Does God Need Your Permission in Order to Save You?

[Hammster]

The point was that all Christians serve God sometimes and server satan sometimes.

Good thing Christ bore all of our sins and we are declared righteous and are in Him.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

To save you from what?

From Whom, is the question.

 

[fhansen]

It's a simple question, which requires a simple, Yes or No, answer.

No, of course not. He doesn't need our permission; He requires it.

God didn't do all that dramatic "salvation history" stuff for nothing, patiently leading humankind down through the centuries to the point where the full light would be introduced to the world, so that, hopefully having attained a certain degree of wisdom and maturity when the time was ripe, we may finally make the right choice when it's offered, as opposed to Adam's wrong choice.

 

[corinth77777]

Good thing Christ bore all of our sins and we are declared righteous and are in Him.

Do you mean He paid the penalty of our sins? And at an appointed time as we walk in Him we are Justified? Made declared right b4 the father?

 

[Hammster]

Do you mean He paid the penalty of our sins? And at an appointed time as we walk in Him we are Justified? Made declared right b4 the father?

Pretty much.

 

[tdidymas]

No, of course not. He doesn't need our permission; He requires it.

God didn't do all that dramatic "salvation history" stuff for nothing, patiently leading humankind down through the centuries to the point where the full light would be introduced to the world, so that, hopefully having attained a certain degree of wisdom and maturity when the time was ripe, we may finally make the right choice when it's offered, as opposed to Adam's wrong choice.

What do you mean by "requires"? If you mean mandate, then it's not permission, but rather surrender. If you mean necessary, then it's a need. Either way it's not permission.
TD

 

[fhansen]

What do you mean by "requires"? If you mean mandate, then it's not permission, but rather surrender. If you mean necessary, then it's a need. Either way it's not permission.
TD

Of course it is. God doesn't save us without our consent, as Augustine put it. He can save us any which way He wants, but instead requires that we make the decision, even as that decision is aided by grace, but grace that we can still resist.

 

[Hammster]

Of course it is. God doesn't save us without our consent, as Augustine put it. He can save us any which way He wants, but instead requires that we make the decision, even as that decision is aided by grace, but grace that we can still resist.

When you say “save”, are you referring to regeneration, justification, sanctification, or something else?

 

[fhansen]

When you say “save”, are you referring to regeneration, justification, sanctification, or something else?

To the extent that we are in a state of justice/righteousness in the eyes of God, we are saved.

 

[Hammster]

To the extent that we are in a state of justice/righteousness in the eyes of God, we are saved.

And you are saying that we can choose to be in that state all on our own? By that I mean, it’s our decision.

 

[fhansen]

And you are saying that we can choose to be in that state all on our own? By that I mean, it’s our decision.

We cannot get into that state without grace. But we can still resist the grace that seeks to inform and draw us into that state, or accept it today and reject it later at any point down the road.

 

[Hammster]

We cannot get into that state without grace. But we can still resist the grace that seeks to inform and draw us into that state, or accept it today and reject it later at any point down the road.

Here’s the problem with this statement. It sounds all spiritual, but there’s nothing there. It’s sounds like New Age thinking.

So to start, where are you getting that we are in these various states?

 

[fhansen]

Here’s the problem with this statement. It sounds all spiritual, but there’s nothing there. It’s sounds like New Age thinking.

Hmm, a rather well-explained statement .

So to start, where are you getting that we are in these various states?

Funny thing is that your gospel sounds novel to me, and a bit shallow perhaps, whereas the one I speak of in any case aligns with the teachings of the ancient churches. In fact, the theology is even built into their sacraments.

 

[Hammster]

Hmm, a rather well-explained statement .

Funny thing is that your gospel sounds novel to me, and a bit shallow perhaps, whereas the one I speak of in any case aligns with the teachings of the ancient churches. In fact, the theology is even built into their sacraments.

Anyway, care to answer? So to start, where are you getting that we are in these various states?

 

[fhansen]

Anyway, care to answer? So to start, where are you getting that we are in these various states?

As I said, from the ancient churches, and scripture. The church has always understood that we can become justified, living by the Spirit, and become unjustified, living by the flesh. And Scripture attests to the same. God can't be mocked; we reap what we sow. Etc

 

[tdidymas]

Of course it is. God doesn't save us without our consent, as Augustine put it. He can save us any which way He wants, but instead requires that we make the decision, even as that decision is aided by grace, but grace that we can still resist.

In my experience, it wasn't permission nor consent prior to my being saved. I felt the threat of judgment, so I conceded that God was right. So it was a concession and surrender, not permission. God wasn't asking. He was telling.
TD

 

[fhansen]

In my experience, it wasn't permission nor consent prior to my being saved. I felt the threat of judgment, so I conceded that God was right. So it was a concession and surrender, not permission. God wasn't asking. He was telling.
TD

That's nice. Either way the concession, surrender, permission isn't a one-time only event; it's a continuous walk; we can cooperate-and continue to -or not.

 

[St_Worm2]

.....we can still resist the grace that seeks to inform and draw us into that state, or accept it today and reject it later at any point down the road.

Hello fhansen, considering what the Scriptures teach us about the necessity of the Father's "drawing" (His grace that makes coming to Jesus possible for us .. John 6:44, 65), how do you reconcile what you just said above with a passage like this one? If ~any~ who are drawn by the Father can forever resist coming to Lord Jesus, or come to Him and then reject Him later, why did the Lord tell us that none of these “drawn” ones will ever be lost?

John 6:37-40 (excerpt)
ALL that the Father gives me WILL come to Me, and .. of ALL that He has given Me, I LOSE NOTHING, but raise it up on the last day.
​

Thanks!

--David

John 6
44 No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.​

.

 

[corinth77777]

Here’s the problem with this statement. It sounds all spiritual, but there’s nothing there. It’s sounds like New Age thinking.

So to start, where are you getting that we are in these various states?

What do you mean by new age....For I bought a book from the book store called friendships with God ...It sounded good...but
What I would think was new age...I stopped at page 100.....New age do not believe there is Hell...but what about what the above person says is new age?

 

[corinth77777]

Hmm, a rather well-explained statement .

Funny thing is that your gospel sounds novel to me, and a bit shallow perhaps, whereas the one I speak of in any case aligns with the teachings of the ancient churches. In fact, the theology is even built into their sacraments.

Is He right? Is it new age? And what is His gosple that differs from yours....?