NOSAS... why I believe it the correct doctrine.

[ProjectPeter]

Okay Jesuslover... here we go. And just for clarification to those that want to debate this and whatnot. That's cool but for now... I am going to lay this out since I was asked by Jesuslover. So naturally I have no problem yapping about all this with you but my first and foremost goal is to lay this out since someone has asked!

Let's start with a couple of passages just to line this all up in the Old Testament, Gospels, and the Epistles.

Paul writes Timothy and tell him;

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
17 that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.


So all Scripture is for doctrine, reproof, correction and training in righteousness. Old and New. So with that knowledge I want to start with a passage in the Old and then I will line that up with passages from the Gospels and the Epistles.

One of the clearest passages on this issue is found here.

Ezekiel 18:20 "The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.
21 ¶"But if the wicked man turns from all his sins which he has committed and observes all My statutes and practices justice and righteousness, he shall surely live; he shall not die.
22 "All his transgressions which he has committed will not be remembered against him; because of his righteousness which he has practiced, he will live.
23 "Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked," declares the Lord GOD, "rather than that he should turn from his ways and live?
24 ¶"But when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity, and does according to all the abominations that a wicked man does, will he live? All his righteous deeds which he has done will not be remembered for his treachery which he has committed and his sin which he has committed; for them he will die.
25 "Yet you say, `The way of the Lord is not right.´ Hear now, O house of Israel! Is My way not right? Is it not your ways that are not right?
26 "When a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity, and dies because of it, for his iniquity which he has committed he will die.
27 "Again, when a wicked man turns away from his wickedness which he has committed and practices justice and righteousness, he will save his life.
28 "Because he considered and turned away from all his transgressions which he had committed, he shall surely live; he shall not die.

[jesuslover1968]

Very nicely laid-out. First question, and I won't be debating as it is a subject I am uncertain of, so I am here to learn.
So is the belief you have based upon the need for repentance alone, or do you believe a person who is saved and turns away must be saved again? God Bless.

[*Madeline*]

Hi PP!

Okay Jesuslover... here we go. And just for clarification to those that want to debate this and whatnot. That's cool but for now... I am going to lay this out since I was asked by Jesuslover. So naturally I have no problem yapping about all this with you but my first and foremost goal is to lay this out since someone has asked!

Let's start with a couple of passages just to line this all up in the Old Testament, Gospels, and the Epistles.

Paul writes Timothy and tell him;

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
17 that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.


So all Scripture is for doctrine, reproof, correction and training in righteousness. Old and New. So with that knowledge I want to start with a passage in the Old and then I will line that up with passages from the Gospels and the Epistles.

One of the clearest passages on this issue is found here.

Ezekiel 18:20 "The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.
21 ¶"But if the wicked man turns from all his sins which he has committed and observes all My statutes and practices justice and righteousness, he shall surely live; he shall not die.
22 "All his transgressions which he has committed will not be remembered against him; because of his righteousness which he has practiced, he will live.
23 "Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked," declares the Lord GOD, "rather than that he should turn from his ways and live?
24 ¶"But when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity, and does according to all the abominations that a wicked man does, will he live? All his righteous deeds which he has done will not be remembered for his treachery which he has committed and his sin which he has committed; for them he will die.
25 "Yet you say, `The way of the Lord is not right.´ Hear now, O house of Israel! Is My way not right? Is it not your ways that are not right?
26 "When a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity, and dies because of it, for his iniquity which he has committed he will die.
27 "Again, when a wicked man turns away from his wickedness which he has committed and practices justice and righteousness, he will save his life.
28 "Because he considered and turned away from all his transgressions which he had committed, he shall surely live; he shall not die.

The passage in Ezekiel 18 is not speaking of eternal life, but rather temporal life. Take for example vs. 24, "in them (iniquity) shall he die". In other words, the man who commits iniquity will die according to the Mosaic law (vs. 26), "for his iniquity that he hath done shall he die" is the same thing. So this passage has nothing to do with losing one's salvation, it has to do with the wicked losing his temporal life in accordance with the Mosaic law. Now let's deal with the Hebrew word translated "righteous" in this passage. It doesn't mean saved, it means doing things correctly or right. An example can be found in 1 Sam. 24:17, "Thou art more righteous than I...". A person is either saved or not, he is not more saved than another. Note also 1 Kings 2:32, "...2 men more righteous and better....". "Righteous" is not saved, it is the description of having done what is right and good.

In summary, the Ezekiel passage is saying that if a man who had done the right things strays, and commits evil, he will lose his temporal life. There's no way of knowing if that man was a believer (i.e. saved) or not. But if he was he would die, but then he would be resurrected unto eternal salvation. But this passage has nothing to do with eternal life, it is speaking of the wicked losing his temporal life. Hope this helps! If you are so confident in the NOSAS doctrine, then why not take it to the arena?

Love,
Madeline

[jesuslover1968]

Hi PP!



The passage in Ezekiel 18 is not speaking of eternal life, but rather temporal life. Take for example vs. 24, "in them (iniquity) shall he die". In other words, the man who commits iniquity will die according to the Mosaic law (vs. 26), "for his iniquity that he hath done shall he die" is the same thing. So this passage has nothing to do with losing one's salvation, it has to do with the wicked losing his temporal life in accordance with the Mosaic law. Now let's deal with the Hebrew word translated "righteous" in this passage. It doesn't mean saved, it means doing things correctly or right. An example can be found in 1 Sam. 24:17, "Thou art more righteous than I...". A person is either saved or not, he is not more saved than another. Note also 1 Kings 2:32, "...2 men more righteous and better....". "Righteous" is not saved, it is the description of having done what is right and good.

In summary, the Ezekiel passage is saying that if a man who had done the right things strays, and commits evil, he will lose his temporal life. There's no way of knowing if that man was a believer (i.e. saved) or not. But if he was he would die, but then he would be resurrected unto eternal salvation. But this passage has nothing to do with eternal life, it is speaking of the wicked losing his temporal life. Hope this helps! If you are so confident in the NOSAS doctrine, then why not take it to the arena?

Love,
Madeline

Okay Jesuslover... here we go. And just for clarification to those that want to debate this and whatnot. That's cool but for now... I am going to lay this out since I was asked by Jesuslover. So naturally I have no problem yapping about all this with you but my first and foremost goal is to lay this out since someone has asked!

Because of this.... God Bless.

[*Madeline*]

Hi jesuslover1968!

Because of this.... God Bless.

I understand, which is why I said that this issue should be taken to the "arena" instead of debating the issue here on this thread. But I'm sorry for interrupting.

Love,
Madeline

[jesuslover1968]

Hi jesuslover1968!



I understand, which is why I said that this issue should be taken to the "arena" instead of debating the issue here on this thread. But I'm sorry for interrupting.

Love,
Madeline

It's fine. That is why he brought it here, though. God Bless.

[mdmd]

In very simple terms: If you do something foolish that results in your death, all your past good decisions won't relieve the consequence of your one bad decision.

It has nothing to do with ultimate salvation.

[moonglow]

Well I have no idea what the last two posts (#5 and #6) were about...didn't follow that...but got a hint this is a no debate thread? is that correct? I would like to chime in but not certain if I should...

God bless

[Redeemed by Grace]

"Humpher whersytrwocnbsgtarsl dhhagdyat" <--- hand over my mouth refraining from speaking... LOL

Well it's probably for the best anyway... so much to say, so little time...

enjoy your discussion...

[ProjectPeter]

Very nicely laid-out. First question, and I won't be debating as it is a subject I am uncertain of, so I am here to learn.
So is the belief you have based upon the need for repentance alone, or do you believe a person who is saved and turns away must be saved again? God Bless.

I didn't figure you would want to debate it. I have no problem doing that with folks that want to... just letting them know that it is my secondary thing here. So Madeline... I'll get with your in a sec!

Anyway... your question which was a very good one I might add! I think of the many times we read in the Prophets where the message they gave Israel was REPENT! Turn BACK to God. So it is certainly a matter of repentance. As to being saved again? That is really more semantics I figure and the further we go in the explanation of why I believe NOSAS is the proper doctrine that will at least become more apparent as to why I say that. But a passage to ponder would be found in Luke and the parable of the prodigal son.

Luke 15:11 ¶And He said, "A certain man had two sons;
12 and the younger of them said to his father, `Father, give me the share of the estate that falls to me.´ And he divided his wealth between them.
13 "And not many days later, the younger son gathered everything together and went on a journey into a distant country, and there he squandered his estate with loose living.
14 "Now when he had spent everything, a severe famine occurred in that country, and he began to be in need.
15 "And he went and attached himself to one of the citizens of that country, and he sent him into his fields to feed swine.
16 "And he was longing to fill his stomach with the pods that the swine were eating, and no one was giving anything to him.
17 "But when he came to his senses, he said, `How many of my father's hired men have more than enough bread, but I am dying here with hunger!
18 `I will get up and go to my father, and will say to him, "Father, I have sinned against heaven, and in your sight;
19 "I am no longer worthy to be called your son; make me as one of your hired men."´
20 "And he got up and came to his father. But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him, and felt compassion for him, and ran and embraced him, and kissed him.
21 "And the son said to him, `Father, I have sinned against heaven and in your sight; I am no longer worthy to be called your son.´
22 "But the father said to his slaves, `Quickly bring out the best robe and put it on him, and put a ring on his hand and sandals on his feet;
23 and bring the fattened calf, kill it, and let us eat and be merry;
24 for this son of mine was dead, and has come to life again; he was lost, and has been found.´ And they began to be merry.
25 "Now his older son was in the field, and when he came and approached the house, he heard music and dancing.
26 "And he summoned one of the servants and began inquiring what these things might be.
27 "And he said to him, `Your brother has come, and your father has killed the fattened calf, because he has received him back safe and sound.´
28 "But he became angry, and was not willing to go in; and his father came out and began entreating him.
29 "But he answered and said to his father, `Look! For so many years I have been serving you, and I have never neglected a command of yours; and yet you have never given me a kid, that I might be merry with my friends;
30 but when this son of yours came, who has devoured your wealth with harlots, you killed the fattened calf for him.´
31 "And he said to him, `My child, you have always been with me, and all that is mine is yours.
32 `But we had to be merry and rejoice, for this brother of yours was dead and has begun to live, and was lost and has been found.´"

So this son, willfully walked away with his inheritance. He was a son no doubt. But while he was gone... he was dead. It wasn't until he came back to the father and repented... it wasn't until then that he was alive again. And that is important wording as well.

Here is the Greek for the words "alive again."

anazao

to recover life (literally or figuratively): -- (be a-)live again, revive.

So he was a son who walked away. While he was away he was dead. When he came back broken and repentant... he was anazao. He recovered life. He lives again. He was once alive, then dead, then alive again. So born-again again... while I know that wording disturbs some folks... I've no problem with the thought. Naturally the ultimate thing is to repent and turn back to the Father. But I think it says much here and it being twice mentioned should gain our attention.

[ProjectPeter]

Hi jesuslover1968!



I understand, which is why I said that this issue should be taken to the "arena" instead of debating the issue here on this thread. But I'm sorry for interrupting.

Love,
Madeline

You can certainly debate this with me. I'd just ask that folks let Jesuslover respond without any grief as she is studying the matter. I am sure that she'll read a number of the post but she asked me to explain why I was NOSAS so I want to do that. My words are wide open for anyone that wants to challenge them most certainly. I just want folks to understand that as the thread progresses... my first goal will be to respond to her questions and comments. Then when I am done with that... I will get with everyone else.

[ProjectPeter]

Well I have no idea what the last two posts (#5 and #6) were about...didn't follow that...but got a hint this is a no debate thread? is that correct? I would like to chime in but not certain if I should...

God bless

Feel free. The thread is open for debate with the disclaimer that my first goal is to talk to Jesuslover on this and anyone else that wants to understand why I figure NOSAS is the correct doctrine. But shoot... you know me. Nothing like a good old debate to get the blood flowing!

[ProjectPeter]

"Humpher whersytrwocnbsgtarsl dhhagdyat" <--- hand over my mouth refraining from speaking... LOL

Well it's probably for the best anyway... so much to say, so little time...

enjoy your discussion...

Oh feel free at any time to jump in! I don't mind at all!

[ProjectPeter]

Hi PP!

The passage in Ezekiel 18 is not speaking of eternal life, but rather temporal life. Take for example vs. 24, "in them (iniquity) shall he die". In other words, the man who commits iniquity will die according to the Mosaic law (vs. 26), "for his iniquity that he hath done shall he die" is the same thing. So this passage has nothing to do with losing one's salvation, it has to do with the wicked losing his temporal life in accordance with the Mosaic law. Now let's deal with the Hebrew word translated "righteous" in this passage. It doesn't mean saved, it means doing things correctly or right. An example can be found in 1 Sam. 24:17, "Thou art more righteous than I...". A person is either saved or not, he is not more saved than another. Note also 1 Kings 2:32, "...2 men more righteous and better....". "Righteous" is not saved, it is the description of having done what is right and good.

In summary, the Ezekiel passage is saying that if a man who had done the right things strays, and commits evil, he will lose his temporal life. There's no way of knowing if that man was a believer (i.e. saved) or not. But if he was he would die, but then he would be resurrected unto eternal salvation. But this passage has nothing to do with eternal life, it is speaking of the wicked losing his temporal life. Hope this helps! If you are so confident in the NOSAS doctrine, then why not take it to the arena?

Love,
Madeline

Okay let's see how that pans out.

If that is the case... will the one that is righteous live and never die or is man going to die no matter how righteous they are? Because if the death means they physically die... then we have an awful lot of sinners that are disproving that as truth and... the righteous are dying long about the same ages. So that being said... if the death means physical death then the life would have to mean they won't die. One cannot pick and choose context so it would have to work that way for both life and death. Naturally we know that it doesn't so that is why that just doesn't fly.

[ProjectPeter]

Okay let's see how that pans out.

If that is the case... will the one that is righteous live and never die or is man going to die no matter how righteous they are? Because if the death means they physically die... then we have an awful lot of sinners that are disproving that as truth and... the righteous are dying long about the same ages. So that being said... if the death means physical death then the life would have to mean they won't die. One cannot pick and choose context so it would have to work that way for both life and death. Naturally we know that it doesn't so that is why that just doesn't fly.

And Madeline... The arena is for a more organized and structured debate. I've a lot going on in life right now and just don't have the time to fit within a structure. So you might ask around a bit before tossing at challenges like that because folks will tell you that I have no problem with my confidence in the doctrine nor do I have a problem debating it with anyone in any arena. It just isn't a good time. But rest assured... I am not afraid to do so and tossing out the challenge like you just did... my not taking it there means nothing other than I simply haven't the time right now. Ask in a couple of weeks when things have settled down and I am settled down then I'm your huckleberry. But ask some of the folks you agree with before doing it... such as RbG and whomever else and see if they think you are really ready for that. If he thinks so then cool... we'll set something up once I get settled.