Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Not really.But didn't you learn in the New Testamant that any righteousness a person has that is pleasing to God, is actually an alien righteousness that is not their own?
Observe:
Phil 3:9
and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith—
To say that Noah had his own innate righteousness that God then rewarded is contrary to the Christian message, is it antithetical to the gospel. It is salvation by works and salvation by merit.
In Genesis we are told that God showed "grace" to Noah. Noah's righteousness was not his own, but imparted to him the same way the Apostle Paul's righteousness was. And yours and mine. We cannot boast in our own righteousness, for it is as filthy rags.
Well maybe you do not know how to write what you mean then. You clearly said that Lazarus allowed Jesus to raise him from the dead.I see you failed to grasp what I was trying to teach, with my post.
My point was, man plays no part in being the recipient of resurrecting, saving grace. Lazarus didn't "let" Jesus resurrect him, or cooperate in any way. A corpse cannot assist in his own resurrection.
Spiritual raising from the dead (aka, salvation) works the same way. Why do you think the Apostle Paul used death and resurrection as an analogy for salvation?
Salvation is monergistic, just like Calvinism says.
God doesn't merely offer salvation then sit back and wait to see what happens, like a lifeguard who tosses a ring to someone struggling to swim, then waiting to see if the person grabs onto the ring and holds on tight with their own strength (cooperation of two parties for the salvation of the man)
Instead, God is a miracle worker who dives to the bottom of the ocean because the swimming man is already dead and drowned, and God drags him to the shore and miraculously resurrects him. (monergism, God alone saves a man)
I know Hamm well enough to say that this would be his testimony. He'd say he "let" Jesus save him the same way Lazarus "let" Jesus save him. Ie, he played no part in his own salvation, but Jesus alone did all the work. And Hamm is eternally grateful.
Well maybe you do not know how to write what you mean then. You clearly said that Lazarus allowed Jesus to raise him from the dead.
Well that's at your own perill.I have nothing further to add.
So wait.
Just so I'm clear, a lot of you believe that God creates two people, both of the same moral character, both equal. Than, for whatever reason (some say to show/demonstrate his "mercy"), God chooses one of those people and saves them and damns the other to hell for eternity?
You realize that means God creates someone evil right? That man had no choice/freewill to choose good or evil, but that he was created evil. And then God damns him because of how he was created.
So God wanted that person to come into the world, only so the end result could be that he put him into eternal torment, while put the other that he created into paradise.
Actually, in reality there would be no such thing as good and evil in those cases, as good and evil are dependent on freewill choices.
Or am I missing something here and that's not what you believe at all?
Well let's think logically about this.I see you failed to grasp what I was trying to teach, with my post.
My point was, man plays no part in being the recipient of resurrecting, saving grace. Lazarus didn't "let" Jesus resurrect him, or cooperate in any way. A corpse cannot assist in his own resurrection.
Spiritual raising from the dead (aka, salvation) works the same way. Why do you think the Apostle Paul used death and resurrection as an analogy for salvation?
Salvation is monergistic, just like Calvinism says.
God doesn't merely offer salvation then sit back and wait to see what happens, like a lifeguard who tosses a ring to someone struggling to swim, then waiting to see if the person grabs onto the ring and holds on tight with their own strength (cooperation of two parties for the salvation of the man)
Instead, God is a miracle worker who dives to the bottom of the ocean because the swimming man is already dead and drowned, and God drags him to the shore and miraculously resurrects him. (monergism, God alone saves a man)
I know Hamm well enough to say that this would be his testimony. He'd say he "let" Jesus save him the same way Lazarus "let" Jesus save him. Ie, he played no part in his own salvation, but Jesus alone did all the work. And Hamm is eternally grateful.
Well that's at your own perill.
Because anyone who does not know the differences between the Old Covenant and New Covenant does not understand the Bible. And thanks for butchering my post to suit your own needs.
Well let's think logically about this.
If God saves who He wants to save, then why even say that we must have faith?
Why not just ka-pow! Your saved! Your saved! Your saved!
Why is for every verse about salvation almost have 'by faith', 'in faith'. Even in the Old Covenant, imputed righteousness was 'by faith'. So there is something that you guys are missing about faith.
If God saves who He wants to save,
Mine have a purpose. You haven't really answered any, though.How can God have predestined sin but not be a liar according to His Holy Word?
We can all shoot out one sentence questions, Hammster. It's not hard.
In Genesis we are told that God showed "grace" to Noah. Noah's righteousness was not his own, but imparted to him the same way the Apostle Paul's righteousness was. And yours and mine. We cannot boast in our own righteousness, for it is as filthy rags.
Just because you don't know why God chose to make salvation a certain way doesn't mean it makes no sense or isn't logical.
Because God works through means. He didn't just say "ka-pow! You're dead!", instead, he flooded the earth and killed everyone that way. He didn't just say "ka-pow!, you're saved!" he sent his son, his son lived for 30 years, then died, was buried, and rose again.
God works through means.
He does whatever is pleasing to him.
Genesis DOES NOT say God SHOWED grace to Noah.
And we do find the means for salvation.
Hebrews 5:9
And having been perfected, He became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him,
Why do Calvinists not mention these means to bring about salvation?
No, you have it wrong. In the OT patriarchs were imputed righteousness because of their great faith.I'm sorry it came off that way, but your post made no sense, because you said:
"Imputed righteousness by faith. Not grace."
This makes no sense because "imputed righteousness by faith" is grace.
So how can you say "it's not one, but the other". How can you say "it's not by grace, it's by faith", when Ephesians 2:8-9 teach us that "salvation by grace through faith" is in fact a gift from God.
Thus this proves my point all along - Noah was saved because of God's mercy. God's gift. God's grace. Whatever you want to call it, it's because God did something kind.
Methinks you are reading wayyyy too much extra information (eisegesis) into the word "found".
You're trying to make the case that it means that Noah fought for, earned, strived for grace, then finally found it somehow.
When in reality it just simply means that God was gracious to Noah. That's all.