Tuesday, January 19, 2016

Positional Statement on Salvation

19 January 2016: It has become necessary due to recent events that I present a Positional Statement which explains in detail per Scripture how an individual is saved and how that individual maintains their salvation through to death or the Harpazo.  This Positional Statement is not being made so that it may be debated in any matter whatsoever; no debate in the comments section will be allowed because every jot and iota of what follows is based upon Scripture. 

I have long been a student of the Biblical teaching of Dr. David R. Reagan of Lamb and Lion Ministries and his teaching which follows in the embedded link to the Lamb & Lion Ministries website is expressly what I also believe and therefore I present it as the Positional Statement on Salvation.  

In this Positional Statement you will learn that the salvation of the individual is an ongoing process that begins with justification, continues with sanctification and is finalized with glorification at resurrection from the dead or at the Harpazo. You will also learn that the so-called doctrine of "One Saved Always Saved" is an extremist doctrine; it is not Biblical and I do reject it as not being in accordance with the Word of God.


Sean Osborne said...

Just to be perfectly clear... comments on this subject will be posted, but any submitted comment containing debate concerning this subject will not be posted.

Rhonda said...

Just a few weeks ago I turned the station to watch Lion and Lamb Ministries
and saw Ted Cruz's father talking with Dr. Reagan. I was very impressed by
their conversation which made me feel quite pleased with my choice of presidential
candidates. I personally believe out of the candidates we have, Ted Cruz is
the one that would be asking God for help. I just don't know if he, or whoever
wins the office of President will have time to fix our huge mess?

hartdawg said...

To be honest, I always wondered why this wasn't posted from the beginning. Are you going to post this on the side column along with your prophetic road to revelation and all your other links? I personally think that you should....just my thoughts anyway

Sean Osborne said...

I had wanted Dr Ben Carson to be the nominee, but Ted Cruz is also a favorite of mine. The Lord is in control; His will shall be done!

Sean Osborne said...


I intended to place this as the featured post all along and it is now permanently resident on the right-hand column of the main page.

I never thought this was a necessary component for a blog site dealing specifically with coming prophetic fulfillment, mostly because as my personal statement was also present on that column. Yesterday I realized that I had pulled the personal statement some time ago to make room for another addition (Situational Awareness) to the column and never put it back.

Making some fixes over the coming days.

Ken B said...


I have always loved Dr. Reagan's ministry!

I have placed that article to my Facebook page and will pray it reaches at least one person!

Ken B

Sean Osborne said...


I can tell you that in the approximately 24 hours since I posted this over hundred twenty people have read it. :)

Sean Osborne said...


There is no debate to engaged in on this as Dr. Reagan has already covered all Scripture bases that would need to be covered in any debate. This is clear to anyone who actually reads the entire statement including all of the Scripture references.

Bereanism - what a concept!

Sean Osborne said...

2 Timothy 2:12b
"If we deny Him; He will also deny us."

Which is from...

Matthew 10:33
"But whoever denies Me before men, him I will also deny before My Father who is in heaven."

Someone who accepted Christ and professed Christ for a time, and then fell back into sin and now denies Christ is one who the above Scripture is referring to; one who will be denied by Christ before God the Father.

This unequivocally proves the falsehood inherent in the "once saved always saved" nonsense.

Miriam said...

Sean, apologies in advance if this is annoying, but what do you then make of the fact that Peter denied Jesus 3 times on the night after his crucifixion? Obviously that was not the end of the matter as far as Peter was concerned. I think this whole subject is a little beyond me right now, which is OK because God has it all figured out :-)

Sean Osborne said...


Absolutely not annoying! In fact I've been patiently waiting for someone to bring Peter's three-fold denial up in discussion.

We all know that Jesus prophesied to Peter prior to the crucifixion that Peter would deny Jesus three times before the morning.

We also know that on the third post resurrection occasion that Jesus appeared to the disciples, after they ate the fish for breakfast, Jesus required Peter to confirm three times that Peter did indeed love (agape - unconditional love) Jesus. When Peter answered in the affirmative each time Jesus replied "feed my lambs," then "feed my sheep," then "feed my sheep" again, meaning the Christians there in Jerusalem who would spread the Gospel outwards to the nations. Then Jesus told him how he would die in service to and for the glory of God, and Jesus said, "Follow Me."

This is how Jesus personally restored Peter into salvation and faith, so that he would able to lead the newly born church forward.

Then moments later Peter questioned Jesus about the disciple He loved, John, and said "Lord, what about this man?"

And Jesus said to Peter, “If I will that he remain till I come, what is that to you? You follow Me!


What does it concern anyone else about anyone else regarding their salvation, what is that to them? You follow Jesus and glorify God.

This is bottom line reason why I will not allow any debate on this issue here.

What is it to you? Follow Jesus and glorify God.

That's all there is.

Salvation is His business and nothing for His sheep to argue about.

Sean Osborne said...


Are you ashamed of your name? Is it not written in the Book of Life? If so, then why do you hide behind "anonymous" among other Christian brethren?

Why do you confuse straightforwardness with rudeness?

Was Jesus rude in His reply to Peter???

Your question was answered in my reply to Miriam above.

NEFAN said...

Sean, thank you for taking a stand and stating this truth. We have a free will... to choose...will we or will we not surrender our lives daily unto the Lord. Yes he will forgive but if we choose to turn away that's our choice. He will chase after and we must RECEIVE the gift of salvation.

Sean Osborne said...


I guess it has not occurred to you how exceedingly rude it is to show up out of the blue making unfounded accusations from a position of total anonymity. Since you refuse to self-identify then I suppose I am under no obligation to post your comments either. That's how a one-way street works, and since that's how you wish to operate, I will also.

Apparently what Dr. Reagan wrote, beginning with the title and the subtitle, still has not registered with you, not completely I think. But that can be fixed pretty easily.

Reading and comprehension of what is written don't always go hand-in-hand, I will be the first person to guarantee that is the truth. And I am wondering if that is the reason you say that you are still confused about this.

By the way, this is not debate, it's discussion in the form of a Q&A session. You ask a question and the answer is provided. So, moving forward...

You trust Jesus and you will not deny Him. Good, that's how one maintains their salvation even if they do nothing else for the rest of their entire lifetime. There's no doubt about that, salvation assured, but it would be not be the best life to do nothing and ignore God's will for your life would it? So, just believing, as Dr. Reagan asks, is it enough or is there more to it? Would not a Christian in that circumstance not stagnate and eventually fall by the wayside, or worse, backslide.

What do the Scriptures say about living the Christian life and striving to grow and become more Christ-like, a more mature Christian, to truly be His servant at all times in all circumstances.

Salvation is by the grace of God and you had to ask for it in order to receive it and once the individual receives salvation by asking for a receiving the covering blood of the Lamb of God one is not done at that point. One must then be OBEDIENT to His Word and being OBEDIENT to God means that from that point on we are working because our faith will always be manifested in works for the glory of God, as the Scripture says, "faith without works is dead."

Does a person who by choice falls away, and whose faith becomes dead spend eternity in Heaven with God?

Does the Holy Spirit continue dwell within the individual whose faith is dead, and who in all probability has gone back into a life of rampant sin? Does the Holy Spirit remain in that person to partake in that sin?

Seriously, who believes that the Holy Spirit (God) coexists within the person whose soul is dead because of sin?

I'll tell you who, the person whose itching ears savors the words and promises of a false doctrine.

If God cannot live with sin in eternity, how can He in the person of the Holy spirit live within the soul which is dead with sin?

This is the soul which becomes unsanctified through the willing continuation of sin after accepting salvation. This is the soul which makes a mockery of the sacrifice made by God in the person of Jesus on the Cross. This is the soul who He will spew out or to whom He will say "I do not know you." This is the soul that falls from grace.

Someone has to show me Scripture which proves this to be in error. In over 40 years no one ever has. In fact, no man (or woman) ever will.

Miriam said...


I've been mulling this whole thing over during my drive time recently...what about this from 1 Corinthians 3, in regards to our rewards?: 12 If anyone builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, 13 their work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each person’s work. 14 If what has been built survives, the builder will receive a reward. 15 If it is burned up, the builder will suffer loss but yet will be saved—even though only as one escaping through the flames. Elsewhere in scripture we're told that Jesus' eyes will be like a flame; I think this is related. It seems to me that this may imply that it is possible to be saved by faith and yet presumably backslide and not produce much (or anything, actually) by way of the fruit of the Spirit (which is the only thing that will qualify for reward). What are your thoughts about this?

Sean Osborne said...


My thoughts on 1 Corinthians 3 are exactly as the opening verses state, that Paul was teaching spiritual truth to people who though saved in Christ were still of a carnal nature.

Babes-in-Christ must be fed nothing but milk at first because they cannot handle or are not ready for the more solid spiritual food, the meat'n'taters so to speak, of the deeper spiritual truths. Such babes-in-Christ are still more governed by carnal human nature than by the Spirit of God, even though upon acceptance of Christ they also receive the Holy Spirit. This is the process of growing in the Spirit from a babe to a mature Christian, and Paul was teaching the same thing here to the Corinthians, and to us. It's a fantastic lesson.

Paul is very direct, some would even say rude or blunt, in verse 3, which I spoke to also in my recent comments regarding division and its utter futility. But this verse is nothing compared to what lies further on in this lesson.

Among these Corinthians there are carnal people; they are new Christians, but they still retain their carnal nature; all things have not yet become new and for the glory of God in them. So too these people in Corinth were not yet exhibiting the traits of a maturing Christian. They clearly had yet to fully submit themselves to God; they had not yet become vessels within which the Holy Spirit could and would abide and could work to build for the glory of God.

(This gets to the point I have made recently about the difference between receiving the Holy Spirit upon becoming a Christian, and the baptism in the Holy Spirit which comes afterword for Christians just as it did for the Apostles.)

The maturing Christian builds with works of faith that are done in, by and of the Holy Spirit; the carnal Christian produces works built of earthly or fleshy things that are worthless; they are as rags in the Spiritual sense. Only those things truly of God will stand the test and they must be built upon the foundation which is Jesus Christ.

What good is it to build upon Christ those things which are carnal, fleshy, earthly. No good whatsoever! Those things will be burnt up because they are of zero Spiritual value.

Now, none of this has anything to do with the Christian who has willfully turned his back on Christ; he/she is not doing any works whatsoever on the foundation of Christ, there is no Spirit abiding within that individual which would enable such Spiritual building and works; he/she is not a temple, and on this concluding point the Holy Spirit-filled Apostle Paul could not have been any clearer: (1 Corinthians 3:16-17a)

"Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? If anyone defiles the temple of God, God will destroy him.

This verse above is yet another example of plain text Scripture which puts the kibosh on the false futility of the "once saved always saved" itching ear rubbish.

Unknown said...

It also seems like we can get salvation confused with sanctification....a very concise explanation is given in Dr Reagan's article.

Romans 8:29 gives us the purpose of our salvation, to become like Christ....this is sanctification, and it tends to be a life-long process. I think some people see the struggles of sanctification as a question of their salvation, when it is a process that every Christian has to go through. Just a thought.


Kenny said...

As always, I read your posts routinely. In that I agree with you and Dr. Reagan.

Only issue I find is some 'versions' of the Holy Bible have inadvertently left out some language. My wife's NIV Study Bible and My KJV Bible have Hebrews 6:6
If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

This passage is not to teach one can lose his salvation through disbelief or apostasy. Because of "IF", it's a hypothetical situation. So these speaks to demonstrate the folly what would happen if a saved person could fall away.

Not to create controversy at all, but insure clarity.

Sean Osborne said...

A note regarding Hebrews 6.

There are varying interpretations of this chapter that have been taught to many people. I've seen at least four different and largely exclusive versions in my inbox today. Of course, everyone believes that what they have been taught is correct and the teaching that others have received are errant teaching on the meaning of Hebrews 6.

I will say this (which should cover most bases of what I've seen thus far)...

Hebrew 6 does not say or even imply that falling away from Christ is an impossibility. Were it an impossibility then the prophecy of a great apostasy occurring in these last days would be a false prophecy.

One cannot be apostate (abandonment, breach of faith, open or agggressive rebellion) against Christ if one was never a believer in Him to begin with.

The Bible teaches that apostasy is a threat to the Body of Christ, and so it has been since the 1st century AD.

Apparently many Christians do not understand Paul's prophecy regarding apostasy in 2 Thessalonians 2, which is subtitled in the NKJV as "The Great Apostasy." This apostasy is vividly taught in 1 Timothy 4:1-3.

Unknown said...

Hey Sean,

Was reading your reply to Miriam regarding Peters 3x denial. So basically if I have this right, Christ restored Peter even after Peters denial of Him 3x?

It's a tough issue to understand, I personally believe Peter denied Christ with mouth not heart, a spur of the moment mistake made in fear (sin). I believe his denial of Christ was not heartfelt in other words. I also believe it was an example of how we can all sin, how we can all slip up or make mistakes, and an example of the Lords loving mercy and forgiveness to forgive Peter of it. There was only One who walked the earth without sinning, and that was Jesus the Lord our God and Savior.

I look at myself and in total honestly, I continue to sin even though I love the Lord and will never disown Him. Its so tough not to sin, it really is the toughest test I've ever faced, it's a daily war and it's made all the tougher being surrounded by unbelievers.

I still struggle to accept the concept that those who are "truly" saved, have known and loved the Lord could fall that far down the ladder that they could do an outright 180 and deny Jesus and fall back into worshipping self or idols...how could a saved Christian do such a thing? I made a pledge to God that I would believe on Him, and follow Him to the last of my days, I could not fathom ever being able to one day turn around and convert to Islam for example. It's a difficult thing to comprehend.

When amongst peers at work (who are all atheists), who blaspheme Christ and seethe with enjoyment in tearing down Christian beliefs, I gotta admit my blood begins to simmer to almost boiling point. There's been moments when I'm seconds away from punching someone flat out in the face...I pray for strength in these moments but its a struggle all the same.

Finally, I enjoyed reading Dr Reagans article and I do not disagree with anything he says. I look at myself and my own walk in Christ to know that what he's written is on the money...sin can create distance, it can numb a persons feelings to the point where they may become distant from God, but for myself, to reject and deny Christ is something that will never happen...I'll die first.

Sean Osborne said...


Yes, Christ RESTORED Peter to salvation following his three denials (Peter personally denied Christ ("Woman, I do not know him"); Peter denied being one of Christ's disciples ("Man, I am not"), and an hour later Peter denied both Jesus the Christ and being one of His disciples), by requiring Peter to answer in the affirmative that Peter loved Him.

Peter knew before these issuing these denials that Jesus was God in the flesh; Peter spent three years being taught by Jesus; it was a very intense relationship between them, and then came the ultimate test and Peter miserably failed the test, he failed Jesus the Christ and his brethren apostles in abjectly denying them all. Peter defected from the faith that had been built over the previous three years because he feared the power of Rome more than he loved Christ and his brethren in those hours before the following morning. And Peter was filled with remorse; guilt was consuming him. But that was not enough, and that is what John 21 is all about.

Do you fully understand what occurs in this passage of Christ's restoration of Peter? Have you studied the significant difference between the agape love that Jesus was inquiring of Peter in the first two questions, and the phileĊ friendly, fondness, mildly affectionate love that Peter was responding to Jesus' questions with?

Agape love is unconditional love of the heart; Peters responses were of the friendly, fondness, just affectionate kind of love. This is a lesson in and of itself. Peter's denials were denials of the heart, and this required a three-fold in like-kind restoration of Peter by Jesus the Christ. This can be seen by studying the original Greek text that John wrote it in.

I'm restating what Dr. Reagan wrote for emphasis, it is that important:

"But the Bible also teaches that we can lose that salvation if we stop trusting in Jesus (Gal. 5:4, I Tim. 4:1, and Heb. 6:4-6).

Through the indwelling power of the Holy Spirit we have the strength to overcome the world and walk faithfully with the Lord (I John 4:4). But we can stifle, quench and grieve the Spirit by refusing to allow Him to guide us and shape us into the image of Jesus (I Thess. 5:19 & Eph. 4:30).

When we suppress the Spirit in our lives, we open ourselves to willful sin. Although willful sin cannot, in and of itself, cause us to lose our salvation (I John 1:7), it can lead to a progressive hardening of the heart, if it goes unconfessed (Heb. 3:13).

Rebellious, unrepentant conduct can ultimately lead a person to the point where he, in word or in deed (or both), rejects Jesus as Lord and Savior of his life. Since his acceptance of Jesus is what led to his adoption into the family of God, this subsequent rejection of Jesus will result in his being disinherited from the family. The book of Hebrews teaches this very strongly in the following passages: 2:1-4, 3:12-14, 6:1-8, 10:16-31, and 12:12-17. Another powerful passage that teaches the same principle is II Peter 2:20-22 where a person who has come to know the way of righteousness and then decides to return to the world is compared to a dog who returns to its own vomit."

Unknown said...

Thanks Sean for your detailed reply,

As you stated, Peter knew in his heart Christ was the Messiah however in his moment of weakness and fear denied Him and failed miserably.

May the Lord give us the strength to stand firm in our faith and love for Him throughout our own trials.


Sean Osborne said...

It has come as no great surprise since the posting of this Positional Statement (on Salvation) which is based upon Scripture alone, that about 1/6th of those who had joined to follow this blog in recent weeks have since removed themselves from fellowship with the blog, and therefore from the other brethren who come here.

It is likely that this departure also was also due to my own insistence that the Biblical doctrine adhered to in the Positional Statement was not up for debate, as made clear up-front in the first comment to this section.

The itching in those ears must have just be too great to suffer sound Biblical doctrine. Praise God.

Tim Wood said...

Hi Sean,

This is my first post on your blog but I saw that you are a student of Dr D Reagan and wanted to ask if you agree with him on the subject of annihilationism or conditionalism?

God bless

Sean Osborne said...


I believe what is written in Revelation 22, nothing more, nothing less.

Tim Wood said...

Which is what? Please answer clearly, do you affirm annihilationism or not? I'm not looking for an argument but I need to know your doctrinal standpoint on this issue?

Sean Osborne said...


My response was perfectly clear. It also affirmed that I care not one whit for the fancy terminology of human theologians who debate and nit-pick issues they really know nothing about because they cannot know anything about them. We live by faith and trust in the Word of God for our eternal salvation. Period. This is why the first comment made to to this post (my comment) says what it says.

Your initial comment is clearly predicated upon your belief that EVERY CHRISTIAN THING I know or believe is based upon what Dr. Reagan teaches. This is a grossly erroneous presupposition on your part. I was born again in Christ Jesus and baptized in the Holy Spirit more than 30 years before I first learned of Dr. Reagan's ministry. Upon learned of Dr. Reagan's ministry I found one who believes as I do. In this "Positional Statement on Salvation" I found Dr. Reagan's published positional statement mirrored my own understanding per the Word of God. This is a last days prophecy blog, so the convenience of his published statement made sense to include as a statement that I agree with.

My view mirrors the inerrant, literal Word of God, from Genesis to The Revelation of Jesus Christ. Take for yourself as examples of my view these key examples of Scripture:

1 Timothy 6:11-16

2 Timothy 2:8-14

Revelation 20:11-15

Revelation 21

Revelation 22 has already been presented to you.

Sean Osborne said...


Obviously you cannot have any idea how many "first time " posters or otherwise disingenuous inidivuals appear here. It is a large number, I assure you. Therefore, as you have noticed, I vigorously defend this cyber "turf."

The lake of fire and brimstone will have many eternal occupants following the great white throne judgment. Revelation 20:10-15; Revelation 21:1-8 are literally explicit on the eternal fate of all unsaved which are those whose names WERE NOT written in the Lamb's Book of Life.Revelation 21:27.

This is what I believe.

Sean Osborne said...


You came here with a question. I answered your question.

You then doubled down by demanding "I need to know your doctrinal standpoint on this issue." I gave you my "doctrinal standpoint" which is based upon Scripture.

That was the end of our discussion. I'm an extremely busy individual; this blog takes up a great deal of my free time. That means that following my freely giving you what you specifically demanded to know I have moved on to other far more pressing eschatological issues.