Closed Debate: Who then can be saved?

[Jon_]

Topic: Who can be saved? (Can Arminians presently be saved?)

Debaters: Jon_, jonas3

Affirmative Argument: Jon_ (Arminians can presently be saved, i.e. regenerate.)

Negative Argument: jonas3 (Arminians cannot presently be saved, i.e. regenerate.)

This is a closed debate between the debaters. It is being performed publicly for the edification of all forum members. The title is taken from Mark 10:26, 27:

And they were astonished out of measure, saying among themselves, Who then can be saved? And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible. (AV)
​

The affirmative argument will follow that Arminians, while professing erroneous theology, nevertheless can presently profess a true salvific faith in Christ Jesus (i.e., can presently be regenerate). The negative argument will follow that Arminians, while possessing an erroneous theology, such as universal atonement, cannot presently possess a true salvific faith in Christ Jesus (i.e., cannot presently be regenerate).

 

[Jon_]

I would like to open the debate by offering my definition of an Arminian. Because the nature of Arminian doctrine is at the heart of the issue, I think it is reasonable and proper that both sides establish their understanding of the Arminian position.

The famous five points of Calvinism were actually formulated in repudiation of the five points established by the Remonstrants, who were the original Arminians. Through a strange twist of history, Calvinism has taken the five point doctrinal formulation to itself and used them as teaching points for the past 400 years. I believe that he heart of Arminian soteriology lies in the original five points, however, not the repudiations thereof.

What follows are the five articles of the Remonstrants, dated ca. 1610. These I will maintain form the definition of the Arminian.

Conditional Election

That God, by an eternal and unchangeable purpose in Jesus Christ his Son before the foundation of the world, has determined that out of the fallen, sinful race of men, to save in Christ, for Christ’s sake, and through Christ, those who through the grace of the Holy Spirit shall believe on this his son Jesus, and shall persevere in this faith and obedience of faith, through this grace, even to the end; and, on the other hand, to leave the incorrigible and unbelieving in sin and under wrath and to condemn them as alienated from Christ, according to the word of the Gospel in John 3:36: “He that believes on the Son has everlasting life: and he that does not believe the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abides on him,” and according to other passages of Scripture also.

Unlimited Atonement

That, accordingly, Jesus Christ the Savior of the world, died for all men and for every man, so that he has obtained for them all, by his death on the cross, redemption and the forgiveness of sins; yet that no one actually enjoys this forgiveness of sins except the believer, according to the word of the Gospel of John 3:16, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” And in the First Epistle of John 2:2: “And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.”

Deprivation (Partial Depravity)

That man does not posses saving grace of himself, nor of the energy of his free will, inasmuch as in his state of apostasy and sin he can of and by himself neither think, will, nor do any thing that is truly good (such as saving Faith eminently is); but that it is necessary that he be born again of God in Christ, through his Holy Spirit, and renewed in understanding, inclination, and will, and all his faculties, in order that he may rightly understand, think, will, and effect what is truly good, according to the Word of Christ, John 15:5, “Without me you can do nothing.”

Resistable Grace

That this grace of God is the beginning, continuance, and accomplishment of all good, even to the extent that the regenerate man himself, without prevenient or assisting, awakening, following and cooperative grace, can neither think, will, nor do good, nor withstand any temptations to evil; so that all good deeds or movements that can be conceived must be ascribed to the grace of God in Christ. But with respect to the mode of the operation of this grace, it is not irresistible, since it is written concerning many, that they have resisted the Holy Spirit (Acts 7, and elsewhere in many places).

Assurance and Security

That those who are incorporated into Christ by true faith, and have thereby become partakers of his life-giving Spirit, as a result have full power to strive against Satan, sin, the world, and their own flesh, and to win the victory; it being well understood that it is ever through the assisting grace of the Holy Spirit; and that Jesus Christ assists them through his Spirit in all temptations, extends to them his hand, and if only they are ready for the conflict, desire his help, and are not inactive, keeps them from falling, so that they, by no deceit or power of Satan, can be misled nor plucked out of Christ’s hands, according to the Word of Christ, John 10:28: “Neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.” But whether they are capable, through negligence, of forsaking again the first beginning of their life in Christ, of again returning to this present evil world, of turning away from the holy doctrine which was delivered them, of losing a good conscience, of neglecting grace, that must be more particularly determined out of the Holy Scripture, before we ourselves can teach it with the full confidence of our mind.

I will also provide a brief argument concerning what is required for one to be saved, as this is at the heart of the debate.

Salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Jesus Christ alone

No where within the five articles of the Remonstrants is the doctrine of salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Jesus Christ alone ever denounced. The Remonstrants were good Protestants every one. Wrong in theology? Yes. Is proper theology necessary to be saved? Certainly not.

For the excellent argument of saving faith I put forth article 14 of the Westminster Confession of Faith, as masterful a work on the subject as any other, here shown with Scripture proofs. Of especial application is 14:2:

(14:1) The grace of faith, whereby the elect are enabled to believe to the saving of their souls (Heb. 10:39), is the work of the Spirit of Christ in their hearts (2 Co. 4:13; Eph. 1:17-19; Eph. 2:8); and is ordinarily wrought by the ministry of the Word (Rom. 10:14, Rom. 10:17): by which also, and by the administration of the sacraments, and prayer, it is increased and strengthened (Luke 17:5; Acts 20:32; Rom. 1:16, 17; 4:11; 1 Pt. 2:2).

(14:2) By this faith, a Christian believeth to be true whatsoever is revealed in the Word, for the authority of God Himself speaking therein (John 4:42; Acts 24:14; 1 Th. 2:13; 1 Jn. 5:10); and acteth differently upon that which each particular passage thereof containeth; yielding obedience to the commands (Rom. 16:26), trembling at the threatenings (Is. 66:2), and embracing the promises of God for this life, and that which is to come (1 Ti. 4:8; Heb. 11:13). But the principal acts of saving faith are accepting, receiving, and resting upon Christ alone for justification, sanctification, and eternal life, by virtue of the covenant of grace (John 1:12; Acts 15:11; Acts 16:31; Gal. 2:20).

(14:3) This faith is different in degrees, weak or strong (Mt. 6:30; 8:10; Rom. 4:19, 20; Heb. 5:13, 14); may be often and many ways assailed, and weakened, but gets the victory (Luke 22:31, 32; Eph. 6:16; 1 Jn. 5:4, 5); growing up in many to the attainment of a full assurance through Christ (Col. 2:2; Heb. 6:11, 12; 10:22), who is both the author and finisher of our faith (Heb. 12:2).
​

With that, I will turn the discussion over to my opponent for his opening statement.

 

[Proeliator]

*subscribing*

 

[jonas3]

The gospel is God’s promise to save His people (Mat 1:21) conditioned on the atoning blood (Heb 9:12-14) and imputed righteousness of Christ alone (Rom 4:6-8). Those who do not believe the gospel are lost (i.e. unregenerate), as it is written,

“3 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: 4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them." - 2Cor 4:3-4.

The gospel is made up of a set of Scriptural beliefs that all true Christians profess. If an individual does not profess these beliefs, then they are said to be blinded, and the gospel is said to be hidden from them. In fact, the apostle Paul through the Holy Spirit concludes that they are lost (i.e. unregenerate). Take this for example, if someone professes “faith” in Jesus Christ, but says that Jesus Christ is not God, are they regenerate? If you properly answered NO, then you believe as well that the gospel is made up of a set of Scriptural beliefs that all true Christians profess, and one of those beliefs is that Jesus Christ IS God. Therefore, we can be certain that those who are saved (i.e. regenerate) have a knowledge of the gospel (i.e. they all believe certain Scriptural doctrines). What I am not saying is that knowledge leads to salvation (i.e. being regenerated), but rather that God gives His people knowledge of the gospel upon regeneration (Mk 16:16, Jn 17:3, Jn 8:32, Rom 1:16, Rom 5:5, 2Th 2:13-14, 1Jn 5:20, etc, etc), which is a very important distinction to understand.

My opponent maintains that since Remonstrants (i.e. Arminians) never denounce that, “salvation is by grace alone through faith alone in Jesus Christ alone”, that the rest of their “erroneous” theology means nothing. Is this true? Absolutely not! Is the “erroneous” theology that professes that Jesus is not God important in determining if someone is regenerate or not? It certainly is. My point is this; there must be more to an individual’s judgment of who is and who is not a Christian, then simply calling everyone a Christian who professes that salvation is by grace alone through faith alone in Jesus Christ alone. Certainly all true Christians will profess that their salvation is by grace alone through faith and not of works; however, it does not follow that all who simply profess this are undoubtedly Christians. An important question to ask this person might be how does an individual become a partaker of God’s grace? From their answer to this question alone, we can already see that their initial profession of “salvation by grace” could be hugely unscriptural.

Therefore, Christians are commanded to, "Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment." - Jn 7:24. What is righteous judgment? Righteous judgment is not judging by appearance, observations, or someone’s sincerity, but according to the gospel of Jesus Christ.

If a person does not believe in the gospel of Jesus Christ, then that person is currently lost (i.e. unregenerate). There exist no Christian who is ignorant of the gospel of Jesus Christ, which conditions salvation alone on the atoning blood and imputed righteousness of Christ alone. In Romans 10:2 it is written,

"For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge." – Ro 10:2.

There are many people who have, "a zeal of God", but, "not according to knowledge". What does this mean? It means that they APPEAR to have a form of godliness, but they lack true knowledge. They call themselves Christians, are very sincere in their beliefs, live moral lives, and strive to obey God’s commands; however, despite their "zeal", they are ignorant of something. What are they ignorant of? What knowledge do they lack? We read in the next verse,

"For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God." – Ro 10:3.

These people are, "ignorant of God’s righteousness", which shows that they are ignorant of the gospel of Christ, as it is written,

"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." - Ro 1:16-17.

They lack the knowledge of the gospel of Christ, and are going about to establish their own righteousness. All those who do not believe that the atoning blood and imputed righteousness of Christ alone demands the salvation of all whom He died for, are unregenerate.

Christians (i.e. regenerate individuals), who have been saved by grace through faith, profess that Jesus Christ met all of the conditions for their salvation, and this faith that they now profess was the result of God having regenerated them, and not the prerequisite. It is written,

“8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.” – Eph 2:8-9.

A very superficial understanding of these verses would say that anyone and everyone who simply professes that they are saved by grace through faith is a Christian. However, Arminians do NOT believe that they are saved by grace alone, since they do NOT believe that their salvation is condition on the work of Christ alone. Arminians do not believe that it is the work of Christ alone that ensures the salvation of all whom He represented on the cross. In fact, they believe the very opposite (i.e. universal atonement), and since they do not believe that it is the work of Christ alone that ensures the salvation of His people, they do not believe that they are saved by grace alone; and therefore, they do not have true faith. Let’s see how the view of universal atonement denies salvation by grace alone through faith.

Since the atonement is the central message of the gospel of Jesus Christ, it can rightly be said that if a person does not have a proper understanding of the atonement, then that person does not believe the gospel, and is thus unregenerate (i.e. not saved) according to 2Cor 4:3-4. The truth of the atonement (or reconciliation) can be found in many passages of Scripture including: Jn 10:11, 15, 27-28, Eph 1:4-7, Eph 5:25-27, etc. etc. This knowledge is most definitely apart of the gospel, just as the knowledge that Jesus Christ IS God is apart of the gospel; therefore, those who do not believe the truth about the atonement are lost according to 2Cor 4:3-4.

Those who believe that Jesus died for everyone without exception (i.e. universal atonement) do not believe the gospel, because they do not believe that it is the work of Christ alone that makes the difference between salvation and damnation, but that it is the conditional work of the sinner to have "faith" in order to make Christ’s sacrifice effective towards him, which is blasphemy. They believe that Jesus Christ died for everyone without exception including those who end up in hell. However, if Christ died for those who end up in hell, then what did the blood of Jesus Christ actually accomplish for that person in hell? It accomplished nothing, and what was the reason that Christ’s blood was not effective for that person in hell? An Arminian would say that it is because that person did not have “faith”, or because that person rejected Christ. Therefore, under their view, we see that it is NOT the work of Christ alone that makes the difference between salvation and damnation, but rather the conditional WORK of the sinner to have “faith” in this “christ" who died for everyone. They do NOT believe that they are saved by grace, because they boast in their own works (i.e. their faith). If a person can rightly say that he is saved because he had faith over another person, then he has conditioned his salvation on himself, and not on the finished work of Christ, and he has made grace no more grace, as it is written,

“And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace…” – Rom 11:6.

If a man's salvation is in anyway conditioned upon himself, then it is no more of grace, and if it ceases to be of grace, then it ceases to be salvation. The “grace” and the “faith” that my opponent claims that Arminians profess; thereby, “proving” that they are, or can presently be saved (i.e. regenerate), is not true grace, or true faith, but works; and therefore, they cannot possibly be presently saved (i.e. regenerate), since true faith, which is received upon regeneration, professes the very opposite of what they profess.

The ATONEMENT is essential to the GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST. Jesus Christ came and died for His people in order to secure their salvation through His atoning blood and His imputed righteousness alone. What the cross of Jesus Christ actually accomplished is the central theme of the gospel. The apostle Paul said this,

“For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.” – 1Cor 1:17.

“For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.” – 1Cor 2:2.

My opponent must either say that the atonement is not apart of the gospel, which blatantly denies Scripture, or that universal atonement is an acceptable “form” of the gospel, which also blatantly denies Scripture. The truth is that by works shall no flesh be justified; therefore, it is impossible for a regenerate person to profess that their salvation is by grace alone through faith and still condition their salvation somehow on themselves, which is exactly what an Arminian does; therefore, contradicting my opponents position. As a result, my question to my opponent is this:

How does universal atonement not condition salvation on the sinner; and therefore, not contradict salvation by grace alone through faith?

 

[Jon_]

I believe the critical flaw in my opponent's argument lies in his interpretation of what the Gospel entails. To this end, I will pose a series of questions intending to get to the heart of what he believes encompasses the Gospel and what is necessary to be saved.

Jonas, what are the teachings of the Gospel?

 

[jonas3]

I believe the critical flaw in my opponent's argument lies in his interpretation of what the Gospel entails. To this end, I will pose a series of questions intending to get to the heart of what he believes encompasses the Gospel and what is necessary to be saved.

Jonas, what are the teachings of the Gospel?

I don't think so Jon_. I am happy to discuss things with you, but this is NOT going to be a one-sided debate in which you ask all the questions, and I give all the answers. You don't get to just ignore everything I say, as I did not ignore what you said. I have already told you that the atonement is apart of the gospel, and I have posed to you a question in my previous post. Your turn.

-jonas

 

[Jon_]

I don't think so Jon_. I am happy to discuss things with you, but this is NOT going to be a one-sided debate in which you ask all the questions, and I give all the answers. You don't get to just ignore everything I say, as I did not ignore what you said. I have already told you that the atonement is apart of the gospel, and I have posed to you a question in my previous post. Your turn.

I thought that was rhetorical. Moreover, that was your opening statement. I've never engaged in a debate in which a person's opening statement can be setup to lead into cross-examination. If you want me to go through your opening statement step-by-step then I can do that, but I thought that you specifically wanted to limit every post to just a single topic. I am trying to do just that.

 

[Robbie_James_Francis]

*subscribed*

 

[jonas3]

I thought that was rhetorical. Moreover, that was your opening statement. I've never engaged in a debate in which a person's opening statement can be setup to lead into cross-examination. If you want me to go through your opening statement step-by-step then I can do that, but I thought that you specifically wanted to limit every post to just a single topic. I am trying to do just that.

My question was clearly and directly stated to you and was not rhetorical at all. As for the formality of this debate obviously that is only somewhat (i.e. semi-formal); therefore, my “opening statement” was a half-reply to your opening comments and was meant to spur the conversation forward. I specifically hoped that we could limit the questions/post to one, in order, to maintain a focused discussion; however, an individuals post may cover multiple topics if it is necessary to their explanation.

I stated in my initial post that you must either say that the atonement is not apart of the gospel, or that universal atonement is an acceptable “form” of the gospel. These are really your only two options. Now, you have asked me to state the, “teachings of the Gospel”, but I have already stated that the atonement is an essential teaching of the gospel. Therefore, why don’t we start out by examining the atonement in order to keep the topic focused?

To answer your question, the atonement is an essential teaching of the gospel. This is one doctrine that ALL Christians properly believe, understand, and profess. The sins of all of God's people were imputed or legally charged to Jesus Christ on the cross, and through His death on the cross His atoning blood propitiated and redeemed His people alone (i.e. He paid the penalty for their sins (i.e. He became sin for them (2Cor 5:21))).

If we cannot agree that what Christ accomplished on the cross (i.e. the atonement) is a doctrine that is apart of the gospel, then I doubt that we can agree on much else. Therefore, let’s discuss, for now, this one essential gospel doctrine alone to keep the topic focused.

Question:
If you believe that the atonement is NOT apart of the teachings of the gospel, then can you defend this position from Scripture? On the other hand, if you do agree that the atonement IS apart of the teachings of the gospel, then how does universal atonement not condition salvation on the sinner; and therefore, not contradict salvation by grace alone through faith?

 

[Jon_]

If you believe that the atonement is NOT apart of the teachings of the gospel, then can you defend this position from Scripture?

The burden of proof is on you to show that a lack of understanding of the true nature of the atonement nullifies or invalidates faith. I'm not going to allow you to proof surrogate your argument and make me prove the contrary. You are the one with the aberrant doctrine. My positive argument has already been made, which cannot be disproven.

On the other hand, if you do agree that the atonement IS apart of the teachings of the gospel, then how does universal atonement not condition salvation on the sinner; and therefore, not contradict salvation by grace alone through faith?

I never said that the two are not contradictory. I never would. What I'm saying is that those who ascribe to a universal atonement are irrational. I'm saying that they are contradicting themselves, but that they don't realize it. Moreover, they refuse to accept the implications of their contradictions! Countless Arminians that I have debated with refuse to acknowledge that faith before regeneration constitutes a "work" of the law. They firmly believe in grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone, and they do not realize that their own soteriology implies otherwise. This is their saving grace.

Your problem is that you think the atonement is somehow the "core doctrine" of the Gospel and that anyone who disagrees with its limited nature is unregenerate. This is nonsense. The Scripture says nothing of the sort.

Even more, you want to define the Gospel in a limited scope when you have absolutely no basis for doing so. You have yet to even provide a definition of the Gospel. And you cannot provide a biblical definition of it that will fit the application that you desire. Since you fail fundamentally in this area, I will provide you with the definition, so that you might be edified.

It is whole word of God that is the Gospel. All of Scripture is written about Jesus Christ.

(Mt. 4:4 AV) But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

(John 5:39 AV) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

(Rom. 4:23, 24 AV) Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him; 24) But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;

(2 Ti. 3:16 AV) All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
​

You are drawing a distinction where Scripture gives none. If all Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, then by what Scripture to you declare that failure to understand one doctrine is damning whereas failure to understand another is not? Tell me, Jonas, are you an amillennialist? Are you a paedobaptist? Do you understand the the Lord's Supper and its typological prefigurations as detailed by covenant theology? Do you understand all biblical doctrines? You have no argument to draw a theological line and declare the right to be regenerate and the left to be unregenerate.

This too is a teaching of the Gospel, Jonas:

(John 6:53 AV) Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
​

Are you prepared to say that those who have never partaken of the Lord's Supper are unregenerate? How about this:

(Acts 2:38 AV) Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
​

Is baptism necessary for regeneration? Do you subscribe that regeneration comes at baptism? Are you prepared to theologically hang yourself by defending that position? If not, then on what basis do you reject that baptism is a necessary teaching of the Gospel? Does not Peter make it clear here that baptism is a central teaching? If not Peter alone, then John the Baptist and Jesus Christ:

(Mt. 3:14, 15 AV) But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me? 15) And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.
​

You have failed to offer a definition of the Gospel. You haven't even referred to the Greek for the word Gospel. If you do not understand how the authors of the New Testament used the word, then how can you possible interpret what it means? Euaggelion is that word, Jonas, which means good message.

The Gospel is the good news of Jesus Christ.

Where do we learn about Jesus Christ?

In the Scriptures!

In which Scriptures?

All of them!

Therefore, Jonas, you are far from the biblical truth. Far have you wandered from the straight path of interpretation and far from the Gospel message. You do not even understand what is at issue here. You do not even understand what you are debating. What is at stake here is what a man needs to know to be saved.

What a man needs to know to be saved is this:

(Mt. 7:21 AV) Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

(John 6:40 AV) And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.

(Acts 2:38 AV) Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

(Acts 13:48 AV) And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.

(Eph. 2:8 AV) For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
​

Faith in Christ is necessary for salvation, Jonas. Your argument holds no water. Your impious interpretation of verses such as 2 Co. 4:3, 4 places Scripture at odds with itself. In 2 Co. 4:3, 4, Paul is speaking of those who have "faith," but have no works, just as those that James rebukes in his epistle. Paul is speaking of evangelism. He says "if our gospel be hid." He means if we keep our faith to ourselves and never act upon it or share it.

You are trying to smuggle in your own "gospel" into the verse by requiring a doctrine of limited atonement for salvation. This, Jonas, is a circular argument. You use this verse to prove limited atonement is a part of the Gospel that leads to salvation, yet you must first show that Paul's use of Gospel here includes the limited atonement. You recycle your conclusions back into the premises and end up begging the question.

And you should also continue reading the chapter, where Paul provides assurances to them he is speaking to:

(2 Co. 4:6, 13 AV) For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. 13) We having the same spirit of faith, according as it is written, I believed, and therefore have I spoken; we also believe, and therefore speak;
​

And thus we come round to where we were before. Until you provide support for your assertion that the "Gospel" necessarily includes the doctrine of limited atonement, which must be believed for a man to be saved, every argument you make will beg the question because the only way you can make the verses say what you want them to say is to introduce your aberrant interpretation into the texts.

Faith is what is required for salvation and grace—grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. If any man reject this doctrine, then let him be anathema; however, let him rejoice that proclaims Christ Jesus as his Lord and Savior.

(John 6:39 AV) And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.
​

There is no reply that you can make here, Jonas. You can rail and kick and rebel against the clear teaching of the word, but all your misapplications and wrong interpretations will be repudiated and refuted. You fail to establish any basis for your claim that believe in the limited nature of the atonement is necessary for salvation. You fail to understand the fundamental teaching of Scripture, which is plainly that all of God's word is written about the Word. And you fail to understand that your argument necessarily infers that many other doctrines, which you do not uphold as necessary to salvation, become necessary for salvation. Your argument "proves" much more than you are willing to admit. You are like the Arminian, who has an incorrect view of the Bible, and when the implications of this doctrine are pointed out to him, he refuses to accept them and flatly denies the logic.

The same is true for you, Jonas. You base your arguments on sheer irrational speculations and you wrongly judge the souls of men based on your misunderstanding. For that, I charge you with grievous sin and call upon you to repent! I will pray that our Lord will be merciful toward you for your transgressions and move your heart toward conversion from sin.

 

[5solas]

subscribed

 

[Augustine_Was_Calvinist]

subscribed

 

[jonas3]

Due to post length restrictions this post is divided into two postings.

The burden of proof is on you to show that a lack of understanding of the true nature of the atonement nullifies or invalidates faith. I'm not going to allow you to proof surrogate your argument and make me prove the contrary. You are the one with the aberrant doctrine. My positive argument has already been made, which cannot be disproven.

I have already shown how universal atonement nullifies or invalidates faith. I have already shown how universal atonement contradicts salvation by grace alone through faith. Nevertheless, let me summarize the basic concept once again.

True faith professes that Jesus Christ met all of the conditions necessary for the salvation of His people (Titus 3:5-7), and that there is no additional work required by the sinner to be saved (i.e. not of works, lest any man should boast (Eph 2:9)).

The doctrine of universal atonement asserts that Jesus Christ died for everyone without exception (including those who end up in hell); therefore, it becomes evident that it is not the work of Christ alone that has secured the salvation of His people, but the conditional work of the sinner to have “faith” in order to be regenerated. This “faith” is the condition that the sinner must meet before they can benefit from Christ’s atoning blood, which is, as they say, upon all without exception.

Therefore, we see that universal atonement advocates say that “faith” is a necessary prerequisite that precedes regeneration; whereas, true faith professes that regeneration precedes faith; and therefore, cannot be a prerequisite for salvation (i.e. regeneration). These two ideas of faith are diametrically opposite, and cannot be compatible. The “faith” that the universal atonement advocates profess is invalid faith (i.e. null and void).

The false gospel is inseparably linked to salvation conditioned on sinner in some form or another. However, the sole condition, that is, the only condition for salvation is to have a perfect and spotless righteousness, a righteous that would satisfy and answer the demands of God's Law and Justice. Can this perfect righteousness be produced by fallen man? Absolutely not! Only Jesus Christ, the God-man mediator, has met all of the conditions of God’s law, and only Jesus Christ has established this perfect righteousness for His people; therefore, the true gospel conditions salvation entirely (i.e. 100%) on the work of Christ alone without any contribution on behalf of the sinner. I simply defend salvation condition on the work of Christ alone and not on the works of wicked men. That is the gospel (i.e. salvation conditioned on the work of Jesus Christ alone). The doctrine of universal atonement (as well as many other doctrines) condition salvation on the sinner in one form or another; and therefore, is accursed.

I never said that the two are not contradictory. I never would. What I'm saying is that those who ascribe to a universal atonement are irrational. I'm saying that they are contradicting themselves, but that they don't realize it. Moreover, they refuse to accept the implications of their contradictions! Countless Arminians that I have debated with refuse to acknowledge that faith before regeneration constitutes a "work" of the law. They firmly believe in grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone, and they do not realize that their own soteriology implies otherwise. This is their saving grace.

It is amazing that you actually agree with me by saying that Arminian soterilogy contradicts their so called belief in salvation by grace alone through faith, but then you go on to say that this does NOT invalidate or nullify their faith! They profess a faith that conditions salvation on themselves (i.e. a false faith), but since they claim to affirm salvation by grace through faith, thus, their “irrational faith” is now somehow valid faith.

Your problem is that you think the atonement is somehow the "core doctrine" of the Gospel and that anyone who disagrees with its limited nature is unregenerate. This is nonsense. The Scripture says nothing of the sort.

The atonement is not just a “core doctrine” of the gospel, it is the gospel. What could possibly be the gospel if you remove the WORK OF JESUS CHRIST ON THE CROSS!? The good news of the Messiah was that for His people He would,

“…make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.” – Dan 9:24.

“But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.” – Isa 53:5.

“For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures” – 1Cor 15:3

According to what? That is, according to the Scriptures. Now, do the Scriptures teach universal atonement? The correct answer is no, for Christ laid down His life for His sheep (Jn 10:15).

Even more, you want to define the Gospel in a limited scope when you have absolutely no basis for doing so. You have yet to even provide a definition of the Gospel. And you cannot provide a biblical definition of it that will fit the application that you desire. Since you fail fundamentally in this area, I will provide you with the definition, so that you might be edified.

It is whole word of God that is the Gospel. All of Scripture is written about Jesus Christ.

(Mt. 4:4 AV) But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

(John 5:39 AV) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

(Rom. 4:23, 24 AV) Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him; 24) But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;

(2 Ti. 3:16 AV) All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

The gospel of Jesus Christ is most definitely proclaimed throughout the whole word of God; however, every single verse in Scripture is not the gospel. The gospel is God’s promise to save His people conditioned on the atoning blood and imputed righteousness of Christ alone. That is the good news! Salvation has been secured for God’s elect, and they have no fear of damnation because God is perfectly satisfied with the WORK of Jesus Christ. What Jesus Christ accomplished on the cross for His people, is the gospel, as it is written,

“For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.” – 1Cor 1:17.

The apostle Paul most assuredly taught the gospel of Christ out of the Old Testament seeing how the New Testament was not available to him, so it is a sure and certain fact that the gospel of Christ is throughout the whole Bible, and this I affirm, but it is very naïve to suggest that the gospel is every single verse in the Bible; on the contrary, the gospel is repeated throughout all of Scripture. If the gospel is every single verse in the Bible, then every single doctrine in the Bible would be necessary to believe to actually believe the gospel, as Jesus said, “…he that believeth not shall be damned.” – Mk 16:16. However, every single Biblical doctrine is not something that all regenerate Christians know upon regeneration. They certainly believe that the Bible is the only inspired Word of God and that it contains absolutely no contradictions; however, they may be ignorant of some doctrines within the Bible. Christians may grow in wisdom in many areas; however, the gospel is something they absolutely know since they were given this knowledge upon regeneration, because a regenerate person believes upon the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the only way one can believe upon the Lord Jesus Christ is to KNOW the true Jesus Christ of the Bible, as it is written,


“And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.” – 1Jn 5:20.


Now, perhaps I just misunderstood you? Are you saying, as I am saying, that the gospel is repeated throughout the entire Bible, or are you saying that every single verse in the Bible is the gospel?

You are drawing a distinction where Scripture gives none. If all Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, then by what Scripture to you declare that failure to understand one doctrine is damning whereas failure to understand another is not? Tell me, Jonas, are you an amillennialist? Are you a paedobaptist? Do you understand the the Lord's Supper and its typological prefigurations as detailed by covenant theology? Do you understand all biblical doctrines? You have no argument to draw a theological line and declare the right to be regenerate and the left to be unregenerate.

The failure comes in when one conditions salvation on themselves. The gospel is salvation conditioned on the work of Jesus Christ alone. If any man professes ANY doctrine that conditions salvation on himself, then this person is unregenerate. It is not a failure to, “understand one doctrine”, in a sense; but rather, it is a failure to believe the one gospel. When a person conditions their salvation on themselves they do not believe the gospel, and they actually HATE (i.e. do not love) Jesus Christ, and, as it is written,

“If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maranatha.” – 1Cor 16:22.

This too is a teaching of the Gospel, Jonas:

(John 6:53 AV) Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

Are you prepared to say that those who have never partaken of the Lord's Supper are unregenerate?

Yes, but if you think that to eat the flesh of the Son of man, and to drink His blood is to partake in some physical act, then you do not understand John chapter 6. I will not go further into the discussion now as it is likely to disrupte our current topic.

How about this:
(Acts 2:38 AV) Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Is baptism necessary for regeneration? Do you subscribe that regeneration comes at baptism? Are you prepared to theologically hang yourself by defending that position? If not, then on what basis do you reject that baptism is a necessary teaching of the Gospel? Does not Peter make it clear here that baptism is a central teaching? If not Peter alone, then John the Baptist and Jesus Christ:

(Mt. 3:14, 15 AV) But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me? 15) And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.

“One Lord, one faith, one baptism” – Eph 4:5.

“Then remembered I [the apostle Peter] the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.” – Acts 11:16.

Those who suggest that water baptism is necessary or required for salvation are unregenerate. It all goes back to the true gospel verses the false gospel, which is salvation conditioned on the work of Christ alone verses salvation conditioned on the work of the sinner.

You have failed to offer a definition of the Gospel. You haven't even referred to the Greek for the word Gospel. If you do not understand how the authors of the New Testament used the word, then how can you possible interpret what it means? Euaggelion is that word, Jonas, which means good message.

The Gospel is the good news of Jesus Christ.

I agree, but how is that defined? What does one mean exactly? Is the gospel the good news of Jesus Christ because everyone is going to heaven now? No! Thus, the gospel must be defined.

Where do we learn about Jesus Christ?

In the Scriptures!

In which Scriptures?

All of them!

I agree.

Therefore, Jonas, you are far from the biblical truth. Far have you wandered from the straight path of interpretation and far from the Gospel message. You do not even understand what is at issue here. You do not even understand what you are debating. What is at stake here is what a man needs to know to be saved.

I have wandered from the gospel message when I proclaim that salvation is conditioned on the atoning blood and imputed righteousness of Christ alone? I have wandered from the gospel message when I say that the false gospel of conditional salvation is wicked and accursed? I am defending the true gospel against your antichrist notions when you suggest that an individual can believe whatever doctrine of devils he wishes, but just so as long as he confesses that his salvation is by grace alone through faith, then he must be saved. That is the opposite of sound judgment.

The rest of my reply can be found in the following post...

 

[jonas3]

Continuation of previous post...

What a man needs to know to be saved is this:

(Mt. 7:21 AV) Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

(John 6:40 AV) And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.

(Acts 2:38 AV) Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

(Acts 13:48 AV) And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.

(Eph. 2:8 AV) For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

Faith in Christ is necessary for salvation, Jonas. Your argument holds no water. Your impious interpretation of verses such as 2 Co. 4:3, 4 places Scripture at odds with itself. In 2 Co. 4:3, 4, Paul is speaking of those who have "faith," but have no works, just as those that James rebukes in his epistle. Paul is speaking of evangelism. He says "if our gospel be hid." He means if we keep our faith to ourselves and never act upon it or share it.

Rather, all who are saved have faith in Christ. Those who are saved (i.e. regenerate) have true faith, which is the faith that professes that salvation is conditioned on the work of Jesus Christ alone. One can only BELIEVE in Jesus Christ if one KNOW’S who He is, and WHAT He did (i.e. His person and work).

Read the verses again,

“3 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: 4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.” – 2Cor 4:3-4.

The people who are blinded “BELIEVE NOT”, which means that the gospel WAS ALREADY declared to them, and they did not believe it. Why did they not believe it? It was not because it had not been shared with them, but rather because it HAD been shared with them but their minds were blinded by Satan, the god of this world. They are unregenerate and cannot know the things of the Spirit of God (1Cor 2:14).

You are trying to smuggle in your own "gospel" into the verse by requiring a doctrine of limited atonement for salvation. This, Jonas, is a circular argument. You use this verse to prove limited atonement is a part of the Gospel that leads to salvation, yet you must first show that Paul's use of Gospel here includes the limited atonement. You recycle your conclusions back into the premises and end up begging the question.

I don’t make anything a requirement (i.e. a prerequisite) for salvation, nor do I say that any belief in any doctrine, “leads to salvation”. In fact, I say the exact opposite. Do I have to say it again? I simply say that those who are saved (i.e. regenerate) believe the gospel. The PERSON and WORK of Jesus Christ is apart of the gospel. Let me explain,

“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 [i.e. in the gospel] is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith." - Rom 1:16-17.

What is revealed in the gospel? The righteousness of God. How is the righteousness of God revealed in the gospel? Through the PERSON and WORK of Jesus Christ. The person of Jesus Christ is that He is the God-man mediator, and the work of Jesus Christ is that He has secured salvation for His sheep through His atoning blood and His imputed righteousness alone. The gospel is revealed in Scripture. The word “gospel” alone, does not reveal what the gospel entails, for what the gospel entails is discovered from Scripture; therefore, when the apostle Paul through the Holy Spirit says that the gospel is hid to them that are lost, he is using the word “gospel” to summarize something that lost people do not believe.

And you should also continue reading the chapter, where Paul provides assurances to them he is speaking to:

(2 Co. 4:6, 13 AV) For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. 13) We having the same spirit of faith, according as it is written, I believed, and therefore have I spoken; we also believe, and therefore speak;

And thus we come round to where we were before. Until you provide support for your assertion that the "Gospel" necessarily includes the doctrine of limited atonement, which must be believed for a man to be saved, every argument you make will beg the question because the only way you can make the verses say what you want them to say is to introduce your aberrant interpretation into the texts.

Those who believe the gospel have assurance. The apostle Paul, in 1Cor 4:3-4, was talking about those who do not believe the gospel, and what their true condition is (i.e. they are lost (i.e. unregenerate)). I have already provided support that the cross of Christ is apart of the gospel of Christ. That should be very obvious.

“For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures” – 1Cor 15:3.

There is only ONE way in which Christ died, at least, that is, according to the Scriptures.

Faith is what is required for salvation and grace—grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. If any man reject this doctrine, then let him be anathema; however, let him rejoice that proclaims Christ Jesus as his Lord and Savior.

(John 6:39 AV) And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.

There is no reply that you can make here, Jonas. You can rail and kick and rebel against the clear teaching of the word, but all your misapplications and wrong interpretations will be repudiated and refuted. You fail to establish any basis for your claim that believe in the limited nature of the atonement is necessary for salvation. You fail to understand the fundamental teaching of Scripture, which is plainly that all of God's word is written about the Word. And you fail to understand that your argument necessarily infers that many other doctrines, which you do not uphold as necessary to salvation, become necessary for salvation. Your argument "proves" much more than you are willing to admit. You are like the Arminian, who has an incorrect view of the Bible, and when the implications of this doctrine are pointed out to him, he refuses to accept them and flatly denies the logic.

The same is true for you, Jonas. You base your arguments on sheer irrational speculations and you wrongly judge the souls of men based on your misunderstanding. For that, I charge you with grievous sin and call upon you to repent! I will pray that our Lord will be merciful toward you for your transgressions and move your heart toward conversion from sin.

Your position for this debate is that Arminians can be saved (i.e. regenerate), as long as they do not reject salvation by God’s grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone, yet you use the word “Arminian” as a slander against me? However, I profess that my salvation is by God’s grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. I do not reject this doctrine; therefore, why are you inconsistent in your judgment against me verses your Arminian brethren? What exactly am I, “railing and kicking and rebelling against”, that is contrary to your idea of true faith? I, in your opinion, like the Arminian, have “sheer irrational speculations”? But these same irrational speculations are what you used above to prove that Arminians have true faith! Even though their beliefs are irrational, they still have true faith because they say their salvation is by grace alone through faith, which is something I also say. Wherein is my difference in your opinion? Furthermore, why are you intending to, “pray for me”? Do you judge me to be lost? If you do not consider me lost, then why do you pray? If you consider me lost, then by what standard do you judge me to be lost? For I believe exactly what you said regenerate people believe.

-jonas

 

[Jon_]

Okay, now that we have both made two substantive arguments, it would probably be in the best interest of the debate to try to confine our posts to just one particular topic, like we talked about before. Since what is at issue here is the Gospel, specifically, what it entails (and thus must be believed to be saved), I think we should start by examining the New Testament use of this term and its Old Testament types.

Now, you have asserted that the Gospel is the atonement:

The atonement is not just a “core doctrine” of the gospel, it is the gospel.

I would ask if there is anything else contained in the Gospel according to your interpretation. Does the Gospel (Gr. euangelion) refer only to the atonement or are there other peripheral referents in this term?

 

[jonas3]

Okay, now that we have both made two substantive arguments, it would probably be in the best interest of the debate to try to confine our posts to just one particular topic, like we talked about before. Since what is at issue here is the Gospel, specifically, what it entails (and thus must be believed to be saved), I think we should start by examining the New Testament use of this term and its Old Testament types.

Now, you have asserted that the Gospel is the atonement:


I would ask if there is anything else contained in the Gospel according to your interpretation. Does the Gospel (Gr. euangelion) refer only to the atonement or are there other peripheral referents in this term?

The gospel is centered around the atonement, and by my saying that the atonement is the gospel I was affirming that it was the very heart of the gospel. What Christ accomplished for His people on the cross is the very essence of the gospel message; nevertheless, there are certainly other teachings that surround the atonement that are essential gospel doctrine. For starters, the gospel is God's promise. It was God's promise to save His people (i.e. the cross of Christ), and since God keeps all of His promises; therefore, He is sovereign. If God was not sovereign, and not in control of all things, then His promises could fail because something outside of God's control could prevent Him from fulfilling His promises; therefore, the sovereignty of God is apart of the gospel. If one does not believe that God is sovereign, then they are unregenerate because they do not believe the gospel. Furthermore, if one does not believe that God is sovereign, then one cannot believe that they are saved by grace alone through faith. If God is not sovereign, then His grace might not always be salvific seeing how it could potentially fail given certain circumstances that were supposedly outside of His control.

-jonas

 

[Jon_]

. . . nevertheless, there are certainly other teachings that surround the atonement that are essential gospel doctrine.

Would you please provide me with an exhaustive list of every doctrine that must necessarily be believe in order to believe in the Gospel?

 

[jonas3]

Would you please provide me with an exhaustive list of every doctrine that must necessarily be believe in order to believe in the Gospel?

Let me explain, the gospel is God's promise to save His people conditioned on the atoning blood and imputed righteousness of Christ alone. Here is my exhaustive list of every doctrine that every regenerate person believes,

Exhaustive List
1. Salvation is of the Lord.

The regenerate person is given a knowledge and understanding of the true gospel of salvation conditioned on the work of Jesus Christ alone and the realization that he was unregenerate when he believed a false gospel of salvation conditioned on the sinner. When one of God's elect is regenerated, they have the righteousness of God revealed to them, and they know the true and living God, Jesus Christ. They understand the person and work of Jesus Christ, as it is written,

“And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” – Jn 8:32

“And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” – Jn 17:3

“But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.” – Ro 6:17

“For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. – 2Cor 4:6

“And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.” – 1Jn 5:20.

The faith that they are given upon regeneration professes that Jesus Christ has met all of the conditions for their salvation, and they will never again profess that their salvation is conditioned on themselves in anyway. An individual upon regeneration immediately (i.e. at that very second) believes the gospel; therefore, he or she now believes in the true and living God alone for salvation and will never condition salvation on themselves.

For example, a regenerate person may have never heard of the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints; however, they believe it, because they believe that their salvation is not conditioned on themselves. They profess that Jesus Christ is the author and finisher of their faith and it is by His grace alone that they are saved, and it is by His grace alone that their salvation is maintained. A regenerate person will never profess a false gospel of conditional salvation.

“4 And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice. 5 And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers.” – Jn 10:4-5

I have been trying to show you that the false gospel is salvation conditioned on the sinner, and the true gospel is salvation conditioned on the work of Christ alone.

“But I will sacrifice unto thee with the voice of thanksgiving; I will pay that that I have vowed. Salvation is of the LORD.” – Jon 2:9

An individual, upon regeneration, is given the knowledge that: SALVATION IS OF THE LORD.

Take for example, the thief on the cross,

“41 Likewise also the chief priests mocking him, with the scribes and elders, said, 42 He saved others; himself he cannot save. If he be the King of Israel, let him now come down from the cross, and we will believe him. 43 He trusted in God; let him deliver him now, if he will have him: for he said, I am the Son of God. 44 The thieves also, which were crucified with him, cast the same in his teeth.” – Mat 27:41-44

In this passage it states that both of the thieves were mocking Christ along with the chief priests and others, but then in the Luke account we read,

"39 And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him, saying, If thou be Christ, save thyself and us. 40 But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation? 41 And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss. 42 And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. 43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise." - Lk 23:39-43

We see here that one of the thieves had been regenerated and converted.

The thief, through the power of God through regeneration, saw that he could do nothing to save himself (i.e. he repented of the false gospel of conditional salvation), he recognized that Jesus was God, he recognized that Jesus was sinless, he cried unto the Lord for salvation; thereby, acknowledging Christ's atoning blood and imputed righteousness, he recognized that his salvation was not conditioned on himself, he shared the gospel with the other thief and even rebuked him, but saw that Jesus made no such promise to him (i.e. election), and he recognized that he had assurance in the eternal kingdom, and he did none of this through his own power, but by the Holy Spirit.

SALVATION IS OF THE LORD.

-jonas

 

[oworm]

subscribed

 

[Jon_]

Wow, I'm sorry for the long wait in my reply. I've been having computer difficulties at home and haven't had time at work to make a post.

The regenerate person is given a knowledge and understanding of the true gospel of salvation conditioned on the work of Jesus Christ alone and the realization that he was unregenerate when he believed a false gospel of salvation conditioned on the sinner.

This reply begs the question. Since the defintion of "true gospel" is what is at issue, you argue in a circle when you say that the true gospel is what regenerate Christians believe and that to be a regenerate Christian, one must believe the true gospel. Moreover, you commit a logical fallacy if you try to infer the doctrine of particular redemption into this argument. Since it does not appear as a premise, it cannot appear in the conclusion.

The verses that you provided most certainly do speak of God being the True God and of Jesus being the True God, and even of the believer being given knowledge of the True God at conversion, but it is invalid to infer that particular redemption is a necessary component of that conversion from the premises you have given. You must first demonstrate that this doctrine is given immediately upon conversion.

When one of God's elect is regenerated, they have the righteousness of God revealed to them, and they know the true and living God, Jesus Christ.

True, but it is invalid to infer that particular redemption is necessarily a part of this understanding, at least from these premises. Your argument does not follow. Most of your post seems to follow this line of reasoning, so I will forego pointing out the other places in which you use this argument.

They understand the person and work of Jesus Christ.

This is so ambiguous that I cannot even begin to formulate a response.

For example, a regenerate person may have never heard of the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints; however, they believe it, because they believe that their salvation is not conditioned on themselves.

This is epistemologically impossible. In order to know something, three conditions must be met:

1) Truth (something must be true to be known)
2) Belief (i.e. agreeing that it is true and assenting to it)
3) Justification (there must be a sound basis for belief)

It is invalid and impossible to say that someone "knows" the doctrine of particular redemption before they have justification for knowing it. The best example is the illustration of a pain. Can you have a pain without feeling it? No, of course not. The sensation of pain is a part of the definition of pain itself. Such is the same with knowledge. You must have it communicated, transmitted, relayed, etc., by some medium, believe it is true, and it must actually be true, in order for you to know it. Justification would necessarily derive from being exposed to the doctrine. For instance, you argue that the thief on the cross knew this doctrine, but that is impossible because no one ever told it to him.

You make the argue that regenerate persons believe the doctrine of particular redemption because it is revealed to them by the Holy Spirit. This contradicts the Scripture, however (Rm. 10:17). Special revelation by the word of God (the Scriptures) is the media by which we learn doctrine.

To learn and understand the doctrines of God we must study the Scriptures (Ps. 119:130). The Holy Spirit works in two parts through the word of God. In the first, he has breathed out the words of God in language that we can understand. In the second, he illuminates the Scriptures in our hearts and enables us to understand them. A man cannot study the Scriptures and learn truly without the illumination of the Holy Spirit. Likewise, the illumination of the Holy Spirit does not reveal truth apart from the Scriptures. The Spirit does not reveal truth through dreams, visions, impressions in grilled cheese sandwiches, nothing apart from the word of God. This is the basis of Christian epistemology, that the Scriptures are the only source of truth.

Therefore, it is impossible for someone to know a doctrine if he has never read or heard it. If I witness to a person that Jesus Christ came to save what was lost and that all men are sinners and if they will acknowledge their sins and believe that Christ died for them they will be saved, and if someone believes this, they will still know nothing of particular redemption. In fact, they will likely invalidly infer that this promise is extended to everyone. (It is actually invalid to infer either limited or universal atonement from the proposition that I gave.) That is why doctrine is so important. That is why Paul exorted Timothy to continue walking in the light of the Scriptures.

. . . thereby, acknowledging Christ's atoning blood and imputed righteousness, he recognized that his salvation was not conditioned on himself . . .

Again, this does not follow. The account in Luke says nothing about the thief's understanding regarding the doctrine of particular redemption. It is invalid to infer that the thief understood it. Your argument is once again circular.

I noticed that the Trinity is conspicuously absent from your required understanding for salvation. Does this mean that one can repudiate the Trinity and still be saved?