Here are some issues against OSAS
1. In your 4 examples: Joseph Prince has a mixed bag of doctrine as many Pentecostals do, so I do not think he is credible when it comes to doctrine. His ministry is exemplary, I do not condemn him but he cannot be an authority on church doctrine. One exception to common Pentecostals so far is Hillsong by their songs and examples. I do not know their declared beliefs though. but they have shown some consistency in their Wesleyan-like beliefs (deliverance not only from the PENALTY of sin but from the POWER of sin in this life) 2. Ravi does not personally believe in OSAS, I know because he was ordained in the denomination I came from which does not believe that. He was simply talking about the uniqueness of the Christian faith, that forgiveness is not earned by good works but is entirely a gift of God. 3. Nadia's clip has nothing to do with OSAS. 4. Only Tim Keller among the four does teach that (false) doctrine based on simply analyzing words of Scripture without the full context of the Bible and history. 5. There are so many churches and versions on this issue contradicting each other, AND ALL OF THEM USE SCRIPTURE SUPPORT! So who is to judge who is right? The answer my friend is the Apostle's doctrine and early church tradition. They (the early church) created the New Testament (and NOT the other way around), so their life, belief and practice should complement and support what is correct doctrine. The first century never taught OSAS, in fact they believed the opposite and they lived their lives accordingly where none of this world was important to them, they gave everything up for the salvation that Christ offered as a gift. Who would understand the New Testament better? Of course those who lived around the time it was written and who spoke Koine Greek with all the idiomatic expressions and nuances of the language. Not Tim Keller nor RC Sproul nor other pretenders to doctrine which was never taught by the Apostles. 6. All Christian churches (perhaps with the exception of the Latin church and some pentecostal groups) believe that the canon of Scripture is closed which means there should be NO NEW REVELATION after canon was closed in the 3rd century. New understanding is OK but ONLY on a PERSONAL basis since the Holy Spirit does speak today but in personal terms BUT IT CANNOT BE TAUGHT AS DOCTRINE. Well, OSAS is an innovation of the 16th century. No Christian actually believed such teaching before that. The pre-Tribulation rapture which is widely taught in America and now the world is not even 200 years old. These are new doctrines forcing themselves as NEW GOSPELS invented by people who either ignore the Apostle's doctrine and practice or are just completely ignorant of it. Stubborn exegetes who insist on ignoring church history as an integral part of their hermeneutics would then be arrogant to presume that they have a corner on a truth which goes against early Christian belief. These people are just self-made POPES without knowing it (Maybe some do know it?) since they implicitly believe that only their interpretation is correct. They actually believe that they are better at interpretation than Paul, John, Peter, James and even Christ who time and against preaches against the dangers of being unfaithful (this assumes that they have been faithful before). Now, do not argue about Law and Grace here, yes Christ berated the Pharisees who did nothing but debate him because they thought their interpretation of the Law and the Prophets were the correct one, BUT he chose Paul an EVEN MORE STRICT AND VIOLENT PHARISEE who killed Christians, to be an apostle. What was the difference? The Pharisees were arrogant interpreters. But look at Paul's personal testimony, he was a God-seeker who wanted to please God to the limit. Christ intervened because Paul's heart was in the right place, he wanted to fight for God and please God. Finally, he was willing to give in to the correct interpretation of the Law (The Great Commandment) that it had less to do with truth but more to do with pleasing God with your heart, soul, MIND, and strength and loving your neighbor sacrificially. Hank Hannigraff host of CRI and the Bible Answer Man changed his belief from OSAS to the opposite now that he is with the Eastern Orthodox Church. So we have Ravi, who never believed OSAS and Hank to changed his view. The biggest mistake in modern Bible interpretation is equating Assurance of Salvation to OSAS. They are NOT the same. Assurance has to do with knowing for sure that you are IN THE FAITH like do you abide in the vine and never get cut off? Does your faith manifest itself in good works? Do you "naturally" and consistently bear the fruit of the Spirit? Do you have a sacrificial love for God the way he sacrificially loved you? Are you willing to live OR die for Christ anytime, all the time? THIS IS ASSURANCE because you can determine this for yourself. You do not have to guess! People who say you "possess" eternal life have no way to confirm that biblically because this is purely a mental thing. Losing salvation or the threat of losing salvation is all over Scripture so I do not need to defend it except to say, just BE INTELLECTUALLY HONEST with your hermeneutics and junk any doctrine that does not fit what God is really saying not only through his word but proven by the Apostle's tradition (2 Thessalonians 2:15 DO NOT READ THE NIV FOR THIS, IT IS A BIASED VERSION https://relational-theology-institute.blogspot.com/2020/12/avoid-niv-for-doctrinal-studies.html)
No comments:
Post a Comment