Does the Prophecy of Apostasy Prove OSAS is False?

[John146]

Hi, John. whould you agrtee or disagree that those with saving faith can at some point have tehir name blotted out of the Lamb's book of life?

I agree because I believe Jesus implied it here:

Rev 3:5 He that overcometh, 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.

If those who overcome will not have their names blotted out of the book of life then I think it only follows that those who do not overcome will have their names blotted out of the book of life.

[John146]

It's probably just me, but meaning this in general, and not attacking anything you stated, I can see coming to absurd conclusions from interpreting it like that. some examples. Babies wouldn't be Christians, since they wouldn't know how to choose. By default then, they would have to receive the mark. Mentally challenged folks, ones who can't comprehend much of anything, they wouldn't be Christians either, since they would have no way to choose Christ.

You completely misunderstood what I was saying. So, let me try again. I am saying that those who worship the beast are those whose names are not written in the book of life. I'm saying that because that is exactly what Rev 13:8 says. And I'm saying those who worship the beast, which are those whose names are not written in the book of life, would be those who have the mark of the beast. Clearly, babies would not worship the beast. So, I don't believe they would have the mark of the beast.

[John146]

Logically then, if babies can be Christians during this time in question, then babies should be able to be Christians at any other time in history as well. When babies grow up then, why is it only then they can get saved or not, depending if they except the good news and believe? And besides, since I'm somewhat familiar with Eric's views, he believes folks will literally be burned alive with the earth when Christ returns, and that this could include babies, since babies were likely killed in the flood in Noah's day. It seems illogical if these babies are Christians, that they would be burned alive when Christ returns.

While it's quite clear that babies were killed in the flood that doesn't mean they necessarily will be killed when Christ returns. If they are considered to belong to Him then I would think they will be caught up to Him with the rest of us. But scripture doesn't tell us specifically about that so we can only speculate on it. But what I have never said is that babies could worship the beast. That's ridiculous. How could they? All I was pointing out is that there is a direct connection between worshiping the beast and having one's name not written in the book of life and I base that conclusion on Rev 13:8. And based on Rev 13:15-16 it seems to me that there is a connection between worshiping the beast and having the mark of the beast. That's why I believe that everyone who worships the beast also has the mark of the beast.

So if they do get burned alive, it's only logical that they received the mark, that would be my point, tho I find that illogical to begin with, since how could a baby worship or not worship the beast to begin with?

Of course. Why in the world would you think that I would try to claim that a baby could worship the beast?

[divaD]

Of course. Why in the world would you think that I would try to claim that a baby could worship the beast?

Unfortunately you are misunderstanding me. I'm not claiming you said any such thing. I was just trying to illustrate in general, the logical conclusion if it played out this way or if it played out that way, etc.

Here's something else to ponder, keeping in mind that I'm just thinking out loud, and meaning in general, and not trying to imply any of this might be your conclusions. this would be in regards to everyone on the planet worshiping the beast, except for saints of course. But if not everyone reads the Bible nor has read the Bible, then how can one conclude that everybody on the planet is in mind, when some on the planet wouldn't even have a clue about some of these things? How could someone who has never heard of the beast, then follow after the beast and then worship the beast on top of that?

[claybevan]

Originally Posted by claybevan
He cannot be unborn to Elizabeth but he can be unborn to the family and throne. If he doesn't tow the line and turns away from the traditional family requirements his inheritance can be taken away from him and given to another, as in the case of Edward V111.

I believe that this posting is the closest to answering the whole matter. The reason why no verses are forthcoming concerning the rescinding of regeneration is that it is impossible. It is doubly so because;

1. There has not been a single case recorded in the history of human or animal life. The offspring of any father or mother stays exactly that until they cease to exist. Prince Charles can do what he likes. He can even be disowned but he will have his mother’s DNA forever. His source can never change. He can go to prison, be disowned from the throne of England, be disowned as an heir to the family fortune, change his name and his appearance, but he remains Charles, son of Elizabeth.
2. God has so ordained it in the most powerful terms. In Genesis 1:11-12 God laid down a law which not only continues today in all forms of life, but which is the basis for the Person and nature of Jesus Christ our Savior, and the basis for your rebirth. The law is, everything is produced by, and is exclusive to, its own seed. This law is the death knell of evolution, for evolution says that something can produce something else slightly (or grossly) different. But what we observe in our world is that pine trees always produce pine trees, cats produce kittens and dogs never give birth to foxes.

I say “powerful” in point 2 because our Lord Jesus’ dual nature of both God and Man is a fact because of this Law. The female part came from Mary, who in turn came from Adam, and the male part came from God (Lk.1:35) making him both 100% man and 100% God. If Jesus was not a Man, you all would still be in sin and sins, for animal sacrifices cannot atone for sins (Heb.10:4, 10). And angels cannot be saved because Jesus is not an angel (though they desire to look into this matter – 1^st Pet.1:12). Because man sinned man must pay the price, and only a man could atone for men. This is God’s righteousness.

I say “powerful” because your new divine nature is based on this law. In John 12:24 our Lord Jesus is likened to a grain of wheat. His death is the releasing event that allows all the other grains to come forth – you and I. Your rebirth by the Holy Spirit is based on this principle, and the divine nature you possess is based on this law. It cannot be changed.

It is a settled fact of God’s irrevocable and crucial law that once born again, nothing can change that. The prodigal son was a son in the father’s household, he was a son while he lived amongst the swine, and he was a son when he returned to the father. If he had not returned, he would have remained a son, though among the pigs forever.

Now to apostasy.

I think that nearly all proponents agree that the warnings of the New Testament regarding falling away apply to Christians. Common logic does not allow a “falling away” from somewhere that you weren’t in the first place. Added to this, in every context where it is mentioned or alluded to, those addressed or the listeners where God’s people.

When God made man, He made him for two reasons.

1. To be in God’s image and likeness
2. To subdue and rule the earth and its environs of sky and sea

Contemporary Christian doctrine is very demeaning to our Great God. It says that God’s enemy, Satan, came in, messed things up, and God had to send His Son Jesus to save man and take him to heaven, while the earth will be destroyed. As we all know that Christians make but a small minority of all men, The God that the Christians portray is a God who has been defeated by Satan. But the bible says that far from a small percentage of men going to heaven and the earth destroyed, men will rule the earth, the earth will be renewed, and the city that is made up of the men ruling the earth will have the glory (image) of God. It says that the earth will be pristine, have no curse, be at peace and except for those in the Lake of Fire, there will be no tears or death (Revelation Chapters 21 & 22). How different is the bibles account of the end to that of many Christians.

So the question is, why be born again, as discussed above? The reason is that for God to accomplish His plan of Genesis 1:26-28 He needs two things.

1. Men in the image and likeness of God
2. These men empowered to subdue and rule the earth

And this is the story of man’s inheritance. It starts with Adam, and he fails. The rulership of the earth reverts to Satan. Then God starts again with Noah, and his offspring fail. Then God starts with Abraham, and his offspring, Israel, fail. Then God starts with the man Jesus Christ, His Son, and He does NOT fail. Jesus Christ is in the image of God (Col.1:15) and Jesus Christ will rule this earth (Rev.19:15). Over and over in the Old Testament it is predicted that our Lord Jesus would inherit the world and the nations. Over and over again in the New Testament it is predicted that our Lord Jesus will get the nations for an inheritance. The bible ends with Jesus Christ, the light and presence of the New Jerusalem, on earth, ruling and owning the earth. (Notice the New Jerusalem “comes down out of heaven” – where to? The earth, as the context shows.)

The fact of John 12:24, where Jesus is the first of many seeds like Him, shows that God will achieve this plan not only with the Man Jesus, but many men like Jesus. God’s original plan of Genesis 1:26-28 was that all men would rule. But after the fall God extends His offer to any one that will hear. That is, there will be a percentage of all men joining Jesus Christ in this highest attainment, that of fulfilling God’s original plan. And what does God promise?
“Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth” (Ps37:11; Matt 5:5)

“And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations: 27 And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father” (Rev.2:26-27)

“… and they shall reign for ever and ever” (Rev.22:5)

etc. etc. etc.

This is man’s inheritance in Christ Jesus, and notice they are all connected with works. Any Christian who through a wanton, slothful and sinful life, brings dishonor upon himself and the Lord Jesus will be excluded from this inheritance. He incurs the wrath of his/her Father and is barred from attaining to God’s plan. It is not the Christian’s rebirth that is lost, but his/her inheritance.

So Paul, already a born-again Christian for years, says; “Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before, I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus” (Phil.3:13-14). He calls it a “prize” and we all know from the Olympics that a prize is gained only by striving, by sweat. It is not a gift.

Again Paul, many years a Christian says; “Know ye not that they which run in a race run all, but one receiveth the prize? So run, that ye may obtain. 25 And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible. 26 I therefore so run, not as uncertainly; so fight I, not as one that beateth the air: 27 But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway” (1st Cor.9:24-27). Again we have the “prize” which is not salvation, but a “crown.” A “crown” is for ruling. And notice they are connected to works.

At the end of his life, Paul can say; “But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry. 6 For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. 7 I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith: 8 Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing” (2nd Tim.4:5-8). Notice that the crown is again connected to works.

I can give many more examples, e.g. Galatians 5:21 and Ephesians 5:5, and will do so on request, but space constrains me (and you).

I propose that no Christian can lose their regeneration and no Christian can ever go to the Lake of Fire. But Christians can fall short of God’s intended plan and incur great loss and shame. If a Christian does not gain the “crown” by works in Christ Jesus and loses it by evil works, he/she has apostatized themselves.

Dear Walls, you interpreted my post in the opposite way that I meant.
As I see it
We have all come from God's seed, we all have life because God breathed life into us but that life doesn't come with an instant inheritance.
That's the first birth, but the everlasting birth comes not from being born but being 'Born again' the second birth requires us to give ourselves up to God ( that's where the inheritance comes in )and it's that inheritance so freely given that we can choose to turn away from.
We didn't get to choose wether we would be born or not but we do get to choose wether we want to become his forever and we can choose to forfeit that.
I think the warnings of apostasy mean what they say, some will choose to turn back.

Works only govern our reward at the Bema Seat not our salvation
Some of us will finish the race with glowing colours
Some will just finish the race
Some will start but not finish
Well I know what I mean
Blessings to you
Mari

[Eyelog]

(2) thereafter, live a life of close contact with the Lord and submit yourself to His vigorous training by self denial and self discipline. If he does this he will enter the kingdom in God's favor and joy. If he does not, he can expect a terrible rebuke at the judgement seat and to be cast out what he should have earned. Notice the process and qualifications laid out by our Lord's chief Apostle.

Hi, Wallee. You know, I too am prone to many typos. I was wondering if you might correct this one so I can see what you meant at that critical point. Are you saying rewards will be cast out or the believer will be cast out? In either case, where does the reward and/or believer land? Hell/Lake of Fire? somewhere else?

I'm not sure what you are saying.

[Walls]

Hi, Wallee. You know, I too am prone to many typos. I was wondering if you might correct this one so I can see what you meant at that critical point. Are you saying rewards will be cast out or the believer will be cast out? In either case, where does the reward and/or believer land? Hell/Lake of Fire? somewhere else?

I'm not sure what you are saying.

My apologies. A typo, but sadly it was at a crucial point. It should read, "If he does not, he can expect a terrible rebuke at the judgement seat and to be cast out of what he should have earned." If you will allow me something extra here to enlarge on this point, the Lord has given us a fitting example. In 1st Corinthians 10:6 scripture says that what happened to Israel is an example of what could happen to Christians. Well, what happened to them?

• They were chosen by God and given promises
• They were saved from the angel of death by the Lamb
• They were buried or immersed in water at the Red Sea
• They all set out for their inheritance - The Land of Canaan
• They endured hardship in the wilderness as sojourners or pilgrims
• They ate spiritual food and drank spiritual drink

BUT
Only two of about 600'000 men over the age of 20 made it into their inheritance! The rest did not enter their inheritance (including Moses).

So Paul says, watch out ye carnal Corinthians! You are all saved by the Lamb. You are all baptized by full immersion in the name of Jesus. You have all the spiritual food and drink in your meetings via the gifts. You endure persecution for your belief's sake. But you are all still in danger of not making it into your inheritance - the kingdom of our Lord Jesus when He is made King of this earth for ever, starting with His return and lasting 1'000 years in the present conditions.

To your second question - Where are they cast out to?

They are all resurrected so they are on the earth during this time. They are all born again so they can "see" the kingdom around them and in action. BUT, they are cast from the presence of the Lord for 1'000 years. They may not have a say in everyday affairs on this earth as their fellow Christians will. They will be branded a disgrace to the Lord, to men, to themselves and to the name of Christ. They will carry this brand before the nations who are living in bliss under the kingship of Christ and His co-kings. What a disgrace to have been offered such pleasure and such fame and to have squandered it by temporary evil works. When you consider Psalms 16:11, 17:15 and 21:6 you can see what a terrible loss the first point alone will be. Scripture says that to be in the presence of the Lord is "pleasure forevermore." The deepest loss and suffering for a man must be to be cast away from His presence. This I take to mean "outer darkness".

[Walls]

Originally Posted by claybevan
He cannot be unborn to Elizabeth but he can be unborn to the family and throne. If he doesn't tow the line and turns away from the traditional family requirements his inheritance can be taken away from him and given to another, as in the case of Edward V111.


Dear Walls, you interpreted my post in the opposite way that I meant.
As I see it
We have all come from God's seed, we all have life because God breathed life into us but that life doesn't come with an instant inheritance.
That's the first birth, but the everlasting birth comes not from being born but being 'Born again' the second birth requires us to give ourselves up to God ( that's where the inheritance comes in )and it's that inheritance so freely given that we can choose to turn away from.
We didn't get to choose wether we would be born or not but we do get to choose wether we want to become his forever and we can choose to forfeit that.
I think the warnings of apostasy mean what they say, some will choose to turn back.

Works only govern our reward at the Bema Seat not our salvation
Some of us will finish the race with glowing colours
Some will just finish the race
Some will start but not finish
Well I know what I mean
Blessings to you
Mari

Thank you for your blessings Mari.

I'm sorry if I misinterpreted your response. I sure did a lot of typing about something you didn't mean. I can only hope it profited someone else.

But may I comment on some of the points you raise here?

Concerning our origin. You are right. We all have life through the "breath of God" (Gen.2:7). So do the animals (Gen.7:15). But to the man is given the Tree of Life. He is commanded to eat from it (Gen.2:16). Here we see that in God's plan man needed something more than just the "Breath of Life." He needed to eat of a divine Tree. When we eat fruit a strange thing happens. If you were to be cut open some hours or days after eating fruit the cutters would not find the fruit. What has happened is (a) the fruit became organically one with you, and (b) you would be nourished and healthy.

But we see that man never ate from this tree. The word "also" in Genesis 3:22 indicates that he had not hitherto eaten of this fruit. Man is barred from this tree. Because sin had come in, blood needed to be shed, so anyone wanting to eat from things divine had to now eat a slain Lamb. Israel do this symbolically (Ex.12:1-11), but the Church is commanded, "Take, eat, this is my body" (Matt.26:26 etc.). From the moment of resurrection all men may come to eat from Christ and (a) become organically one with the effects of this, and (b) be empowered to do His commands. This is the RE-birth. It is by faith in the Person of Christ and His completed work.

Once a person is born, he/she automatically becomes heir to whatever the parents have, be it money, land or position (such as a king). The parents have a vested interest in the education of the child because of this very inheritance. Prince Charles has had a strict and disciplined upbringing simply because his mother, Elizabeth, knows that great wealth, power and prestige will one day be put in his hands. However, if the inheritor shows contempt for his/her inheritance, is a rebel, lives wantonly and is a general disgrace to the family and what it stands for, the parents will finally disown the child. This does not mean that it is NOT their child. Nobody can change that. It means that all that the child was due to inherit, is forfeited. So it is with the Lord.

A second point you mentioned which I risk a comment on is the use of the word "salvation." I know the Christians at large have given our theme the abbreviation of OSAS - "Once Saved Always Saved." While I understand what they are getting at, it is, for the purpose of an accurate theological solution, inaccurate. This is because the word "saved" is too broadly used in scripture and can (and does) lead to confusion. Let me illustrate.

David is saved from Saul. Paul is saved from a venomous viper and a shipwreck. Peter is saved from prison by a miracle. Noah was saved from death by the flood waters by the ark. But he still dies some three hundred and fifty years later. Noah was saved from death, but still died. Let me show an even more dreaded misunderstanding. If this whole thread is about "salvation" from the Lake of Fire (which most readers assume it is), the original poster runs the risk of heresy by using the word "saved." In Philippians 2:12 Paul says, "Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling." The grammar clearly indicates that one's salvation is to be by his/her own effort. Perish the thought! Ephesians 2:8 contradicts this completely! "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God." And so you have a huge discussion about salvation that has two different origins and two different meanings. Don't laugh. Roman Catholicism, which makes up the huge bulk of so-called Christianity today teach salvation by works. So "saved" must be defined every time it is used to avoid heresy.

That is why, seemingly pedantically, I use the term "born again" and not salvation. The issue in so-called OSAS is whether a person can have their rebirth undone or not. Needless to say, if you do not regard the Millennial Kingdom of Jesus Christ, and you subscribe to the common Christian belief that one dies and goes either to heaven or hell, you have no option but to believe that one can have their rebirth undone by works. Because what then shall be done about all the warnings!? If you embrace the Millennial Reign of Christ, the solution is easy, as the example of Israel above has shown. Put all my posts in this thread together and see the overwhelming evidence that a person cannot be unborn to God, but can suffer the loss of what they were born again for - the Millennial Kingdom of our dear Lord Jesus, to whom the earth and the nations have been promised as an inheritance.

[Eyelog]

Just so I can see your entire view,

1. What happens after the 1000 years for those you describe as 'cast out'?
2. Is the inheritance limited to a participation in the 1000 years, or do you see it including eternity future (presumably a lot longer than the 1000 years)?
Of course, I am curious if you see a difference between the millenial kingdom period and eternity future.

[Boo]

Haven't you missed something Boo?

Firstly, As the Lord Jesus isn't really a tree, the Vine must be a parable or type. So if you study the trees of the bible in typology you would find that they do not represent rebirth. A tree in typology represents a king and his kingdom (Jdg.9:8-15; Dan.4:20-22; etc.). So taking the two scriptures I alluded to in the second last paragraph of my last posting, viz. Galatians 5:21 and Ephesians 5:5, it is very clear that one can be cut out of the kingdom.

Secondly, we were grafted into the Olive tree of Romans 11 and NOT the Vine of John 14. These two Trees show two different aspects of the kingdom and should not be mixed together.

Thirdly, in a previous post I made a difference between the word "saved" (from which comes salvation) and "regeneration." Yet you now make them the same for the sake of your rebuttal.

Why not read my posting again carefully and see if there is really an issue.

I don't know that I confused anything at all.

You cannot be a "child of God" unless you are reborn. That is regeneration, correct? To be regenerated, your sins are washed away and the Holy Spirit gives you a new life. At that point, you are grafted in, correct?

Are you implying that you can be saved without being regenerated? Perhaps you are saying that you can be regenerated without being saved? Yes, to me they go hand-in-hand and cannot be separated.

I don't know why you want to say that we must discern a difference between a tree and a vine when the analogy to me is the same thing. You are a small part being made part of a larger thing. When you are not fruitful, you are cut off. Perhaps I take it too simply? I guess it is because I see no need to try to complicate it. Parables were meant to explain things in simple terms, not to give us material for dissection and re-explanation.

Your discussion, if I have read you correctly, would seem to indicate that we can live wordly lives after accepting the gift of salvation and still avoid hell. It seems to me that your statements lead us to accept that the only thing we lose for living sinful lives "after regeneration" is the vast store of gifts that we could have recieved if we had been obedient.

Have I got you correctly this time?

I guess I am being simple, but it seems so simple:

Mark 13:13 And you will be hated by all for my name's sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved.

(that being the case, the one who does not endure to the end will NOT be saved)

John 15:2 & 6 Every branch in me that does not bear fruit he takes away, and every branch that does bear fruit he prunes, that it may bear more fruit.

If anyone does not abide in me he is thrown away like a branch and withers; and the branches are gathered, thrown into the fire, and burned.

(If we abide in Christ, we will not be gathered and thrown into the fire. It does not say that if we do not abide in Chirst, we will lose our rewards.)

Matthew 7:21 - 23 "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?' And then will I declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.'

Would it not seem that we must do the will of God? If we don't, God will not even know us on the last day. How can we do the will of the father when we return to a sinful lifestyle? I don't think we can.

Matthew 10:22 and you will be hated by all for my name's sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved.

If we do not endure to the end?

Matthew 24:9-13 "Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and put you to death, and you will be hated by all nations for my name's sake. And then many will fall away and betray one another and hate one another. And many false prophets will arise and lead many astray. And because lawlessness will be increased, the love of many will grow cold. But the one who
endures to the end will be saved.

Without becoming too repetitious, I would like to add that the threat is not the threat of losing our rewards. It is the threat of not being saved.

We really should be careful in how we try to examine what we are told in scriptures. It was a problem back when the Apostles walked the earth and it is a problem now. There has never been a shortage of bible lawyers, even before there was a "bible." It seems that there were those back then who also thought that you cannot lose your salvation by continuing in sin. Peter did not seem to think that was the case.

II Peter 3:14-17 Therefore, beloved, since you are waiting for these, be diligent to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace. And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability.

It is a dangerous think to lead someone to think that they can no longer end up outside the Kingdom of God through sin just because they once "got saved."

[Walls]

Just so I can see your entire view,

1. What happens after the 1000 years for those you describe as 'cast out'?
2. Is the inheritance limited to a participation in the 1000 years, or do you see it including eternity future (presumably a lot longer than the 1000 years)?
Of course, I am curious if you see a difference between the millenial kingdom period and eternity future.

1. They are lovingly restored by a loving Father but I understand from Daniel chapter 12 that there are eternal consequences. In Daniel 12:1-2 God is speaking to Daniel of "thy people." That is, the Jews. Notice that after resurrection some Jews gain eternal life and some "everlasting contempt." Now if God is consistent, then those of the Church who despised their inheritance will not ever be made kings. Revelation Chapters 21 and 22 shows "no more tears." So I take it that on the New Earth (after the 1'000 years) the slothful Christians will be restored to Christ's presence and enter the bliss that a full salvation (now I use the word salvation to encompass all the privileges of believing in Jesus Christ) brings. But they still cannot be kings. My argument is strengthened by the case of Esau. Esau was the firstborn and in line for a double portion of the inheritance. But he despised his inheritance for a plate of soup, that is, for the flesh (hunger). He has the birthright ripped from him and during the Millennium, while all the other deserts bloom, Edom stays a wilderness. It is, in my understanding of God's dealings with us, a very serious thing to despise your inheritance for the sake of the flesh.

2. Revelation 22:5 says "forever and ever." That is, on the New Earth for eternity future. This is further confirmed by Ephesians 2:7 and 3:21 in that the Church features in the "ages (plural) to come."

[claybevan]

Thank you for your blessings Mari.

I'm sorry if I misinterpreted your response. I sure did a lot of typing about something you didn't mean. I can only hope it profited someone else.

But may I comment on some of the points you raise here?

Concerning our origin. You are right. We all have life through the "breath of God" (Gen.2:7). So do the animals (Gen.7:15). But to the man is given the Tree of Life. He is commanded to eat from it (Gen.2:16). Here we see that in God's plan man needed something more than just the "Breath of Life." He needed to eat of a divine Tree. When we eat fruit a strange thing happens. If you were to be cut open some hours or days after eating fruit the cutters would not find the fruit. What has happened is (a) the fruit became organically one with you, and (b) you would be nourished and healthy.

But we see that man never ate from this tree. The word "also" in Genesis 3:22 indicates that he had not hitherto eaten of this fruit. Man is barred from this tree. Because sin had come in, blood needed to be shed, so anyone wanting to eat from things divine had to now eat a slain Lamb. Israel do this symbolically (Ex.12:1-11), but the Church is commanded, "Take, eat, this is my body" (Matt.26:26 etc.). From the moment of resurrection all men may come to eat from Christ and (a) become organically one with the effects of this, and (b) be empowered to do His commands. This is the RE-birth. It is by faith in the Person of Christ and His completed work.

Once a person is born, he/she automatically becomes heir to whatever the parents have, be it money, land or position (such as a king). The parents have a vested interest in the education of the child because of this very inheritance. Prince Charles has had a strict and disciplined upbringing simply because his mother, Elizabeth, knows that great wealth, power and prestige will one day be put in his hands. However, if the inheritor shows contempt for his/her inheritance, is a rebel, lives wantonly and is a general disgrace to the family and what it stands for, the parents will finally disown the child. This does not mean that it is NOT their child. Nobody can change that. It means that all that the child was due to inherit, is forfeited. So it is with the Lord.

A second point you mentioned which I risk a comment on is the use of the word "salvation." I know the Christians at large have given our theme the abbreviation of OSAS - "Once Saved Always Saved." While I understand what they are getting at, it is, for the purpose of an accurate theological solution, inaccurate. This is because the word "saved" is too broadly used in scripture and can (and does) lead to confusion. Let me illustrate.

David is saved from Saul. Paul is saved from a venomous viper and a shipwreck. Peter is saved from prison by a miracle. Noah was saved from death by the flood waters by the ark. But he still dies some three hundred and fifty years later. Noah was saved from death, but still died. Let me show an even more dreaded misunderstanding. If this whole thread is about "salvation" from the Lake of Fire (which most readers assume it is), the original poster runs the risk of heresy by using the word "saved." In Philippians 2:12 Paul says, "Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling." The grammar clearly indicates that one's salvation is to be by his/her own effort. Perish the thought! Ephesians 2:8 contradicts this completely! "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God." And so you have a huge discussion about salvation that has two different origins and two different meanings. Don't laugh. Roman Catholicism, which makes up the huge bulk of so-called Christianity today teach salvation by works. So "saved" must be defined every time it is used to avoid heresy.

That is why, seemingly pedantically, I use the term "born again" and not salvation. The issue in so-called OSAS is whether a person can have their rebirth undone or not. Needless to say, if you do not regard the Millennial Kingdom of Jesus Christ, and you subscribe to the common Christian belief that one dies and goes either to heaven or hell, you have no option but to believe that one can have their rebirth undone by works. Because what then shall be done about all the warnings!? If you embrace the Millennial Reign of Christ, the solution is easy, as the example of Israel above has shown. Put all my posts in this thread together and see the overwhelming evidence that a person cannot be unborn to God, but can suffer the loss of what they were born again for - the Millennial Kingdom of our dear Lord Jesus, to whom the earth and the nations have been promised as an inheritance.

hi there Walls,
Made me chuckle actually, how we read things so differently.
I'm glad our salvation doesn't depend on this one, you are such a gracious soul and i will get round to reading your reply when I haven't got the hungry masses plaguing me.
Mari

[Walls]

OK Boo,

I hear you. I think we have become a little sidetracked from the original thread. This is what I think happened. There are three big issues in the bible, because there are three types of people.

In Ephesians 2:11-22 Paul reports that God viewed the population of the earth in two groups. One was group of people on the earth called Gentiles, or the "Uncircumcision". The other was a group who had been given circumcision and Laws. This is obviously Israel or the Jews. By taking members "of these two" (Twain - KJV), God made a third called the New Man and made it into the Habitation of God. This is the Church. Now each of these three peoples, the Gentiles or the Nations, Israel and the the Church are dealt with by God according to their standings with Him.

These three peoples remain even to the New Earth. In Revelation 21:24 we have the City which is made of the Church as the Walls, Israel as the Gates, and the Nations may visit it unless they have some restriction (v.27). Each of these three peoples, the Church, Israel and the Nations have a different destiny, because God had different criteria for dealing with them. For example, only the Church possesses eternal life, because, as the Gospel of John, and other scriptures clearly show, you may only receive eternal life by believing in Jesus Christ. The Jews rejected Him and the Nations rejected Him, so they are intrinsically different to the Church.

This thread that has been so energetically supported, deals only with the Church. The original question is, "Does the Prophecy of Apostasy Prove OSAS is False?" Because the various saints have varying views on scripture, and because they have various standards of knowledge on the bible, there are various points of view concerning this point. The question was not; "Must you be born again..." The question was addressed to those already born again. In my postings, I chose,

• To make a difference between the very broad concept of "salvation" and the very precise and limiting concept of rebirth
• To show that because rebirth depended not on man's works, but on the finished work of Christ, it cannot be rescinded
• To show that despite this "security" of rebirth, there were dire warnings concerning those CHRISTIANS who thought they could live like they wanted because their rebirth was secure
• To show what the consequences of a wanton Christian life were

At no time did I enter into what will happen to a Jew for rejecting Christ, and at no time did I enter into what the destiny of one of the Nations will be. This was not the subject of the Thread. At no time did I call our rebirth into question. The Thread assumes it as an accomplished fact. We were only discussing whether the prediction by our Lord Jesus, and His Apostles, that there would be a "falling away" in the Church, supported the idea that "Once Saved, Always Saved" (OSAS) was valid.

If you read my postings one by one, starting from the first time I posted, this will become evident.

If you think that losing your inheritance AFTER rebirth is not frightening enough, then this is because you and I do not have the same appreciation of this awful loss, not because my doctrine is faulty. Our controversy lies in the magnitude of the loss. To me it makes my knees smite together. Maybe to you it doesn't.

Finally, let me say one thing. It is good that we exchange views, for we all learn new things. But concerning the completed work of our Lord Jesus Christ, Jehovah of the universe holds this in VERY high esteem. Before any Christian goes on record saying that once applied to a man, it can be overthrown, he/she should think very long and hard. God applies rebirth to a believer based on what Jesus, His beloved Son, DID. If it can be overthrown, which I don't believe is the case (Eccl 3:14), it can only be overthrown by God, and not the works of a mere man. Just as the blood of Christ, when brought into disrepute, can cause big trouble (1st Cor.11:27-32), so can a despising attitude to His great work bring the wrath of God. Do not take the decision to say that Christ's eternal work can be overturned easily, especially when you have been told that it is an "eternal salvation" (Heb.5:9), and that any work by God is "forever" (Eccl.3:14).

If our rebirth was done by God (in the Person of the Holy Spirit - Jn.3:6), we must all be careful what we say about it.

Will you allow me to pass on the matter of the Trees. It's big subject and not appropriate in this thread. Thanks.

God Bless

[John146]

Unfortunately you are misunderstanding me. I'm not claiming you said any such thing. I was just trying to illustrate in general, the logical conclusion if it played out this way or if it played out that way, etc.

Here's something else to ponder, keeping in mind that I'm just thinking out loud, and meaning in general, and not trying to imply any of this might be your conclusions. this would be in regards to everyone on the planet worshiping the beast, except for saints of course. But if not everyone reads the Bible nor has read the Bible, then how can one conclude that everybody on the planet is in mind, when some on the planet wouldn't even have a clue about some of these things? How could someone who has never heard of the beast, then follow after the beast and then worship the beast on top of that?

Well, one difference between us is our understanding of the beast. I believe you see the beast as an individual Antichrist, don't you? That's not my understanding of the beast. But maybe we can save the discussion of who the beast is for another thread. All I know is that the scripture says this:

Rev 13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

This says everyone on the earth "whose names are not written in the book of life" will worship the beast. So, tell me your understanding of this verse. Whose names are not written in the book of life? The same ones who will eventually be cast into the lake of fire, right?

Rev 20:15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

So, how do you identify someone whose name is not written in the book of life? We're talking about people who are not saved and don't belong to Christ, right? Does it not say in Rev 13:8 that all of them on the earth whose names are not written in the book of life will worship the beast? What unsaved person would be excluded from all "whose names are not written in the book of life"?

[divaD]

Does it not say in Rev 13:8 that all of them on the earth whose names are not written in the book of life will worship the beast?

Yes, that's what it says. But I already used examples of exceptions. Logically, if babies are burned up when Christ returns, this indicates they received the mark of the beast. If they are not burned up, but spared instead, this shows that God has mercy on infants the 2nd time around, but the first time around, meaning the flood, He didn't have mercy. So is the beast relevant to this discussion? Maybe..maybe not, depending on how one might be looking at it. The point being, maybe those that worship the beast are only apostates from the faith, and that not every single person on the planet is in mind. Another perspective to consider is this.

Revelation 3:5 He that overcometh, 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.

Maybe those that worship the beast were at first in the book of life, but got blotted out because they followed after the beast instead, indicating apostasy.

BTW, just so that no one misunderstands me. All of this is just ponderings on my part. In no way am I claiming this is the way things really are...because I just don't know.