Adam and eve and Arminian Thought

[frumanchu]

This is rather, mirroring passages like 2Jn1:7-9, that says "watch yourselves against antichrists/deceivers, that you not go too far and not abide in Jesus' teachings"...

"7 For many deceivers have gone out into the world who do not confess Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist. 8Look to yourselves, that we do not lose those things we worked for, but that we may receive a full reward.
9Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son. 10If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house nor greet him; 11for he who greets him shares in his evil deeds." - 2 John 1:7-11

Verse 8 "...that we do not lose those things we worked for but that we may receive a full reward." Now surely you don't believe we WORK FOR our salvation. Could it be...possibly...that what is referred to is the treasure we are storing up in Heaven and not just our salvation?

As usual, this verse does not say what you wish it to say.

 

[Ben johnson]

Verse 8 "...that we do not lose those things we worked for but that we may receive a full reward." Now surely you don't believe we WORK FOR our salvation. Could it be...possibly...that what is referred to is the treasure we are storing up in Heaven and not just our salvation?

As usual, this verse does not say what you wish it to say.

"SALVATION" is called "REWARD", in Col3:24. 2Jn1:7-8 says "Watch yourselves against the deceivers". Where in Scripture can one be deceived, but still be saved? Certainly not in 1Tim4:1 ("But the Spirit explicitly says that in later days some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons.") If one can BE deceived, then how can a DECEIVED PERSON, still be saved? DECEIVED FROM WHAT? We discussed 2Cor11:3, where Paul clearly says "I fear ...lest you be led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ." First, is there anything to hint that he's not SINCERE about "being-led-astray" (or "deceived-by-antichrists"), that it's not POSSIBLE??? No. This begs the question: "CAN one be 'deceived', or 'led astray', or 'fallen-from-steadfastness', or 'fallen-from-faith' --- but STILL SAVED?" (If SO, then what is salvation???)

In 2Jn, it says "ergazomai", "labor-achieved-wrought-accomplished". I don't see this as incompatible with "salvation by grace and not works" --- but, in promoting the Gospel, they labored hard to build them in faith; and, by losing that faith, they lost what was accomplished.

The problem, is that there is no way to separate vs9 from vs8; "WATCH YOURSELVES" (undeniably against the deceivers), "that you do not lose what was accomplished." He explains in vs9, "Anyone who goes too far" (goes on ahead) "and does not abide in the teachings of Christ, has not God." There is no way to "split" the ideas of "lose what was accomplished" from "leaving the teachings of Christ and NOT HAVING GOD". Clearly, the two are the SAME.

"LEAVE-JESUS'-TEACHINGS" is what he means by "LOSE-WHAT-WAS-ACCOMPLISHED". So WE are to watch OURSELVES, against the DECEIVERS. It seems pretty clear to me...

The premise of "being DECEIVED to only losing HEAVENLY-REWARDS but not SALVATION ITSELF", doesn't fly. If we can be DECEIVED, then it is "from the purity and simplicity of devotion to Jesus". Identically, "GOING TOO FAR and not abiding in Jesus." Perfect harmony...

 

[Reformationist]

Here is a "break" in understanding between you and me. What does, "falling into sin" mean to you?

It means that a Christian get's caught up in sinfulness and it begins to control his/her life.

An occasional sin, which is repented promptly? It would have to be that

Hate to disappoint you but it doesn't mean that to me.

because I don't think you would go against Jesus ("No good tree produces bad fruit"), or Paul ("Those who practice these things will NOT inherit the kingdom"), or John ("do not be deceived, he who practices righteousness IS righteous, he who practices unrighteousness is of the devil; by this the children of God and children of the devil are exposed...").

I don't think that you correctly understand these verses either so our "break in understanding" goes a lot deeper than this.

But Paul here, says "phtheiro-CORRUPTED" --- Strong's says, "corrupted, destroyed, perished" --- can such a one still be saved???

LOL! You do remember that I'm a reformed Christian, right? Reformed doctrine professes that every one of us is "corrupted, destroyed and perished" prior to God regenerating us.

I don't see how this can be viewed as "only a little-stumble but they'll repent and ABIDE" --- Paul seems to be saying "corrupted from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ." All that OSAS is left with here, is to try to make it, "hyperbole/hypothetical it can't REALLY happen Paul didn't MEAN it..."

No, that's not all OSAS believers are left with because we also know that Scripture repeatedly tells us that we are held by the power of God. I'm not sure what you think but I'm pretty positive that God's power is capable of overcoming my rebellion.

God bless

 

[Ben johnson]

It means that a Christian gets caught up in sinfulness and it begins to control his/her life.

What does that mean, "Christian gets caught up in sinfulness that controls his life"? Did not Paul write, "You are slaves to the one you obey, EITHER sinfulness (resulting in DEATH), or obedience resulting in righteousness (life)? How can a CHRISTIAN, be caught up on sin, controling his life (slave), yet STILL BE SAVED? Have you found an exception to what Jesus said (Matt7:18), what Paul said (1Cor6:9-11, Gal5:19-21), what John said (1Jn3:7-10)?

LOL! You do remember that I'm a reformed Christian, right? Reformed doctrine professes that every one of us is "corrupted, destroyed and perished" prior to God regenerating us.

Are we no longer corrupted? Do we not still sin? Here is an unresolvable conflict --- if regeneration makes us no longer corruptible, then we are constrained by verses like, "No one born of God sins, indeed he CANNOT sin if the Spirit of God abides in him." 1Jn3:9

And yet, the struggle Paul narrated in Romans 7, still continues. This does not contradict that 1Jn3:9 verse, but simply sets it as "walking in the SPirit", against our ability to "walk in the flesh". Us-regenerated-Christians DO sin; in 1Jn1:8, "If we say we have no sin we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us."

The only concept that makes sense of all these verses, is that we HAVE the ability to "walk in Him", and we HAVE the ability to "fall away" (not-walking-in-Him, deceived, fallen-back-into-sinfulness.) And this is only possible if "regeneration consequents from OUR BELIEF" (rather than Divine Instillment).

No, that's not all OSAS believers are left with because we also know that Scripture repeatedly tells us that we are held by the power of God. I'm not sure what you think but I'm pretty positive that God's power is capable of overcoming my rebellion.

Sometimes our own "understanding" colors our perception. I would answer you with Peter's statement, 1:1:9, "kept by the power of God through faith" --- but your understanding of that is colored by your other understanding of "salvic-faith-is-from-God". Because I see "salvic-faith-from-the-heart", this reads to me as, "Responsible Grace"...

 

[frumanchu]

The premise of "being DECEIVED to only losing HEAVENLY-REWARDS but not SALVATION ITSELF", doesn't fly. If we can be DECEIVED, then it is "from the purity and simplicity of devotion to Jesus". Identically, "GOING TOO FAR and not abiding in Jesus." Perfect harmony...

Ben, you are straying ever further into the snare of legalism and you don't even realize it.

Are you, have you always been, and will you always be 100% correct in all your doctrinal positions and understandings? Certainly I concede that I may very well be incorrect in some views. I trust you would be willing to agree the same for yourself.

By the logical outworking of your position here, if you have been deceived into believing ANYTHING that is not 100% true to the Word, you are going to hell. You apparently hold no possibility that a man may be deceived and still be saved.

You are promoting a God who essentially stands like a father before his child as that child lets go and takes his first steps, arms open but never helping the child. When the child falls, the father sits and stares while the child struggles to get back to his feet, then moves back, opens his arms again, and beckons the child to come but again does nothing to help him.

Your entire position PRESUPPOSES the ability of man to lose his salvation, and through that filter you read EVERY text even remotely containing admonitions as being a warning against losing salvation. How do you have any hope for yourself that you will persevere in your faith when you have unknowingly set yourself up for failure by your own standards?

I'm not trying to provoke you, Ben. I sincerely believe that you are entangled in a subtle legalistic view. I'm not questioning your salvation, just pointing out that if the standards you are putting forth were actually enforced by God you could conceivably be oscillating in and out of salvation on a daily basis!

I'm going to return this back to the other thread where we will continue to explore the notion of losing one's salvation.

 

[Ben johnson]

Legalism is based on WORKS; and the Gospel is LOVE, that is RETURNED (or not).

Your entire position PRESUPPOSES the ability of man to lose his salvation, and through that filter you read EVERY text even remotely containing admonitions as being a warning against losing salvation.

I suppose I DO believe that salvation can be lost; but there are verses that SAY it can. So, if I have a "presupposition", it is from Scripture.

just pointing out that if the standards you are putting forth were actually enforced by God you could conceivably be oscillating in and out of salvation on a daily basis!

That a person can RETURN to salvation, is Scriptural; but people don't truly BELIEVE, and then truly DISBELIEVE daily. Just doesn't happen.

That a BELIEVER can truly DISBELIEVE, is also Scriptural. It is required of us to persevere, to be diligent about our calling and election, to keep ourselves in His love. To "walk IN the salvation that we have RECEIVED." Col2:6

If salvation, succinctly defined, is "CHRIST-IN-US", and if He is THERE because of our BELIEF, why is it such a stretch to consider the possibility of UNBELIEF?

You say: "through that filter you read EVERY text even remotely containing admonitions as being a warning against losing salvation. " What if YOU have a filter, that keeps you from seeing real warnings, as real?

I do admit I can be wrong; and if wrong, I can be proven by Scripture, and willing to change.

But I don't see how all these Scriptures together support Predestination...

 

[Received]

Legalism is based on WORKS; and the Gospel is LOVE, that is RETURNED (or not).

Moreover, I would say that the entire idea of working for one's salvation has to do with earning the otherwise gift that is offered, in the same sense that Billy earns his work's pay for the hours he invested weekly. The claim prescribed here originally is not what non-Calvinists and Arminians mean, and the Calvinist claim that it is horrendously fallicious, in my opinion. Paul declares in Romans 4 that belief is not a work -- that regardless of who makes belief possible, it -- belief -- in itself is not according to debt. Why the aggressiveness? Because the emphasis on this false point is undoubtedly -- at least in reference to the original post -- to belittle, whether directly or indirectly. There is no negation of sovereignty according to the correct understanding.

 

[Reformationist]

LOL! Ben, if I thought you were discussing this for any other reason than to prove to others that you feel you are very knowledgeable I may be inclined to continue this parley. Unfortunately, I think you share your knowledge too much and listen too little. That makes for a very tiresome discussion.

Besides, I think fru is more than up to the task of squashing your errant views.

I wish you the best in this discussion and pray that the Lord gives you the ability to listen to others at least as often as you expect others to listen to you.

God bless

 

[Ben johnson]

The claim prescribed here originally is not what non-Calvinists and Arminians mean, and the Calvinist claim that it is horrendously fallicious, in my opinion.

I mean no disrespect to my Calvinist brothers and sisters; no matter how many times we-RG proponents say, "it is GRACE and not WORKS", still persists the retort: "YOU THINK IT'S WORKS." Perhaps we are just being taught patience.

Paul declares in Romans 4 that belief is not a work -- that regardless of who makes belief possible, it -- belief -- in itself is not according to debt.

that is an excellent verse to use in this discussion, Received; I also like to refer to Jn6:29, where "this is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom God sent." Contextually it does NOT mean "This is the word of God for the FEW ELECT to believe", but that "if we believe, He works salvation in us". Clearly, belief is not a work.

Why the aggressiveness? Because the emphasis on this false point is undoubtedly -- at least in reference to the original post -- to belittle, whether directly or indirectly. There is no negation of sovereignty according to the correct understanding.

I'm not sure it's to "belittle" us; it seems more defensive. Maybe either from those who accuse Cavlinists, or possibly when there is no defense or refutation available...

 

[Ben johnson]

LOL! Ben, if I thought you were discussing this for any other reason than to prove to others that you feel you are very knowledgeable I may be inclined to continue this parley. Unfortunately, I think you share your knowledge too much and listen too little. That makes for a very tiresome discussion.

Heh heh. Ad-hominem, huh? My replies are carefully constructed, and respond with careful detail to the other posts here. Instead of thinking "you don't listen", think instead, "the verses we assert do not accomodate, in an OSAS view, the verses with which you reply"...

Besides, I think fru is more than up to the task of squashing your errant views.

That remains to be seen, Don; so far no one has proven that SALVIC-FAITH comes not from our OWN HEARTS. Did you read Rom6:17? It aligns PERFECTLY with Responsible Grace, and not a bit with Calvinism. "From the HEART", Don; not "instilled by God". Perfectly reflected in 2Tim3:15, Rom10:10 & 17. Salvic-faith/belief comes from the HEART, not instilled by GOD.

No one has refuted the verses I've offered that speak of TRULY FALLING FROM SALVATION. And no one will be able to. The only responses that avail themselves include thinking that the subjects weren't really SAVED in the FIRST PLACE, or thinking that though STUMBLED they remain SAVED, or perhaps the passage is only HYPOTHETICAL and not REAL. I gave the possibilities in advance, and refuted them all in advance; so that no one would feel "ambushed". There are only about 4 understandings, and none of them work, The only possibility, is that the subjects were SAVED, and became UNSAVED.

WHich of course precludes "PREDESTINED-ELECTION". If we are predestined to salvation, then none predestined can become unsaved, and none unpredestined can become saved. Is this sentence just stated, not the ESSENCE of "Calvinism/Predestined-Election"? That the REGENERATED HEART cannot become UNREGENERATED? And none who are NOT elected, can ever BELIEVE? Do you see how a "preconceived theology" forces one to try to bend passages to fit? For instance, Luke8:13, must be "interpreted" to mean, "They weren't REALLY saved, it was a FALSE BELIEF!" Nothing in there to even HINT they weren't saved. They "received it with joy and BELIEVED". Period. It was only when persecution/affliction/temptation came that they FELL AWAY. Do you see how the EXEGESIS says "they believed, but when tested fell"? And the EISEGESIS says "it wasn't REAL belief"?

How could they BELIEVE AT ALL (acccording to PE), if they had not been REGENERATED?

 

[Colossians]

Received,

One extra point: Calvinists will deliberately misapprehend the idea of belief, even though scripture clearly teaches that belief is not a work:
It is a work. A work of God.
And a work of God only, therefore no human can do it.
This is why Calvinism is correct.

What Arminians don't seem to be able to grasp is the philosophical constraints of causality: it is not possible for one's desire to precede one's desire. Once one has a desire for Christ, He is already saved. While He doesn't have a desire for Christ, there is no way to have a desire for Christ.

In a nutshell, desire (either way), precludes counter-desire (either way).
Alternatively, state cannot be changed from within itself. (One cannot pull oneself off the ground by one's own bootstraps.)

 

[frumanchu]

Why the aggressiveness? Because the emphasis on this false point is undoubtedly -- at least in reference to the original post -- to belittle, whether directly or indirectly. There is no negation of sovereignty according to the correct understanding.

Thank you for presuming to know "undoubtedly" my motivations and purpose in this thread, and for excluding the possibility that my actual motivation might be to contend earnestly for the faith and to expose and refute what I perceive to be grave theological errors.

Speaking of which, Received, do you believe that those who die without having faith in Jesus Christ will perish eternally? Wait...on second thought, don't answer that. If I don't have "the correct understanding" I may misunderstand your position to be heretical or wholly unorthodox.

I'm not sure it's to "belittle" us; it seems more defensive. Maybe either from those who accuse Cavlinists, or possibly when there is no defense or refutation available...

And thank you, Ben, for taking away one false motivation and replacing it with another. I think from this point I'll confine my discussions with you to the Responsible Grace thread. Just so we're clear, it is NOT because I have "no defense or refutation available" for your arguments, but rather a desire to remain focused.

 

[Ben johnson]

And a work of God only, therefore no human can do it.

Therefore? Do you have any Scripture to support this? Theology founds on Scripture, Colossians; whatever conclusions we make, must be supporte by verses. Show me the verse that says "Humans have NO ABILITY to believe/disbelieve without God's machination". Instead, I read "you WILL not believe", and "you don't WANT to believe". Jesus says, "He who believes is not judged, but he who DOES not believe is judged already, BECAUSE he has not believed". It is "eisegesis" to insert, "he has not believed because God has not first REGENERATED his heart so that he COULD believe". It simply doesn't say that...

Regeneration consequents from belief, not vice-versa...

 

[Ben johnson]

And thank you, Ben, for taking away one false motivation and replacing it with another. I think from this point I'll confine my discussions with you to the Responsible Grace thread. Just so we're clear, it is NOT because I have "no defense or refutation available" for your arguments, but rather a desire to remain focused.

Forgive me for angering you. I should have worded it: "defensive against blistering accusations of Calvinism".

I know you have seen how often the response to RG is, "YOU BELIEVE IN WORKS-SALVATION". And patiently, time after time, we explain, "No, works do not save us, works consequent from a saved heart". This is sometimes frustrating for us. There is no way that anyone who has been reading could have missed us saying "SALVATION IS NOT BY WORKS" --- that's why I said it might be because someone didn't have any other response.

Again, sorry for the "slight"...

 

[rnmomof7]

Moreover, I would say that the entire idea of working for one's salvation has to do with earning the otherwise gift that is offered, in the same sense that Billy earns his work's pay for the hours he invested weekly. The claim prescribed here originally is not what non-Calvinists and Arminians mean, and the Calvinist claim that it is horrendously fallicious, in my opinion. Paul declares in Romans 4 that belief is not a work -- that regardless of who makes belief possible, it -- belief -- in itself is not according to debt. Why the aggressiveness? Because the emphasis on this false point is undoubtedly -- at least in reference to the original post -- to belittle, whether directly or indirectly. There is no negation of sovereignty according to the correct understanding.

Is it a gift if you have worked for it or a wage due?

Billy is getting a wage so it is a poor analogy



**
*

 

[nobdysfool]

Heh heh. Ad-hominem, huh? My replies are carefully constructed, and respond with careful detail to the other posts here. Instead of thinking "you don't listen", think instead, "the verses we assert do not accomodate, in an OSAS view, the verses with which you reply"...
That remains to be seen, Don; so far no one has proven that SALVIC-FAITH comes not from our OWN HEARTS. Did you read Rom6:17? It aligns PERFECTLY with Responsible Grace, and not a bit with Calvinism. "From the HEART", Don; not "instilled by God". Perfectly reflected in 2Tim3:15, Rom10:10 & 17. Salvic-faith/belief comes from the HEART, not instilled by GOD.

No one has refuted the verses I've offered that speak of TRULY FALLING FROM SALVATION. And no one will be able to. The only responses that avail themselves include thinking that the subjects weren't really SAVED in the FIRST PLACE, or thinking that though STUMBLED they remain SAVED, or perhaps the passage is only HYPOTHETICAL and not REAL. I gave the possibilities in advance, and refuted them all in advance; so that no one would feel "ambushed". There are only about 4 understandings, and none of them work, The only possibility, is that the subjects were SAVED, and became UNSAVED.

WHich of course precludes "PREDESTINED-ELECTION". If we are predestined to salvation, then none predestined can become unsaved, and none unpredestined can become saved. Is this sentence just stated, not the ESSENCE of "Calvinism/Predestined-Election"? That the REGENERATED HEART cannot become UNREGENERATED? And none who are NOT elected, can ever BELIEVE? Do you see how a "preconceived theology" forces one to try to bend passages to fit? For instance, Luke8:13, must be "interpreted" to mean, "They weren't REALLY saved, it was a FALSE BELIEF!" Nothing in there to even HINT they weren't saved. They "received it with joy and BELIEVED". Period. It was only when persecution/affliction/temptation came that they FELL AWAY. Do you see how the EXEGESIS says "they believed, but when tested fell"? And the EISEGESIS says "it wasn't REAL belief"?

How could they BELIEVE AT ALL (acccording to PE), if they had not been REGENERATED?

May I respectfully point out, Ben, that your supposedly "irrefutable" eisegesis is being sytematically deconstructed, decompiled, and shown to be erroneous? You seem to have this need to confront any Calvinist/Reformed person you meet, and "dump" all over them with your crusade to "defeat" Calvinism, and set up your own term for Arminianism, called "Responsible Grace". Funny, I don't see the Calvinists budging...and I don't think they will. I don't doubt your salvation, Ben, or your zeal for what you believe to be true, but you will outgrow this fascination with free will, and thinking that you must maintain your salvation under your own power...

IMHO, of course....

 

[Gamecock]

Good Day Gamecock

Never thought of that in that fashion. Thanks for the "Brain Food"

BBAS

Thanks. I don't like being so pithy and simplistic, but it seemed the best way to make my point.

<><

 

[Colossians]

Ben J,

"SALVATION IS NOT BY WORKS"
To choose, is a work. This is what you people fail to understand.


Your camp is in similar error to that of the Seventh Day Adventists:
they say they are not saved by keeping the law, but that if they don't keep the law, they are not saved.
Likewise, you say Salvation is not by works, but then you say that unless you work by choosing it, you are not saved.

Your definition of 'work' is austere. In scriptural/spiritual terms, "work" means "anything anyone does apart from God." Thus choosing is a work. And thus your error.

 

[Ben johnson]

May I respectfully point out, Ben, that your supposedly "irrefutable" eisegesis is being sytematically deconstructed, decompiled, and shown to be erroneous?

Really! And where was I when this happened? All I have seen are responses like: "They can be LED ASTRAY from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ BUT STILL SAVED". Or, "They can be fallen from steadfastness but STILL SAVED." Or, "they can be "fallen from grace and severed from Christ but STILL SAVED!" All of which begs the question, "WHAT IS SALVATION"? (Especially if it can be UNSTEADFAST, and/or FAITHLESS, and/or UNDEVOTED-TO-JESUS, etcetera...)

You seem to have this need to confront any Calvinist/Reformed person you meet, and "dump" all over them with your crusade to "defeat" Calvinism, and set up your own term for Arminianism, called "Responsible Grace".

I am pulled in two directions; fully aware of the admonition not to "engage in disputes factions and dissentions", but also to "contend for the faith" and to "hold fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, that I may be able to both exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict". This issue cuts to the heart of SALVATION --- its ESSENCE. How could it not be important? And it is not PE that receives my attention --- I confront Wicca, WATER-BAPTISM=SALVATION, Mormonism, Jehovah's Witness, Eternal Security, Carnal Christian, Islam, and any other doctrine that counters what I have learned in the Word.

Funny, I don't see the Calvinists budging...and I don't think they will.

And why do you suppose that is, NBF? Why are Predestinationists willing to embrace ideas like "faithlessly saved", or "unsteadfastly saved", or "deceived from purity of devotion to Jesus but saved"? What is salvation if it can be without faith, or if it can be without steadfastness, or if it can be without pure devotion to Jesus?

I don't doubt your salvation, Ben...

You did on the other thread, just a couple days ago...

but you will outgrow this fascination with free will,

Certainly. The day when I can be shown how my grasp of Scripture is wrong, that James1:14-16 & 5:19-20, and 2Pet2:20-22 & 1:9-11 & 3:14 &17, and Gal3:1-3 & 5:1-7, when these and many more like them are NOT speaking about FALLING FROM SALVATION. But no PE is willing to address these, NBF; why do you suppose that is? Mounts tried, and I very much respect him and salute him for the effort; more than anyone else has done. But the only responses possible are, "these passages are about the NEVER-SAVED", or "they're not about REALLY FALLING", or "they're just HYPOTHETICAL but can't REALLY HAPPEN", or "those entire letters do not apply to US TODAY". But each of those responses can be refuted. So --- there doesn't seem to BE any response to them, does there?

If I present Scripture that cannot be accomodated to another certain view, how can it be said that "BEN has been COMPLETELY REFUTED?" Where is the refutation?

... and thinking that you must maintain your salvation under your own power..

Have you ever heard of a Calvinist rebuking me for misrepresenting their position? Happens all the time, doesn't it (the accusation, that is)? But look what you just said about me --- "You think you must maintain your salvation by your own power." This after I have often said, "Peter writes: 'Protected by THE POWER OF GOD, through faith' ". It's not my power, NBF; not my salvation, nothing of me; it was JESUS on that Cross, I had no part in my redemption. It was GIVEN to me, SOLELY BY GRACE (because He LOVED me); yet the gift was RECEIVED by my own FAITH. It is NOT my power, it is HIS power --- operating through my FAITH --- when (and while) I BELIEVE.

Always in these debates I am conflicted; never desiring to hurt or insult, but always led to "contend earnestly for the faith". It is not WINNING that I seek --- but to correctly purvey the Gospel, that my brothers and sisters in the Lord, and myself, be encouraged and grow strong. I am aware that PE's do not seem won; but I am also aware of all the LURKERS who read along --- and look up the verses right along WITH us. I am aware, because they often EMAIL me and TELL me that their faith has been strengthend by what we have said. This is a "high" for me --- to believe that we act in the service of our Lord, continuing what He started. Correctly teaching the Gospel, that many will come to faith and salvation. Do you know, that right now Africa is turning Christian EN MASS? So is China, and many places in the Mid East. This blesses me GREATLY, and I very eagerlly and joyfully look forward to the day when I can meet all my new brothers and sisters in Christ!

SO --- perhaps, on a Christian message board, something you, or I write, will dispell confusion, and open some hearts to Jesus. I will be JUST as joyful if YOU (any of you) are the instruments that accomplish this, as I would if I have the privilege for God to speak through me.

We struggle with the nature of salvation itself --- it matters. It matters with the greatest importance in the Human universe --- eternity. The nature of "PREDESTINED-ELECTION" denies the importance (because of course salvation CANNOT be lost); the nature of "Responsible Grace" is to assign great importance to the discussion --- because salvation CAN be ...well, not LOST, but FORFEITED...

...by unbelief...

...which is why we are charged to KEEP OURSELVES IN HIS LOVE, to PERSEVERE, to EXAMINE OURSELVES TO SEE IF WE ARE IN CHRIST, to ABIDE, to CONTINUE STEADFASTLY IN JESUS, on and on. Stern charges indeed; stern with the weight of eternity...

 

[Ben johnson]

Ben J,

"SALVATION IS NOT BY WORKS"
To choose, is a work. This is what you people fail to understand.

Hi, Colossians. How do you justify saying "BELIEVING IS A WORK", in light of that verse that Received pointed out: "He that DOES NOT WORK but BELIEVES, his faith is reckoned as righteousness." (Rm4:5) IT says "BELIEF IS NOT A WORK", doesn't it? Not the MAN'S work, anyway...

"And this is the WORK OF GOD, that you believe in Him whom God has sent." Jn6:29 If we choose to believe, then we receive God's work IN US; we DO NOT DO THE WORK OURSELVES. Show me where "belief is not of ourselves". Show me how one can rewrite Rom6:17, 10:10, 2Tim3:15 to say SALVIC-BELIEF is from GOD, rather than from OUR OWN HEARTS?

you say that unless you work by choosing it, you are not saved.

Belief is not a work; and it's not what BEN says, it's what JESUS said. "Whoever believes should not perish but have eternal life. He who believes is not judged; but he who does not believe is judged already, BECAUSE he HAS NOT BELIEVED in the only Son of God."

Salvic-belief, or salvic-faith, is from a person's own heart; not instilled by God.

Can you deny that Rom5:18 says "justification CAME to ALL MEN, in just the same quantity as came CONDEMNATION to ALL MEN? What is it then that JUSTIFIES men? Doesn't verse 5:17 say, "those who RECEIVE the abundance of grace and WHO RECEIVE the gift of righteousness shall reign with Jesus"?

If justification CAME to ALL MEN, and they have the choice to RECEIVE it, then how can "salvic-faith" be "unilaterally instilled by God"? It's their own faith that receives it, isn't it? Do you have another way of understanding Rom5:17-18?

Or Rom6:17, 10:10, 2Tim3:15?