SALVATION

[Mark Quayle]

Good, then we agree that God didn't strictly predetermine man's choice but allowed it. This, by itself, tells us that God values the freedom that He gave to man- to choose rightly. And from there we can understand that He didn't suddenly change His mind afterwards and say, "I no longer want you to make a free choice but instead I'll just first change you now so dramatically that you, at least a portion of you, can't help but make a right choice. In truth, He draws us, by His grace into rectitude, into making the right choice, which begins with faith. And that marks a change in us, to a place of justice/righteousness, of solidarity with God. That constitutes our rebirth into a new life, a life with Him.

I assume you mean, "God didn't strictly predetermine man's choice". After all, I think, you do believe that God gave man to have freewill.

Either way, I think you misunderstand how God's predetermination works. It is a very simple logic: If God created, when there was nothing but God, then everything else logically is caused, as a result. And that is EVERYTHING, in every particular, including thoughts and choices, as nothing results from a void. You are free to think as you will, and free to choose according to your desires, whether or not you realize that you are bound by your nature and inclinations, not to mention influences around you and whatever came before each choice.

@Clare73 uses the term, "allow", as a concession, I think, perhaps to soften the blow that those insisting on self-determination must receive, to find out that they are not as free as they think.

Personally, I can't see why the notion of absolute freedom of the creature is not more terrifying than the notion of absolute control by the Creator.

We are talking about the will of one who can do nothing right, as opposed to one who does nothing wrong.

 

[fhansen]

Once a person is regenerated, he does indeed, pretty much 24 hrs a day, resist grace and faith, "quenching the Spirit" and weakening his trust. But the re-birth itself is done apart from his permission or even his consultation, like when he was born from the womb.

Who said that grace cannot be resisted? The only reference that I am aware of, concerning Irresistible Grace, is to that grace by which God gives that regeneration, and whereby that gift, salvific faith, is generated.

That's a very different gospel than probably most of us have. Adam wasn't responsible for his own existence and yet he was responsible for remaining in union with God, for not disobeying Him. And we're not responsible for our existence either but that one thing, of entering and remaining in fellowship with God, is what we are responsible for and which we can obtain, but only by and with grace. All grace is resistible.

Our rebirth consists simply of our turning to God, and remaining there, now in union with Him, daily picking up our cross and following.

 

[AbbaLove]

That's a very different gospel than probably most of us have. Adam wasn't responsible for his own existence and yet he was responsible for remaining in union with God, for not disobeying Him.

Can you even imagine if Adam hadn't disobeyed God or if Job had given in to his wifes advice? Can you imagine if Noah had decided that building the Ark was too much work and all the ridicule? Or can you imagine if Jesus had instead chosen an obedient disciple instead of Judas?

What is amazing to me is that the first man God created (Adam) disobeyed; whereas; Noah was obedient for 100 years. Does this support predestinationation ... that it was meant for Adam and Eve to disobey and for Noah to obey even before they were created. Same for Moses that talked with God as a friend ... and yet Adam disobeyed even while walking and talking with God.

 

[fhansen]

Can you even imagine if Adam hadn't disobeyed God or if Job had given in to his wifes advice? Can you imagine if Noah had decided that building the Ark was too much work and all the ridicule? Or can you imagine if Jesus had instead chosen an obedient disciple instead of Judas?

What is amazing to me is that the first man God created (Adam) disobeyed; whereas; Noah was obedient for 100 years. Does this support predestinationation ... that it was meant for Adam and Eve to disobey and for Noah to obey even before they were created. Same for Moses that talked with God as a friend ... and yet Adam disobeyed even while walking and talking with God.

I think God can and did make morally accountable beings and not puppets. Otherwise it would make no sense for Him to hold them morally accountable. IOW, He would be solely accountable, or responsible in any case, for the evil that he holds man accountable for.

 

[fhansen]

Personally, I can't see why the notion of absolute freedom of the creature is not more terrifying than the notion of absolute control by the Creator.

If they result in the same evils that his world has experienced then I'd say that they're both equally terrifying. But I'd hope that man's choices would at least be more terrifying than God's.

We are talking about the will of one who can do nothing right, as opposed to one who does nothing wrong.

Then why is there so much wrong in this world?

 

[AbbaLove]

I think God can and did make morally accountable beings and not puppets. Otherwise it would make no sense for Him to hold them morally accountable. IOW, He would be solely accountable, or responsible in any case, for the evil that he holds man accountable for.

Paul believed he was predestined as an apostle to spread the Good News to the gentiles. He believed the only way one is "justified" is if they are resurrected to receive eternal life with a glorified body.

The only way Jesus' disciples knew that Jesus was "justified" was seeing Him resurrected with a glorified body. That explains Paul's order with sanctification preceding justification and Paul's understanding of "justification" with the result being a glorified body ...

nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. (1 Corinthians 6:11)

And those whom He predestined He also called, and those whom He called He also justified, and those whom He justified He also glorified. (Romans 8:30)​

The only glitch is if the RCC and Christendom favors another order then as you say, "I think God can and did make morally accountable beings and not puppets." Unless a religious Christian theology even if a different order is so persuasive as more acceptable to mankind's religious indoctrination more so than Paul's order.

The SALVATION order of Paul is based on a "calling" of the Lord, not on the RCC or another denominational [salvation] theology (e.g. Calvinism).

 

[setst777]

Who said that grace cannot be resisted? The only reference that I am aware of, concerning Irresistible Grace, is to that grace by which God gives that regeneration, and whereby that gift, salvific faith, is generated.

You say:

"Who said that grace cannot be resisted?"

I firmly believe you have a split personality.

You have said it numerous times:

Mark Quayle said: How can you suppose that our choices can only be apart from causation??? It is only by God's causation that our choices even ARE.

Mark Quayle said: There is no conflict between him using our choices and him intentionally causing us to choose as we do. He uses us for his purposes. That is all we are, after all, which is a wonderful thing. I can't imagine why you would have a problem with that. We are nothing apart from him —why declare independent abilities?

Mark Quayle said: I fail to see how God, having chosen (as scripture says he does) some for his particular purposes (Heaven), if it is only a result of fore-seeing who will and who will not accept him, is not controlled by OUR choices, rather than us being controlled by HIS choices.

Mark Quayle said: As my mind uses the word, "sovereignty", concerning God, yes. He who is sovereign by definition foreknows (meaning fore-CAUSES, in his case) all things. And yes, he created all things, and caused them to be what they are, even to the point of their condemnation or salvation. "Has to", as you put it, meaning that it is logically necessary —not that God is constrained by his creation to do anything he would not otherwise do.

Mark Quayle said: I spoke according to your hypothetical construction, "God...creat[ing] us to think or act according to his plans", as far as cause-and-effect, that theoretically, (though the chains are so long and involved that we could not trace them all the way back), we can certainly know that God is at the head of all causation, and so, therefore, all effects are caused, either directly or indirectly by him.

Mark Quayle said: Man is the immediate cause of his choices, and God, as first caused, caused man to be, in every regard, to include man's choices.

Can irresistible grace be resisted? How is that possible?

You say:

"Who said that grace cannot be resisted?"

Over 80 million Christians worldwide believe in irresistible grace. You have said yourself that you do not believe in self-determinism; rather, that God determines all things according to His Sovereign will and plan to take place just as God ordained. Do you want me to quote more of what you wrote to remind you what you believe?

"Irresistible grace” is a doctrine in Calvinist and Reformed theology that refers to the belief that God’s grace, when extended to those He has chosen to save (the elect), cannot be resisted or rejected.

In addition: the term "Irresistible Grace" includes the doctrine that the faith of the elect is not something they generate on their own, but rather it is a result of God’s sovereign and effective grace working in their lives.

The entire process of salvation, from the initial call to the perseverance in faith to the end, is seen as the work of God’s grace alone

Yet you say:

"Who said that grace cannot be resisted?"

 

[setst777]

Paul believed he was predestined as an apostle to spread the Good News to the gentiles. He believed the only way one is "justified" is if they are resurrected to receive eternal life with a glorified body.

Predestined does not mean irresistibly created to spread the Gospel to the Gentiles. God acts on his foreknowledge.

Otherwise, Paul, who says he was predestined to be an Apostle, would not have said the following:

1 Corinthians 9:27 (WEB) 27 but I beat my body and bring it into submission, lest by any means, after I have preached to others, I myself should be rejected

Rejected: Gk: adokimos: worthless (literally or morally) -- castaway, rejected, reprobate
Strong's Greek: 96. ἀδόκιμος (adokimos) -- failing to pass the test

Philippians 3:10-12 (WEB) 10 I want to know Christ—yes, to know the power of his resurrection and participation in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, 11 and so, somehow, attaining to the resurrection from the dead. 12 Not that I have already obtained all this, or have already arrived at my goal, but I press on to take hold of that for which Christ Jesus took hold of me.

What was the Apostle Peter teaching the Called and Elect in Christ regarding their salvation and entrance into the Eternal Kingdom?

2 Peter 1:8-11 (WEB) 8 For if these things are yours and abound, they make you to not be idle or unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 For he who lacks these things is blind, seeing only what is near, having forgotten {{{the cleansing from his old sins}}}. 10 Therefore, {{{brothers and sisters}}}, be more diligent to make your calling and election sure. For if you do these things, you will never stumble. 11 For thus you will be richly supplied with the entrance into the Eternal Kingdom of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

2 Peter 3:17 (WEB) 17 You therefore, beloved, knowing these things beforehand, beware, lest being carried away with the error of the wicked, you fall from your own steadfastness.

The only way Jesus' disciples knew that Jesus was "justified" was seeing Him resurrected with a glorified body. That explains Paul's order with sanctification preceding justification and Paul's understanding of "justification" with the result being a glorified body ...

nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. (1 Corinthians 6:11)​

​

And those whom He predestined He also called, and those whom He called He also justified, and those whom He justified He also glorified. (Romans 8:30)​

The only glitch is if the RCC and Christendom favors another order then as you say, "I think God can and did make morally accountable beings and not puppets." Unless a religious Christian theology even if a different order is so persuasive as more acceptable to mankind's religious indoctrination more so than Paul's order.

The SALVATION order of Paul is based on a "calling" of the Lord, not on the RCC or another denominational [salvation] theology (e.g. Calvinism).

According to the following Passage, which comes first, believing in Lord Jesus or sanctification by the Spirit?

2 Thessalonians 2:13 (WEB) 13 But we are bound to always give thanks to God for you, brothers loved by the Lord, because God chose you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief in the truth

Do you believe that "2 Thessalonians 2:13" is teaching an order to salvation? Are we really sanctified before believing?

According to the following Passage, which comes first, "believing" in Lord Jesus or "sanctification" by the Spirit?

Acts 26:18-20 (WEB) ... that they may receive remission of sins and an inheritance among those who are sanctified {{{by faith}}} in me.’

According to the following Scripture, does sanctification come after righteousnesss and before redemption?

1 Corinthians 1:30 (WEB) Because of him, you are in Christ Jesus, who was made to us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption

According to the following Passage, does redemption come before sanctification?

Hebrews 13:12 (WEB) Therefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people through his own blood, suffered outside of the gate.

The point is, we cannot always rely on the "order of the events" listed in the Scriptures to relay to us doctrinal beliefs.

We agree that those who believe, manifested in repentance - renouncing sin to follow Christ - sanctify themselves to God (2 Timothy 2:19; Romans 6:19-22; Acts 3:19; Acts 20:20-21; Acts 26:19-20). These are the true believers whom God separates (sanctifies) unto himself (2 Timothy 2:19; 2 Timothy 2:21; Romans 11:4) by the Spirit who indwells these believers (Romans 15:16; Ephesians 1:13-14).

"The Spirit" will not indwell and sanctify anyone who is not first believing in Lord Jesus (as the Gospel defines that faith,) and justified through His Blood - having his sins blotted out (Acts 3:19; Hebrews 13:12). That is the whole point of Lord Jesus' death on the cross, so that we could be Spiritually united (sanctified) with God that was lost in the Garden (Hebrews 13:12).

However, "sanctification" does not end with "initial sanctification," but rather, is an ongoing process as we continually renew our minds (2 Corinthians 7:1) with the washing of the water and the Word (Ephesians 5:26), walking in the Spirit as God works in us by His Spirit (1 Thessalonians 5:23; Hebrews 10:14).

 

[fhansen]

nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. (1 Corinthians 6:11)

So...these justified people already had resurrected bodies?

And those whom He predestined He also called, and those whom He called He also justified, and those whom He justified He also glorified. (Romans 8:30)

Whoever they are. Paul, himself, in Phil 3 tells us he was striving towards that end.

The only way Jesus' disciples knew that Jesus was "justified" was seeing Him resurrected with a glorified body. That explains Paul's order with sanctification preceding justification and Paul's understanding of "justification" with the result being a glorified body ...

And Jesus was certainly justice personified prior to His resurrection-and that's what drew them to Him to begin with. Certainly His resurrection was proof positive for all He had said and done, so more impressive yet, but it didn't mean He was justified then.

The SALVATION order of Paul is based on a "calling" of the Lord, not on the RCC or another denominational [salvation] theology (e.g. Calvinism).

Anyone who turns to God is called. IOW no one who comes to Him can do so on their own, apart from grace.

 

[Mark Quayle]

That's a very different gospel than probably most of us have. Adam wasn't responsible for his own existence and yet he was responsible for remaining in union with God, for not disobeying Him. And we're not responsible for our existence either but that one thing, of entering and remaining in fellowship with God, is what we are responsible for and which we can obtain, but only by and with grace. All grace is resistible.

Our rebirth consists simply of our turning to God, and remaining there, now in union with Him, daily picking up our cross and following.

What does it matter that it is a very different gospel than most have? Appeal to majority, there? It is, in case you don't know, not a new gospel; it is what Paul taught.

As usual, you have made several assertions. And even if you had —as you often think yourself to have done when you quote and use scripture— you would not have backed those assertions up, except in your mind.

The implications of what I believe do not relieve anyone of their responsibility; but you are conflating 'first contact', if you will —i.e. the Spirit of God taking up residence within— with your choice, while the Bible repeatedly shows that those to whom God chose to show mercy are changed in nature, from a mind governed by the flesh to a mind governed by the Spirit, preceding, (as far as causation), anything we are able to do on our own, apart from the work of that Spirit inside us. That we are involved in the resulting faith, I don't dispute, though it is also gift, and the salvation, too, but I do not claim that our involvement is causative. It is our willed submission, willed obedience, willed repentance, willed pursuit of Christ and any other virtue, that result from the work of the Spirit within us. so our choice to accept him as our savior is only a result of the work of God, and not a result of any work of ourselves.

And lest we start down the next left fork in the trail, no, I do not claim that any of this is automatic, but, rather, only sure. One is not saved because he perseveres, but he does persevere because God will keep him.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Mark Quayle said:
Personally, I can't see why the notion of absolute freedom of the creature is not more terrifying than the notion of absolute control by the Creator.

If they result in the same evils that his world has experienced then I'd say that they're both equally terrifying. But I'd hope that man's choices would at least be more terrifying than God's.

That seems like a very temporally focused point-of-view, typical of someone insisting on self-determinism. If the evil that comes to pass in this world is only the result of libertarian free will, then "helter-skelter" rules. But if God planned this to its last detail, then this life is not all there is, and every detail of this life is for the richness and particularity of the life to come.

Mark Quayle said:
We are talking about the will of one who can do nothing right, as opposed to one who does nothing wrong.

Then why is there so much wrong in this world?

Because this life is not for this life.

Case in point. So far as I have been able to tell, the only source of good is God himself. In my own situation, I have been shown repeatedly, and hopefully will learn, that there is nothing good in me apart from God himself. THAT is something that makes me yearn for him and love him and thank him for his inestimable goodness to me, not to mention the deepening of the joy in knowing that HE is pleased with what he is doing.

 

[fhansen]

What does it matter that it is a very different gospel than most have? Appeal to majority, there?

Of course not. But it's still reassuring that most have a superior gospel. And fortunately yours is not what Paul taught either.

As usual, you have made several assertions. And even if you had —as you often think yourself to have done when you quote and use scripture— you would not have backed those assertions up, except in your mind.

I'm not even your what you're assertion is here, but, in any case, everyone thinks their positions are supported by Scripture, and argue it endlessly which is why we have Sola Scriptura supporters on this thread arguing Scripture against other Sola Scriptura adherents on this thread doing the same-all making their assertions.

And lest we start down the next left fork in the trail, no, I do not claim that any of this is automatic, but, rather, only sure. One is not saved because he perseveres, but he does persevere because God will keep him.

What we KNOW...is that not all will persevere. And we can't predict our own perseverance. Only God knows who will persevere. Those are the elect.

And grace comes first, and faith is man's first response to it. And that is his rebirth because faith means fellowship, solidarity, agreement, union with God, as man was meant to be from the beginning. It's to know or experience reconciliation with Him. Its to come to know Him, even if only in part in this life..
"Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent." John 17:3

And now you know the meaning of those words, despite any and all assertions to the contrary.

 

[fhansen]

That seems like a very temporally focused point-of-view, typical of someone insisting on self-determinism. I

No, that’s just an honest look at a very ugly world. There's a reason that people should abhor rape, torture, murder, graft, embezzlement, genocide-and strive to prevent it rather than just say, "No biggee-it's only temporary." And from your perspective, how can evil be anything but gratuitous anyway? It serves no purpose.

In mine, evil opposes God's will and everything that's good -it can serve to teach us, directly viscerally, to hate it, to develop a hunger and thirst for righteousness instead, to want something more, something better as our wills are being formed and informed so as to hate the godless pigsty that this world offers, relatively speaking, and so be all the more ready to run like prodigals back to the Father's open arms when He calls us by His grace. I’m mean, that’s just how it works in real life.

Case in point. So far as I have been able to tell, the only source of good is God himself. In my own situation, I have been shown repeatedly, and hopefully will learn, that there is nothing good in me apart from God himself. THAT is something that makes me yearn for him and love him and thank him for his inestimable goodness to me, not to mention the deepening of the joy in knowing that HE is pleased with what he is doing.

Except that you seem to be saying that evil is also in God, rather than in the rejection of God -as its genesis.

 

[Mark Quayle]

No, that just an honest look at a very ugly world. There's a reason that people should abhor rape, torture, murder, graft, embezzlement, genocide-and strive to prevent it rather than just say, "No biggee-it's only temporary." And from your perspective, how can evil be anything but gratuitous anyway? It serves no purpose.

Do you mean to imply that if I think it good that God planned for sin, that I think people should not abhor rape, torture, murder, graft, embezzlement, genocide, nor strive to prevent it? You think that everything coming to pass by God's plan means that sin is good? Nobody's saying, "No biggee-it's only temporary."! Really? Do you think that I think that Christ's sacrifice is no big deal??? Shall we sin that grace might abound? Of course not!!!

Evil serves no purpose? Really? Then explain to me how in God's creation evil even comes to pass! Could God not have prevented it and still left your precious libertarian free will intact?

In mine, evil opposes God's will and everything that's good -it can serve to teach us, directly viscerally, to hate it, to develop a hunger and thirst for righteousness instead, to want something more, something better as our wills are being formed and informed so as to hate the godless pigsty that this world offers, relatively speaking, and so be all the more ready to run like prodigals back to the Father's open arms when He calls us by His grace.

And where does what I say contradict that???

Except that you seem to be saying that evil is also in God, rather than in the rejection of God -as its genesis.

Except that I'm not saying that at all, that evil is also in God. Evil is the privation of good, and not of any absolute value in itself. But if you reject that, then explain to me how it even showed its ugly face. No, its genesis is the antithesis of good, and I have no notion of the sinner's sin being intended by the sinner for good, but God did intend it for good, just as Joseph said. I'm having a real hard time seeing your responses as honest, here.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Of course not. But it's still reassuring that most have a superior gospel. And fortunately yours is not what Paul taught either.

Demonstrate how not. You have many many times posted what you thought demonstrates it, but every time you present either a strawman to beat down, or completely misuse a passage.

I'm not even your what you're assertion is here, but, in any case, everyone thinks their positions are supported by Scripture, and argue it endlessly which is why we have Sola Scriptura supporters on this thread arguing Scripture against other Sola Scriptura adherents on this thread doing the same-all making their assertions.

Oh, so since everyone has an opinion, they are all equal? Of course you don't believe that, but that is just about what you have said here.

What we KNOW...is that not all will persevere. And we can't predict our own perseverance. Only God knows who will persevere. Those are the elect.

And I said different?

And grace comes first, and faith is man's first response to it. And that is his rebirth because faith means fellowship, solidarity, agreement, union with God, as man was meant to be from the beginning. It's to know or experience reconciliation with Him. Its to come to know Him, even if only in part in this life..
"Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent." John 17:3

And now you know the meaning of those words, despite any and all assertions to the contrary.

Show where I asserted to the contrary. You keep doing this! But you can't show where I say anything contrary to those words.

I'll even give you a leg up, here: You say, "...grace comes first, and faith is man's first response to it." Great. Grace is God's gift of the Spirit resulting in regeneration and salvation and faith. That faith is made by God, and is ours because it is inside of us. We did not generate it. Only God is capable of such a thing.

 

[NewLifeInChristJesus]

What post# of mine are you referencing (two opposing viewpoints)?

What post# of mine are you referencing (you admit you commit sins in weakness)?

When/if you commit sins in weakness you may likewise assume it's impossible for even a born again Christian with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit to stop sinning. Do not fellowship with other Christians that believe it's impossible to ... "Go and sin no more" and "Stop your sinning or something worse may happen."

Galatians 5:24-25 [instruction for Christians] 24 Those who belong to Christ [born again followers] have crucified the flesh with its passions and lusts. 25 If we live by the Spirit, let us also keep in step with the Spirit.​

Is the reason you don't think it's possbile to stop sinning because you don't believe the words of Jesus ... "Go and sin no more" or "Stop your sinning or something worse may happen"

These Words of Jesus were spoken before the indwelling empowerment of the Holy Spirit as a born again new creation in Christ. Your confusion seems to be that you question the red bold Words of Jesus as not necessary for today's modern Christians.

repentance ... fepentance ... repentance. Too many [so-called] Christians don't think they have to repent when they sin. These same [so-called] Christians don't believe it's possible for them to stop sinning. Likewise they may not believe that "something worse may happen"

Sorry, I got confuesd. I thought the following was from you, but it wasn't.

As a Christian walks in the light, which is sanctified life onto God, then any sins we do commit in weakness, God is faithful and just to forgive. But if a Christian begins to live in any sin, then he has become the devil's own.

Since you are always walking in the light and never hide the truth, please confess that you believe in sinless perfection. If you can't say so with a simple statement like, "Yes, I believe in sinless perfection", your deception disproves your theory. If you deny that you believe in sinless perfection, please clarify the differnce between your concept of sinlessness and the doctrine of sinless perfection.

 

[NewLifeInChristJesus]

If we truly believe in Lord Jesus, we will follow him into a sanctified life of righteousness. These are the only "Christians" that the blood of Christ cleanses from all sins he does commit in weakness.

Let me rephrase that to be more clear. You are saying, "Jesus only forgives the sins of people who live a santified life of righteousness". That makes a lot of sense doesn't it?

 

[NewLifeInChristJesus]

It means that the righteousness you are clothed in is not merely declared of or imputed to you but is real righteousness given, so that you will no longer engage in the sin that leads to death. A righteousness that the law can only attest to but cannot grant. Only God can give you the real thing, only with God can you obtain the love that fulfills the law and obeys and does good apart from and without reference to the law.

Yes, all these things are true of the new man that God creates when He comes to live in a person's heart. That is why it is said that the "new man was created according to God, in true righteousness and holiiness" (Eph 4:24). It is what Peter was writing about when he said we have become "partakers of the divine nature" (2 Pet 1:4). And it is why John clarified that the new man "cannot sin" for the simple reason that "he has been born of God" (1 Jn 3:9) and that the devil can't touch him for the same reason (1 Jn 5:18).

But you don't really believe what you wrote above because you refuted it when you said this:

Only with God can we become like Him, a truth that Adam hadn't yet grasped in Eden. Then we are responsible for walking in that righteousness, which will occur as we remain in Him. If we find ourselves persistently engaged in and enslaved to grave sin, then we haven't remained in Him-we're lost again.

Adam and Eve were deceived by the devil into thinking they could "become like God" and the actions they took to accomplish that feat landed humanity in the fallen state we find ourselves in now. And the only way out of it is to receive the "true righteousness and holiness" that comes in the new man that God creates when Jesus comes to live in our hearts. Looking to ourselves for the righteousness that survives death and avoids condenmnation requires, as you have stated, that we ignore the depravity of our own flesh, it requires that we don't count our little sins as sins, and it requires that we muster up the stength to avoid the big sins. People who think this way do not understand that the gap between God's righteousness and the righteousness we can muster up in the flesh is infinitely large. Ignoring the depravity of the flesh, not counting our little sins, and focusing only on avoiding the big sins is just a way to convince ourselves that infinite gap can be bridged.

 

[fhansen]

Because this life is not for this life.

The reason that sin/moral evil can exist at all is due to the abuse of the gift of free will. We can either continue to follow Adam's path in this, or by grace, we can turn from it.

 

[fhansen]

Demonstrate how not. You have many many times posted what you thought demonstrates it, but every time you present either a strawman to beat down, or completely misuse a passage.

Of course it would behoove you to believe that as you've bought into a novel and somewhat skewed gospel, but I don't need to repeat-already been their. You've objected to support from the voice of Scripture, experience, reason and history while sticking with a theology that seeks to resolve certain questions regarding the order of salvation, but fails and in so doing does some violence to the gospel.

Oh, so since everyone has an opinion, they are all equal? Of course you don't believe that, but that is just about what you have said here.

Everyone's private interpretations of Scripture will be prone to some error on the basics of our faith. Some will be closer and so me will be further. The closer ones have generally strayed less far from the faith as taught historically.

And I said different?

I'm not sure. As long as we don't fall into the error of presuming that we are necessarily numbered among the elect, that we will necessarily persevere, so that the identify of any such persons are hypothetical, then we are on truer ground.

Show where I asserted to the contrary. You keep doing this! But you can't show where I say anything contrary to those words.

I'll even give you a leg up, here: You say, "...grace comes first, and faith is man's first response to it." Great. Grace is God's gift of the Spirit resulting in regeneration and salvation and faith.

No, faith is the first "event" in response to grace. That faith is to enter a state of justice which means rebirth salvation, as long as we remain in that state, still friends with God meaning that we will be living and walking justly.