Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I pointed out that in his letter to the Galatians that was, at times, the case. But not in Romans 7.
You are also ignoring my points about Circumcision Salvationism.
So I attempted to correct that unbiblical line of thinking.
Just read the verses and it evident.
Why should I bother with them? You started talking about works salvation, I didn't. I was addressing something else entirely in my first post to this thread which began our back-and-forth.
What unbiblical line of thinking? My initial post to this thread had nothing whatever to do with "Circumcision Salvation."
I'm afraid very little of what you think is "evident" actually is. But, honestly, I couldn't care less about your views on "Circumcision Salvationism." I certainly didn't post to this thread with any intention of discussing it. So, why are you making it an issue?
We are not saved by Works Salvationism.
That charge gets thrown around alot falsely.
Obeying God as a part of being loyal to Him is not Works Salvationism.
It also is not in contradiction to one being first saved by God's grace through faith in Jesus Christ.
Sanctification is the 2nd work of God, and Justification is the 1st work of God.
Both are works of God in the salvation process.
Paul was not arguing against the Sanctification Process for salvation, but he was arguing against "Circumcision Salvationism" or Law Alone salvationism that attempted to attack the Justification Process (the 1st work of God done in a believer's life).
Understanding this basic view on Soteriology helps us to understand why we are to be sober and vilgilant because the devil seeks those in whom he may devour.
With a proper view of Soteriology, one can properly understand spiritual warfare and how the devil seeks to destroy all people (Both believers and unbelievers).
Many today do not have the mind of Christ and they justify sin and evil.
This of course is why we must put on the breastplate of righteousness so that we can stand in the evil day and to stand against the schemes of the devil.
Again, it is illogical for Jesus to pray for Peter's faith to not fail if there was no possibility of Peter's faith failing. You don't believe that a Christian's faith will fail. Yet, Jesus prayed so that Peter's faith would not fail.
Also, Jesus said, "“O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones God’s messengers! How often I have wanted to gather your children together as a hen protects her chicks beneath her wings, but you wouldn’t let me." (Matthew 23:37) (NLT).
So here we see the Lord's will not coming to pass. Jesus desired the children of Jerusalem to be gathered together like a hen protects her chicks, but they would not let him do so. It was not because GOD elected them to do so.
Yes, Peter can refer to "us" as the whole of humanity.
If things are as you say, then GOD would be responsible for people remaining as sinners with them never having any kind of hope of salvation. What about the whole, love your enemies thing Jesus taught?
Also, Scripture says that GOD is angry at the wicked every day (Psalms 7:11). So...... why is GOD angry at His own decision to make some to remain as sinners?
Why did it grieve GOD in Genesis 6 that many in the global flood turned out to be wicked?
Could not GOD just elect them to salvation whereby He would no longer feel grieved by their wickedness? Come on now. Your belief here makes no sense in light of Scripture.
Romans 2:4 does not say Unconditional Election or describe a process like Unconditional Election. You are just injecting your biased belief into this verse and not comparing Scripture with Scripture.
"Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off." (Romans 11:22).
Try re-reading the verse again in context.
It does not read with a Calvinistic bias. Nothing is suggestive here of a forced repentance given to Israel.
Peter is defending his position to the unbelieving Jews and he is saying that Savior is at the right hand of God and that He can give repentance to Israel if they want it.
This does not mean Israel at that time as a nation repented.
So the fact that Israel as a nation did not receive repentance is proof that Peter was not talking about how Jesus was giving some kind of forced repentance upon the nation of Israel.
It is talking about the chastisement or correction of the OT saint and not forced salvation.
This is a heart felt cry of help from God to serve Him again, and not some kind of talk of forced regeneration. Here is is in the NLT.
"I have heard Israel saying, ‘You disciplined me severely, like a calf that needs training for the yoke. Turn me again to you and restore me, for you alone are the LORD my God." (Jeremiah 31:18) (NLT).
Hear the cry of the OT saint here? He is crying for help for God to restore Him and to turn Him back to God's good ways.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?