures, etc. in order that they would come to pass exactly as He gave them. Then there's the problem of free will again.

The potential future becomes the fixed past through the present. Time is unidirectional. Eternal now simultaneity/timelessness is Platonic philosophy, not Hebraic thought (our view on this affects our understanding of foreknowledge, etc.).

Actually Platonic philosophy and thought pervaded much of Christian theosophy from about the 4th century on. So? Is God a Hebrew? Is He limited by Hebraic thought?

[Ovedya]

Free will is self-evident and assumed on every page of Scripture. We all live as if we have freedom of choice because this is reality if we are in the personal image of God and responsible for our choices.

"choice" and "free will" are not synonymous terms. As I wrote in a previous post, there is no evidence that "the image of God" is a phrase synonymous with the concept of free will. "The image of God" is not that "free will" which was retained from the fall. Humanity is either absolutely fallen or he is not.