Once Saved Always Saved

[shazeep]

false doctrine may not balance, but its fruit is at some point revealed, and i agree with GD that there is likely a middle ground, as evidenced by the lack of any conclusive "proof" for either side. This tells me that the question is likely irrelevant in some way, like most human questions are. If osas is deemed a license for one to sin against another, v some version of 'blessed assurance,' then this will quickly out either way; and then might be the time to shake the dust off, or not.

I've never been very comfortable with "saved" as a label, as an either/or choice, anyway. On/off. Yes/no. Life just doesn't work that way--not even spiritual life, i don't think.

[KeptByTheWord]

Originally Posted by shazeep

false doctrine may not balance, but its fruit is at some point revealed, and i agree with GD that there is likely a middle ground, as evidenced by the lack of any conclusive "proof" for either side. This tells me that the question is likely irrelevant in some way, like most human questions are. If osas is deemed a license for one to sin against another, v some version of 'blessed assurance,' then this will quickly out either way; and then might be the time to shake the dust off, or not.

I've never been very comfortable with "saved" as a label, as an either/or choice, anyway. On/off. Yes/no. Life just doesn't work that way--not even spiritual life, i don't think.

I too disagree with the OSAS thought that you can sin wilfully and still be saved. But like you said... many Calvinists do not see it that way at all, and have lives that bear fruit of the spirit.

So my intent is to be prepared, and to understand both sides of the argument, and as long as she doesn't believe that you can wilfully sin and still be saved (which I don't think she does), then it probably isn't a hill to fight and die on.