I am not saved by my righteousnous.  I am saved because 

I hear God's voice and open the door.

But what happens if I decide to kick God out?

Believing one can lose their salvation also underestimates the severity and magnitude of our sin.

See and I think it's the exact opposite.  Thinking we can never lose our salvation understimates the severity and magnitude of sin.  If we do not continue to go to God and repent of our sins.  If we do not continue to believe of Christ as our Lord and Saviour.  If we do not continue to purify our heart by bowing before him, then what?  Are we not underestimating all the sin we do?

When Chirst says things like:

this is the Law. This is a command of God. To drive us to Christ. Who when reading this is not crushed saying "Lord, I can not forgive on my own. Help me to forgive." We should not see the Law as the Jews did (And many of us do) and say, "I have to try harder. I will make myself forgive. I will change myself. I will fulfill the Law." By no means!! The Law crushes. None of us can do what Jesus just said. But there is one who has done it for us. That is Jesus Christ!! Now we live a life of gratitude asking God to help us forgive when we can't on our own. But we need not fear being cast out of the family for we have been adopted (Galatians 4:5). If one goes around practicing sin they have not been transformed, born anew. Yes the Law is preached to both the Christian and the non-Christian. To drive them both to the cross that they might not rest in their self righteousness. This applies to both Matthew 6 and 18.
First of all, the quote I gave comes from the Sermon on the Mount. This is Jesus telling those that would follow him how he expected them to live, this isn't Jesus explaining to them how they couldn't live.

To call the Sermon on the Mount part of the Old Testament law is an opinion I've never heard before. So we should just toss out the Beatitudes application to us. The whole "Judge not lest ye be judged" is also no longer applicable? All that talk about being the light on a hill and the salt of the earth is also not for us to attend to, other than to realize we can't do it??

I have a real problem with this thinking. First of all, Jesus never indicated in the least little bit that he didn't really expect his followers to live by the precepts he was clarifying. Any part of the Old Testament Law that he quoted here (in the Sermon on the Mount) or elsewhere, he re-emphasised and clarified and didn't once denounce it as non-applicable.

But you claim that his teachings were for nothing but letting us know we can't faithfully follow his teachings?? You're gonna need a little more than a drive-by claim like that to convince me. It's my understanding that the sermon on the mount was taught to educated his disciples in the life he expected them to live.

 As for Romans 6:12-16,

This is a case of not looking at the context. Read verse 17:

They were slaves to sin. Once one is in Christ they are slaves to righteousness! Paul here has just preached salvation by grace alone. Anticipating someone saying, "Sweet!! I can do whatever I want and God will forgive me." He reminds them that this is no longer who they are. Will they sin? Yes! Is there life a pattern of sin any more? No! They have to be reminded to live as new citizens, citizens of heaven. New creations. 

Right, they WERE slaves to sin, but NOW they are slaves to righteousness. This is not to say that they can't turn back and become slaves of sin again. Paul warns them against yielding to sin, because if they yield to it, they are, in effect, making themselves the servants of sin. At this time they have been redeemed from it, and are slaves of rightousness. He never mentions the impossibility of their no longer being servants of righteousness, but he warns them against the very real possibility of it in the previous verse......
15 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.
16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?
So am I to assume that you also think that this was just Paul wishing to use up his ink? This is only an empty warning? I don't think it is, I think it's a warning for us to take seriously.

Your argument did not prove what you claimed it did. It didn't prove that once we are servants of righteousness, we are always servants of righteousness.

Look at this passage....
John 3:36
36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.
Now - if you're consistent with your thought that once a statement was made about someone's status salvically, you must conclude from this passage that everyone that was unsaved at the point that Jesus said this would stay unsaved forever, because that was their condition at that time and Jesus said that they SHALL not see life. But undoubtably, some who were lost at that point changed direction and were in fact saved eventually and they DID see life.

So, you see, you can't just say that since someone in the Bible said that a condition was in a particular state at the moment, that it would always remain in that state. It's not a provable point and there are many verses (such as the one above) that disprove it.

Hebrews

Please just take the verses I gave and explain your understanding of them. I do appreciate your taking time to comment on as many as you did, but you've ignored a few things. First off, what in the world is the author of Hebrews warning against? Who is he talking to?

He's talking to Jewish Christians to warn them not to return to the Old Jewish system that was about to fade away. Let me just recopy the text ...
Heb 3:12-14
12 Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God.
13 But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin.
14 For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end;

First, he calls them "brethren" - Then in verse 12 he tells them "take heed......lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in DEPARTING from the Living God"
* I would love to see someone depart from something they've never been attached to, but I've never seen it yet. I have never departed from Hawaii, because I've never been to Hawaii.  These folks can't DEPART from the Living God, if they were never involved with the Living God.

In verse 14 he claims that we are made partakers of Christ "IF" we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast to the end! IF is not a long word, but it is the one that jumps out at me. If it said "because" instead of "if" - it would more or less solidify the O.S.A.S. point, but the fact is that it rest on the individual to continue in their confidence in Christ. If you don't - you are no longer in the condition that meets the requirements for His grace.

Now as far as your verse that you copied out from 1 John 2:19. This is not proof that everyone that leaves a group of Christians never were Christians. Let's look at this a little more closely though...

This is an example of a group within a particular group that were not Christians, in fact, they were opposed to Christ in their hearts. They separated from the true Church....How this came about is not said, but likely God stirred things up and they got out and took their doctrine bending teachings with them. They weren't part of the church to begin with and God removed them to show that they were not of them.

This, compared to the warnings of Hebrews, does not compare very well.
The writer of Hebrews warned the people NOT TO DEPART from the living God. The people discussed in 1 John were driven out, by God or some other means and were by no means instructed NOT TO DEPART.

Also, it would be insensible to ask them not to depart from God, since they had never run to God, but evidently the Hebrews had come to God, since they were asked not to depart from him. This seems awfully simple to me. If you are with someone, it is possible to turn and depart from that one. If you are not attached to that person, then you can't depart from what you've never approached in the first place. I still haven't heard anyone give any reasonable response to this.


2 Tim 2:11-13

Who are those who deny Christ? Those who were not saved! The other statements must be considered too. "If we died with Him, we will also live with Him." If one has been saved they WILL live with him. Those who endure and are faithful will show the evidence that they have been transformed by the Holy Spirit. If one denies Christ it is evidence that they were never born again in the first place. 

Once again - I must assume - if you are consistent, with your "wills" and "shalls" that you believe that everyone that was lost at the time that Jesus said this:  and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him, had no hope of ever being saved, since he said the "shall not see life".
By saying that if one denies Christ, it is evidence that they were never saved in the first place. (another assessment I've often heard and never seen verified). But if that's the case, you must assume that Paul considered it possible that he was never saved in the first place, and that he considered it possible that Timothy was never saved in the first place, because he said "we". Now that could include all that ever read this epistle. And I don't say that it doesn't. But, by saying 'we', it must include Paul and Timothy at the very least.


John 15

As for this passage I preached a sermon on it Here. Again, context. What does verse 16 say:

Without commenting on who chose whom, Jesus states what those he is talking to will do. They will "go and bear fruit." And their fruit will abide. Jesus is contrasting here those who are not attached to Jesus and those that are. Then he comments on His readers and their condition. They will abide. It is possible, though not for certain, that Jesus may have been alluding to Judas as to own who was not abiding. 

I know you didn't comment on "who chose whom" and that's fine, but I know where you are getting at. But just remember who he's talking to. He's talking to his 12 disciples. They are alone that this time. This is still the same conversation that began with Peter's confession of Jesus as the Christ. It's still a small party.

When he says - you didn't choose me, I chose you - he's talking about his choosing of these disciples.

Now, once again, you are making a point that seems impossible to me. Jesus tells his disciples, and us as well, to abide in him (or to remain in him). You are making the assertion, that Jesus is telling them to do something that they have no choice but to do anyway. You say - once you are in Christ, you will always be in Christ - but Jesus seems to think differently, since he urges them to remain in him.

Not only that - he talks about the person that DOESN'T REMAIN in Him.
15:6 If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast [them] into the fire, and they are burned.
Now I know you think you can "Not remain in (Him)" and yet have never been in Him, but just the amount of mind numbing logic contortion this demands to arrive at this conclusion baffles me to see how anyone can ascribe to it.


2 Peter 2:19-21

Peter here is speaking of false teachers in the church. He calls them "Springs without water." They are spiritually dead. The water they offer is not the true and living water. All that knowing Christ did for them was to escaped "the corruption of the WORLD" that is all. But they would return to their vomit for they did not know him savingly. He says they are "Slaves to depravity." If they are slaves to sin they have not known Christ savingly. So I would choose "A" as your closest answer.

I seriously don't know how you can honestly get around this one. These indeed are false teachers, they are bringing nothing but wicked, perverse teachings to anyone that would listen. But they started out on the right track.

How can you say that a person who has never been saved has "escaped the pollutions of the world". They are described as a dog returning to his own vomit. Once we come to Christ to be renewed - he removes the old useless garbage from within us. But some choose to return to it. Remember the Hebrew slaves (incidentally, they were referred back to as an illustration of the author of Hebrews point in Hebrews 3^), how they longed for Egypt after God delivered them from slavery. That's what these people are. They went back to their vomit. They were like pigs that had been cleansed, (they weren't still dirty) but they ran right back to the mud puddle after they'd been cleansed....and now they are even worse off than before.

There is a clear illustration in the dog and the pig, but you've made it say that they were never actually cleansed and purified. Then what in the world is the meaning behind their being called 'cleansed' and how can it be said they 'escaped' the pollutions of the world?

Key to all of this is knowing that we contribute nothing to our salvation in the first place.
Christ paid the debt. We could never pay for our salvation, we could never merit our salvation by our deeds. But I disagree when you say that we do nothing to obtain our salvation. We believe and trust in Christ for our salvation. He's our only way. We can't do it, He does it for us, and asks only that we repent and follow him.
John 6:29
29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

God causes us to be born again (1 Peter 1:3)
Here's the whole thing.......
1 Pet 1:3-9
3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,
4 To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you,
5 Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.
6 Wherein ye greatly rejoice, though now for a season, if need be, ye are in heaviness through manifold temptations:
7 That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perisheth, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ:
8 Whom having not seen, ye love; in whom, though now ye see him not, yet believing, ye rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory:
9 Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls.
We are kept by God's power to salvation, but our part is to continue in faith. God saves us, but our job is to believe on Him. Our faith in him is sometimes tested...(verse 7) but the final result of faith is salvation of our souls (verse 9)

and gives us the faith to believe (Ephesians 2:8-9).
Now frankly - I don't know diddly squat about Greek and so forth - so I'll let Adam Clarke answer this one for me..

Ephesians 2:8  PP1

 But whether are we to understand, faith or salvation as being the gift of God? This question is answered by the Greek text: tee gar chariti este sesoosmenoi dia tees pisteoos; kai touto ouk ex humoon; Theou to dooron, ouk ex ergoon; hina mee tis kaucheeseetai. By this grace ye are saved through faith; and THIS (touto  (grk 5124), this salvation) not of you; it is the gift of God, not of works: so that no one can boast." "The relative touto  (grk 5124), this, which is in the neuter gender, cannot stand for pistis  (grk 4102), faith, which is the feminine; but it has the whole sentence that goes before for its antecedent." But it may be asked: Is not faith the gift of God? Yes, as to the grace by which it is produced; but the grace or power to believe, and the act of believing, are two different things. Without the grace or power to believe no man ever did or can believe; but with that power the act of faith is a man's own.
Eph 2:8
8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Just to briefly comment though. If you read it plainly in English, it's hard to tell whether he's saying that the salvation is not of ourselves or the faith is not of ourselves. Adam Clarke seems to think that since the gender of the words don't match up well for faith and that (which is not of ourselves) he speaks of the word: "saved". I have no problem saying that salvation is not of myself. I can't work hard enough and do enough to undo any sin I've commited that damns me, but I can choose to have faith in Christ, and He is my salvation.


God wanted us we did not what him (Romans 5:6-10.) We did not want him in the first place yet he saved us.
Right, He sent Jesus to die for our sinse while we were still sinners and enemies of His. But Jesus draws all men to Him from the Cross.
John 12:32
32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.
And when we hear this gospel, it is the power to awake us from the dead. It is the gospel that is the power of God to salvation....
Rom 1:16-18
16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
It isn't God forcing us to follow Him, it's the goodness of God that leads us to repentance (Rom 2:4). We can accept or reject the Gospel. We can accept or reject God's calling...if we could not reject his call, what sense does this verse make...
Matt 22:14 For many are called, but few are chosen.
If everyone that God called were irresistably drawn to his grace, then there would be no discrpency in the amount called and the amount chosen.

 This would also mean that no one is saved (If we hold to your view).
You obviously don't know my view very well then. When we sin, we are turning down a wrong road. God deals with us to get it right. If we don't then we have yielded to sin. John said that he wrote his letter that we would not sin (1 John 2:1) but that if we did sin, we have an advocate. You are telling me that we have to sin all the time. That we are in sin every second. I don't believe that at all. I believe we can live above it. I don't think we'll be sin free until we are glorified. But I certainly don't think it has to be our master as you seem to think.

1. We were judged for our sins 2000 years ago when they were placed on Jesus. He paid the penalty that we owe.

I'm not sure of the relevance of this to the conversation.  I'm not denying the truth of it, but if you are using it as an argument that we are forgiven for future sins whether we confess them or not, you need to explain your second sentence below.

2. No, we are not underestimating all the sin we do. Aaron has just pointed out that no truly born again person would actively live in sin, thus not confessing our sin would have us living in it.

Um no he didn't

Everything we do is tainted with sin. We do nothing pure. There is never a moment that we love God with all our heart, soul, mind and strength. So that would mean that we are sinning.....all the time.

In his words, our confessions are sin.

Let me paint this as a picture.  My wife loves me (I hope ;) ).  Do I deserve her love?  A lot of the times (if not all the time) probably not.  Does that mean I should reject her love?  No.  But until I accept her love we cannot the relationship that is truly intended.

BTW, why is it called the new Covenant?  Doesn't that mean there's an agreement that both sides need to honor their part?  And that both parties could break it?  

By the way if I have no part to play, no salvation to accept, it's not really "Once saved, always saved".  It is always saved, always saved and God is just putting on a play to show his righteousness.

The question that then needs to be answered is "To who?"  If we are merely puppets, we will either be impressed or not depending on God's desire, not on an action He (or we) do. 

Youth Pastor said -

Aaron: I will say this, if God's Holy Word can't convince Aaron Dinsey, I don't think we stand much of a chance! LOL We all are allowed our differing opinions and that is fine.

Youth Pastor, I'm showing you why I don't think God's Word says what you say it does. I don't see it anywhere. You certainly haven't offered any explanation to my assessments - other than I don't think Aaron Disney's right. Well, I'm sorry, but I'm offering you the opportunity to explain the scriptures that refute soundly the doctrine of Once Saved Always Saved and you simply can't do it, yet you continue to go against the grain of the Word of God and say you believe in that doctrine.

All I'm asking for is a sensible explanation. I've got to hand it to Aaron for trying, but it was not a real convincing case if you ask me.

Mike said
There is much much scriptural evidence for osas, in fact I believe the early Christians took this for granted thus the Paul & co. never explicitly used the phrase.
Seems to me I've put down a few scriptures that obviously show Paul and Co. to not believe in that doctrine. Where is your evidence that the early Christians took this for granted? I don't see any anywhere. I see a lot of warnings against apostacy in the N.T., but I don't see anything saying that no matter what happens after you are converted, you are saved.

I'm just looking for a little bit of substantiation to your claim. I could claim anything I want to and not back it up, and someone might believe me, but I try not to do that..

Terms like saved (past tense, not continuous), born again, new creation, eternal life, all take for granted a permanent state.
SAVED
I tend (as you probably guessed) to disagree here.
Saved, does not mean something that is permanent, just because it's past tense. I could be cured (past tense) of cancer and still get cancer in the future and die.

We are saved (eternally) if we are in Christ at the end of our life. It is imminent. It could be at any moment. But that's why Jesus urges us to remain in Him (John 15) which as I've said before is totally non-sensical if we are not 'in Him' and a void warning if we can't depart 'from him' but I can't get anyone to try to comment on that little leap of logic that the OSAS side holds to.

BORN AGAIN
You can take this phrase, used as an illustration, by Jesus, to an unintended extreme. Born again is simply the act in which you repent of your sins, trust in Christ, and he regenerates you. You become a totally different person than you were. You are a new creation.

Yet you still possess a side that is at war with the Spirit, and that's the flesh, urging you onto sinfulness. To turn from your confidence you started with, which if you do, you will not be partakers with Christ (Heb 3:14).

Now - since we must take this illustration to be exactly the same as natural birth, we understand that all that are born, eventually die. So we must also conclude that all that are 'born again' eventually have a spiritual death, right? No - of course not. But that would be another case of taking the illustration too far.

Born again, is simply, you are a new person. You were born into sin, and now you are born into life.


ETERNAL LIFE
The first thing that we have to realize is that whether we take part in the life that Christ gives or not, that life is always eternal. We have eternal life so long as we are connected to Him. If we depart from Him we no longer have eternal life.
The LIFE is not in us, it's in the SON!
I Jn 5:11
11 And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.
So for us to have this eternal life, we must be connected to the Son.

Jesus says it another way in John 15 - He says he is the true vine and we are the branches. If you cut a branch off a vine, that vine will continue on, but the branch will wither away and die. It had life, so long as it was attached to the vine, but once it was separated, that life ceased. So also, if we depart from the living God (Heb 3:12) we no longer have eternal life, but there still is eternal life, it's in the Son.

Youth Pastor,
You say your verses are not out of context but they are... The context of the chapter (along with the preceding 2 chapters) is that Paul thinks that the Jews may have some sort of beef with the Gentiles, since the Jews were always God's special people. So now that Paul is revealing to them that God intends to work also through the Gentiles, as well as believing Jews (i.e. the "Church") He speaks mainly to the Gentiles and tells them to be careful to hold to Jesus, because, just as the unbelieving Jews were cut off, they could be cut off as well. Did you happen to notice that also in this chapter? I'll highlight that part for you and I'm interested to know your explanation as to what it means.

He wants them to understand that none of the promises - promised to the Jews were revoked. It's not at the level of individual salvation, if it were then it would mean that all the national Jews were saved no matter what.

I'll copy out a good portion of the  chapter, and you can tell me what you think.

Rom 11:11-32
11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.
12 Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness?
13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:
14 If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them.
15 For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?
16 For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches.
17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;
18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in.
20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.
24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree?
25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.
28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.
29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.
30 For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief:
31 Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.
32 For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.
(KJV)

Okay, Joel. You did another drive-by without actually dealing with the verses. I'm gonna stop posting on here because no one actually wants to discuss what I've posted. I wouldn't want to either, though, if I had to defend the indefensible, so I understand. I'll be glad to let someone who is divided and unsure what to believe read these blogs and come to an obvious conclusion.

It's just exhausting responding to everything everyone ever posts and to get about 3% of my arguments responded to, just like in the other blog...

You guys go ahead with it if you wish, but this is really a pointless conversation. I'm really and truly out of it now, so you can make your endless unsubstantiated claims if you want.
If I sound frustrated - I suppose I am a little.

Anyhow. You guys take care.

You know for a debate that I keep hearing is done (because no one is going to change their mind), people sure keep on debate. :)

This is it for me on this for a while.

This has no longer become about learning but pounding and really we're picking and choosing verses to prove our points.  Take this for instance.

Ephesians 4:30  And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.

If this proves that we are sealed and can never chose to walk away from the salvation and our faith, what exactly is the point of the first half of the verse?  If we are saved once we have the seal, what difference does it make if we grieve the Holy Spirit?  (Notice it doesn't say that as saved believers we "can't" or wouldn't.  Otherwise it's a silly admonition.)

And see now I went and did the exact same thing that this has become.  We could continue and I could do it regarding everything else that has come and then "you" could do the same.   This is not the forum to have this discussion.  The discussion is too big and too expansive.

That's just my opinion.

What I do appreciate from discussion though is understanding that people definitely don't think it's as cut and dry as it is (note: This means from God's perspective).  I also appreciate that it's forced me to go out and look what others have said (getting the perspective with one person speaking at a time rather than following all of this is easier for me).  

It has also caused me to want to learn Greek as I stumbled across a site mentioning Young's Literal translation which I had never heard of before.  It for instance suggests that the following (sorry quoting one more small section of scripture, which you can decide if it's in or out of context. ;) )

is more accurately translated from Greek as

 for God did so love the world, that His Son--the only begotten--He gave, that every one who is believing in him may not perish, but may have life age-during.

The difference in tense there obviously makes a huge difference.

(You can find it online here) 

Definitely need an edit button.   Definitely

Aaron, exit gracefully and I wouldn't feel cornered into responding with something, and then annoying laura b/c I spent so much time online putting together a response to you

You realize the irony because I'm sure he would say the same.  And me.  I almost responded... Oh wait I did. *sigh*

Done, done, done, done. 

Norm posted the following above, and although it appears that everyone here is tired of having this conversation in two (three?) different places, I thought I would offer two cents, if it could be worth that much!

[quote]BTW, why is it called the new Covenant?  Doesn't that mean there's an agreement that both sides need to honor their part?  And that both parties could break it?[quote]

I would like to refer us to Genesis 15 in this case, becuase here we will see the working of the "old" covenant, and I believe it will shed light on the new covenant.

7 And he said to him, “I am the LORD who brought you out from Ur of the Chaldeans to give you this land to possess.”
8 But he said, “O Lord GOD, how am I to know that I shall possess it?”
9 He said to him, “Bring me a heifer three years old, a female goat three years old, a ram three years old, a turtledove, and a young pigeon.”
10 And he brought him all these, cut them in half, and laid each half over against the other. But he did not cut the birds in half.
11 And when birds of prey came down on the carcasses, Abram drove them away.
12 As the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell on Abram. And behold, dreadful and great darkness fell upon him.
13 Then the LORD said to Abram, “Know for certain that your offspring will be sojourners in a land that is not theirs and will be servants there, and they will be afflicted for four hundred years.
14 But I will bring judgment on the nation that they serve, and afterward they shall come out with great possessions.
15 As for yourself, you shall go to your fathers in peace; you shall be buried in a good old age.
16 And they shall come back here in the fourth generation, for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet complete.”
17 When the sun had gone down and it was dark, behold, a smoking fire pot and a flaming torch passed between these pieces.
18 On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, “To your offspring I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates,
19 the land of the Kenites, the Kenizzites, the Kadmonites,
20 the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Rephaim,
21 the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Girgashites and the Jebusites.”
Now, this passage is largely lost on us, being ignorant Americans, and I'm afraid it can so quickly be skipped over in reading, since it appears to be such an odd turn of events (Almost like Abraham is tripping on Canaanite shrooms). But, an understanding of Old Testament covenant making is helpful here. In the OT, when two parties would enter into an agreement, they would pass between a sacrifice split in two. Both parties would pass through, and it would be a statement that if either party were to not uphold their part of the covenant, let them become like the dead animal on the ground (i.e. torn apart, divided, etc). Understanding this is a beautiful picture of the Nature of God. In Hebrews 6, we are told:

12 so that you may not be sluggish, but imitators of those who through faith and patience inherit the promises.
13 For when God made a promise to Abraham, since he had no one greater by whom to swear, he swore by himself,
14 saying, "Surely I will bless you and multiply you."
15 And thus Abraham, having patiently waited, obtained the promise.
16 For people swear by something greater than themselves, and in all their disputes an oath is final for confirmation.
17 So when God desired to show more convincingly to the heirs of the promise the unchangeable character of his purpose, he guaranteed it with an oath,
18 so that by two unchangeable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled for refuge might have strong encouragement to hold fast to the hope set before us.
19 We have this as a sure and steadfast anchor of the soul, a hope that enters into the inner place behind the curtain,
20 where Jesus has gone as a forerunner on our behalf, having become a high priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.

This passage in Genesis is the very passage the writer of Hebrews is describing. God, in order to show His faithfulness in the Covenant, promised by two things: His Eternal being (where He is unable to cease existence) and His inability to lie (Lieing would cause Him to cease being God). Notice that it is God that passes through the sacrifice in Genesis. Under covenant law, both parties must pass through, but in this case, God is both parties in the covenant. Now, as I've said in the other blog on OSAS, there is still a condition that is fulfilled in order to take part in the Covenant of God (Abraham is circumsised), but it is does not annul or make void the Covenant because the covenant is established and upheld by God's nature.

Now, NT application. In the events of the Last Supper and Jesus' high priestly prayer following (John 17), we see God working out the new Covenant with God. The main parties in the New Covenant are God: Father, Son, and Spirit. We are not able to be a party in the covenant, because fallen man could never be able to enter into an agreement with God. In the New Covenant, Jesus dies for those whom the Father gives Him, and the Holy Spirit is sent to ensure that all that the Father has given to the Son will be brought into the Covenant. We are mere bystanders in an eternal covenant, dreamed up and orchestrated by the Godhead before time began.

I know this does not directly answer any questions that may have been raised on this site, but I encourage more research into the Work of the Trinity in Salvation. John Owen is especially helpful in understanding the distinct persons of the Godhead.
 
Closing thought, notice what the beginning of the Hebrew passage says, So that you may not be sluggish, but imitators of those who through faith and patience inherit the promises. OSAS or any type of Covenantal language should never be used as a license towards sin or sloth. If so, it would be better that the person fear for their own life, then hear on the final day "I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness." The promises of God are not license, but liberty. If indeed we are new creatures, we are freed from worry of assurance, freed to pursue Christ with our whole being. This is the true freedom of the will. And this freedom comes from new birth. It is not a natural ability. By nature, we are willful slaves to sin. In the new birth, we are willful slaves to Christ.