Is this the position of all dispys, or just some?

[myways]

There WERE two methods of salvation....LOL.

One was faith PLUS works. One is faith alone in the finished work of Christ.

Since Christ hadnt DIED yet , the Jews were under a different standard....yes, looking forward to a Messiah who would set things right for them, but NOT Christianity by any means.

Originally posted by Eph3nine

 

[Jerrysch]

There WERE two methods of salvation....LOL.

One was faith PLUS works. One is faith alone in the finished work of Christ.

Since Christ hadnt DIED yet , the Jews were under a different standard....yes, looking forward to a Messiah who would set things right for them, but NOT Christianity by any means.

Originally posted by Eph3nine

Some.

It is my belief that all who are considered "saved" are justified by faith, that is appart from works, it is the gift of God, so that no man (or woman) can bost.

 

[Jerrysch]

There WERE two methods of salvation....LOL.

One was faith PLUS works. One is faith alone in the finished work of Christ.

Since Christ hadnt DIED yet , the Jews were under a different standard....yes, looking forward to a Messiah who would set things right for them, but NOT Christianity by any means.

Originally posted by Eph3nine

Oh yes, and thank you for asking Sometime we forget to see that all do not believe the same even within our various "camps". Very astute of you to recognize this.

 

[eph3Nine]

Seems that many dont understand the difference between Judaism and the LAW, and Christianity and GRACE.

 

[TheScottsMen]

There WERE two methods of salvation....LOL.

One was faith PLUS works. One is faith alone in the finished work of Christ.

Since Christ hadnt DIED yet , the Jews were under a different standard....yes, looking forward to a Messiah who would set things right for them, but NOT Christianity by any means.

Originally posted by Eph3nine

Those of all ages who were predestined to be saved by the shed blood of Christ have always been saved by grace + faith + nothing. What about the works that seemed to be required in the OT? Grace + faith enabled them to perform these works and they were simply an outward expression of what these two God given gifts performed.

Those who performed these works (though not perfectly) were able to do so by the enabling of grace + faith.

 

[eph3Nine]

Even you should know better than to ask such a question. The Jews lived by the LAW...they were given the LAW to prove to them that it was indeed impossible to PERFORM according to Gods standard of 100% or nothing. They THOT they could do it. The law was never given with the intention of making ANYONE righteous, but to lead them to the ONLY ONE who IS. YOU know the scriptures and I dont need to post them AGAIN.

Judaism was faith plus works. They demonstrated their faith by doing what God told them to DO...circumcision, animal sacrifice (which was instituted to cover the sin God KNEW they would commit, by the way), baptism, etc etc.

You are INCORRECT when you say that salvation has always BEEN by grace thru faith plus nothing.

It is ONLY thru the preaching of the CROSS, which Paul was the ONLY one to do, that we see the purpose of the Cross and where GRACE by faith plus NOTHING comes into effect.

Israel was under the LAW. Performance WAS part of their system.

Christ is the END of the law unto righteousness to all that believe.

Israel wanted to EARN their standing with God thru thinking they COULD obey the law. God used the law to show them that this was NOT the case. NONETHELESS,. they were still UNDER IT, as they ASKED for and signed UP for a LAW contract with God. See Leviticus 26 for the blessings if they obeyed and the cursings if they didnt. They still have ONE course of curses to go thru before this contract is finished, and it will take place at the GREAT TRIBULATION, or the time of Jacobs trouble.

That is just a brief overview. If you would like a CD with specifics and an entire study of the Leviticus 26 agreement that Israel made with God , and where in HISTORY the other four courses of curses have already come to pass, I will provide it for you FREE.

Its an eye opener for sure.

 

[Jerrysch]

Those of all ages who were predestined to be saved by the shed blood of Christ have always been saved by grace + faith + nothing. What about the works that seemed to be required in the OT? Grace + faith enabled them to perform these works and they were simply an outward expression of what these two God given gifts performed.

Those who performed these works (though not perfectly) were able to do so by the enabling of grace + faith.

 

[Jerrysch]

You are INCORRECT when you say that salvation has always BEEN by grace thru faith plus nothing.

.

Don't know if your responce was directed to me???


But for the sake of this thread, not all Dispys believe what you have presented.From my studies it seems as if only Pauline Dispies believe this, but I could be wrong. (I thought I was wrong once... but I was mistaken).

 

[TheScottsMen]

Our differences can be found in our views of soteriology. You once claimed you had studied the doctrine of “Sovereign Grace.” Yet when asked what books you read, you did not answer. Why is that? I really don't believe you have studied either view. You are an Arminian Pauline Dispensationalist because those books you have read were written by such man. You claim you are not Arminian (though I believe you state this because you have never studied what an Arminian believes) and you are allowed to do so. Nevertheless, a man can also call himself a woman, and deny that he is man, but claiming so does not make him a woman.

I believe you have read many good books my Grace authors. However, I also believe you have a hard time having an original thought and not cheerleading simply what you have read. This can be proved by looking at just about everyone of your post; each argument posted could be placed back to another grace author: just about word for word. Your post above is a good example as it carries the same mantras found by other grace authors.

Where are you in all this?

 

[Jerrysch]

Our differences can be found in our views of soteriology. You once claimed you had studied the doctrine of “Sovereign Grace.” Yet when asked what books you read, you did not answer. Why is that?

You have denied you are Arminian in your doctrine of Soteriology; and you are allowed to do so. Nevertheless, a man can also call himself a woman, and deny that he is man, but claiming so does not make him a woman.

I believe you have read many good books my Grace authors. However, I also believe you have a hard time having an original thought and not cheerleading simply what you have read. This can be proved by looking at just about everyone of your post; each argument posted could be placed back to another grace author: just about word for word.
Your post above carries the same mantras found by other grace authors.

Where are you in all this?

Who are you addressing?

 

[TheScottsMen]

Who are you addressing?

Eph39

 

[eph3Nine]

Oh come on now..much of what I have posted has been my own words or words that express my personal belief. Who has time to type out all this stuff over and over, when its been penned well by those who believe the same? I dont. So please dont impune either what I believe or what I have to say. Others have simply said it better, and as far as I know, its NOT a sin to quote them.

I am not arminian in my beliefs. I am Pauline and mid acts. Period.

What difference does it make whose words they are....the bottom line is "what saith the scriptures" and there is plenty of that in all my threads. So...are you complaining cuz you dont like the message, or is it that you dont like the messenger. Its ok if you dont like me. I really dont mind.

 

[TheScottsMen]

Oh come on now..much of what I have posted has been my own words or words that express my personal belief. Who has time to type out all this stuff over and over, when its been penned well by those who believe the same? I dont. So please dont impune either what I believe or what I have to say. Others have simply said it better, and as far as I know, its NOT a sin to quote them.

What difference does it make whose words they are....the bottom line is "what saith the scriptures" and there is plenty of that in all my threads. So...are you complaining cuz you dont like the message, or is it that you dont like the messenger. Its ok if you dont like me. I really dont mind.

Nope, I don't mind you.
But you can be sure whenever you post about Calvinism or Arminianism, a subject you seem to have never studied, I will respond.

And just as we both believe that dispensationalism did not begin with Darby or Scofield, neither do I believe that Calvinism began with Calvin or Augustine, but is found in the very scriptures these men read.

Also, to claim that they came to these conclusions because did they did not "rightly divide" will not hold water; being a Pauline Dispensationalist, or a so called "right divider", I also came to these conclusions.

TSM

 

[eph3Nine]

I simply dont like labels...but that doesnt mean I dont know what they mean. I am a mid acts , pauline, dispensationalist. That covers it all. OH, and I proudly display the badge of "member of the Body of Christ"...how we GOT there will be a topic of much interest to all when we get to glory, wont it? WINK