OSAS is common to Arminianism. It is sometimes associated with the attitude that now that one is saved one can go off sinning with abandon.
OSAS tends to lead to the view that there is nothing remaining for the believer in their walk of faith. Who denies that there are not a few of those that sign the pledge card or answer a
Finneyistic altar call soon show themselves to be not of us for they went out of us? The reason is that the typical OSAS view, never carefully explained from the pulpit, ends up in error, such as in Keswickian
Exchanged Life views that include rationales leading to licentiousness--doing whatever a person wants "now that I am saved and always will be". OSAS fosters the wrong mindset.
The doctrine of OSAS isn't the Reformed doctrine of the Saint's Perseverance. But neither are they correct who embitter souls by teaching that a salvation that is actually theirs can nonetheless be forfeited by the veto-power of the human will. OSAS is a johnny-one-note doctrine that comforts the comfortable and disturbed conscience alike with a smothering salve. It usually teaches that "doubt" is the worst sin, and is the one thing that would demonstrate a lack of salvation. Thus, it offers almost nothing of genuine grace to the trembling soul; and for the casual "believer," it assists him in searing his conscience. In either case, the utmost confidence is urged in an act of the human will.
The Reformed argue that the corrosive power of sin upon genuine faith cannot hollow it out, because the source of that faith is divine, the gifts of God are without repentance, the Lord knows them that are his, no one can pluck them out of his hands, he conquers those he loves and wins them infallibly to himself, for they are elected in love and in Christ from all eternity.
In the doctrine of OSAS (eternal security), the process of justification is divorced from the process of sanctification. This arises from the belief of a libertarian free will, which therefore give Man the freedom to choose whether he or she wants to be sanctified after he/she is justified. Thus, a situation may arise where a person, after being justified before God, slips back into his old habits of sin and become a so-called carnal Christian.
The Reformed doctrine of the
Perseverance of the Saints is much better by far. Unlike OSAS, it does not separate justification from sanctification (although both processes are distinct from each other), neither does it buy into the Arminian false premise of libertarian free will. Instead, it proclaims that all persons who are justified will also be sanctified (
Rom. 5:2-11) and finally glorified (
Rom. 8:30). In contradistinction to the Arminian, those who are justified do not have the 'free will' to 'resist' sanctification, though they willingly submit to it (compatibilism). Thus, those who are justified do not fall into such grievous sin so as to obscure their salvation but will finally repent. Therefore, the classical Arminian objection to Reformed Christianity falls apart with the understanding of the doctrine of the Perseverance of the Saints. Furthermore, if there are such person who do sin grievously without any remorse, the Reformed doctrine of Perseverance of the Saints also states that a person who does sin willingly and happily may not be saved after all. (
1 John 2:19).
Since God
is the Author and Finisher of our faith,
man cannot fall away from eternal salvation. Once a man has been born-again he cannot be unborn-again. Furthermore, the elect of God will definitely manifest evidences of their salvation by means of
good works. The elect shall, by the grace of God and without exception, ultimately
persevere in righteousness. The eternal security of the believer in the Lord Jesus Christ is demonstrated by the persevering faith and righteousness wrought by the grace of God in His
little begotten ones.
AMR