Total Posts:175|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Soteriology for Annanicole

PGA
Posts: 4,032
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 10:45:43 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Hi Annanicole,

I would like to start with a discussion and questions from your second round of debate in "A Christian can not lose salvation"? in which you took the negative position.

I believe you may be confusing the two covenants as to which you are under, the letter of the law and works, or the letter of the Spirit and grace. That is basically what this discussion is about. Does God save or do you, or both you and God. To put it another way; does God save you through your works or through His works of grace?

But there was more to the question: I continued and asked, "Does that freedom of choice exist, and can it be exercised? If not, what prevents it?" I even stated that your position demands continuous miracles. I trust that an explanation will be forthcoming. -Anna

It depends what you mean by free. Can we use our volition? Yes, I believe we can.

Is our volition, our choice free of any baggage or are we always in bondage to the nature we possess? IOW's, does our worldview or foundational beliefs shape what we believe? I believe the Bible shows it does. In talking with unbelievers I believe it shows. Romans 8:6-8 seems to suggests that the sinful mind is not only hostile to God, but dead to God. Jesus came to give life. Jesus said that it depends on what a man builds his house upon, whether sinking sand or solid ground. John 6:37 and 44, as starters seem to express the view that it is God who enables or draws someone to His Son.

Will a man come to God unless God first enables him to?

Ephesians 2:1-3 suggests not, as do passage after passage in the NT.

Not only this but the subject/object relationship in the NT (or OT) points to God as the object of our salvation - not us in any way. We only receive from Him. There is nothing I can do to save myself. So, if God saves me, is He not capable of saving me forever? If He is not capable then He is not sovereign or almighty. A mere man can thwart His plans.

"You ask: "I ask my opponent how can one who gained salvation and became a new creature within Christ then become the old creature again or lose that grace?" -DB

"Why, by exercising his God-given right to think, analyze,and make his choices. In the first century, a paramount problem was the reversion to Judaism, which was and is characterized by the rejection of Jesus as the Son of God. Apparently that problem plagued the Christians in Galatia: "Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free. (Gal 5: 1) That statement is the equivalent of saying they are saved. -Annanicole

Just like DH46, I also question, based on other Scriptures, whether these Scriptures are discussing saved people or just those who profess to believe? If they really truly believed, not just professed, then I believe that God is able and does keep them from rejecting the Son. Various passages imply that, like Jude 24.

Jude 1:24

New International Version (NIV)
Doxology

24 To him who is able to keep you from stumbling and to present you before his glorious presence without fault and with great joy"

One of the two question for you is just that - Is He able?
The second is, Will He save His people or will He just make salvation possible and His people save themselves?

Now what? Well, the instructions: "be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage." The yoke of bondage was Judaism. Notice that the warning implies possibility? It could happen. Continue to Gal 5: 4: "Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace." That is how one can "lose that grace": he can simply reject it. And if he does, then Christ "is become of no effect unto you." He once was "of effect," now he has "become of no effect." Thus, the warning which, like any warning, implies danger. Therefore, "let him that thinks he stands take heed lest he fall." (I Cor 10: 12) -Annanicole

Again, if God alone saves then He will save and save completely and perfectly. If salvation is part of God and part of man - synergism - then I don't see how you can reconcile the various passages that suggest otherwise.

Isaiah 43:10-13

New International Version (NIV)

10 "You are my witnesses," declares the Lord,
"and my servant whom I have chosen,
so that you may know and believe me
and understand that I am he.
Before me no god was formed,
nor will there be one after me.
11 I, even I, am the Lord,
and apart from me there is no savior.
12 I have revealed and saved and proclaimed"
I, and not some foreign god among you.
You are my witnesses," declares the Lord, "that I am God.
13 Yes, and from ancient days I am he.
No one can deliver out of my hand.
When I act, who can reverse it?"


If God acts to save you then can little old sovereign you deny God?

Isaiah 45:21

New International Version (NIV)

21 Declare what is to be, present it"
let them take counsel together.
Who foretold this long ago,
who declared it from the distant past?
Was it not I, the Lord?
And there is no God apart from me,
a righteous God and a Savior;
there is none but me.


Is there any other savior apart from God? If not then who does the saving? Do you aid God by your 'good works?' I don't think so (Romans 3:12). If God does not create/do the work through you I believe you work in vain (Eph. 2:10). If Jesus did not live a perfect life of works before God on your behalf then what perfect work are you going to do before Him, for God is perfect and just?

Are you justified through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ or do you have to justify yourself?

Is your trust in yourself as well as Him or just Him and what He has done, as Double Helix 46 also question?

Are you trying to justify yourself by the law, which Christ fulfilled/accomplished and nailed to the cross as the passage in Galatians 3:10-18 states as it discusses the two covenants (please review). These early believers who professed faith in Christ were living a double life, doing what was already done for them by Christ and the New Covenant. There trust was not fully on the work of Christ but also in what they could do to justify themselves. They wanted to do the work (or some of it) instead of God doing the work in them. I believe that is why Christ had become of little effect to them. The seed of faith was there but it had not germinated into full fledged trust and reliance on Christ. They were guilty of trying to work for their salvation instead of putting their faith and trust completely in Christ's finished actions. If they continued on this route their faith would be shipwrecked. You can't live by both the old and new covenants because the old one of works is not able to save completely. That is why it perished; it was abolished because it could not save completely.

Peter
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 2:50:09 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
PGA: "I believe you may be confusing the two covenants as to which you are under, the letter of the law and works, or the letter of the Spirit and grace. "

Anna: No, if by two covenants you means the Mosaic Law as opposed to the Law of Christ, I do not. I sharply draw the distinction, and place the dividing line at the cross.

PGA: "That is basically what this discussion is about."

Anna: The question is whether a child of God can be severed from Christ and fall from grace, specifically.

**************

I will hit the high points - or what I consider to be the high points - for the most part simply pointing out the differences.

In the first place, the topic in question is not the beginning, but rather the end as we will see in the responses.

PGA: "as starters seem to express the view that it is God who enables or draws someone to His Son."

Anna: God draws us by the gospel. As pointed out to DoubleHelix, his position starts out by demanding miracles - and in his case he continued to demand them. It was never a question of whether God draws: the question was ever and always, "How?" My position is that God draws us by the good news, the gospel.

PGA: "Will a man come to God unless God first enables him to? Ephesians 2:1-3 suggests not"

Anna: I am surprised that a person who seems to understand the salient points of certain difficult prophesies would think that a person cannot believe and obey the gospel unless God has first mysteriously and inexplicably acted on him in some way.

"For I am not ashamed of the gospel: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek."

There are plenty of atheists on this site. Your position is that you may talk and type til the cows come home, but unless the God of heaven directly "draws" - or "illuminates" or "enlightens" or "reveals" or whatever word you choose - these people, then they are helpless, hapless, and hopeless. My response is that I doubt that such is the case, but if it is, then God evidently draws everyone just the same - and the power still lies with man to either accept or reject the gospel message.

PGA: "There is nothing I can do to save myself."

Anna: Not literally, but metaphorically you can.

"And with many other words he testified, and exhorted them, saying, Save yourselves from this crooked generation." (Acts 2: 40)

If my suspicions are correct, you confute and confuse doing something in order to be saved with saving yourself. If someone says that you must be baptized, you express horror and somehow think that such a necessity reflects upon the blood of Christ.

I believe that the Bible is plain ... very clear ... that men must do something in order for God to save them. This idea is expressed again and again.

Anna: "Why, by exercising his God-given right to think, analyze,and make his choices. In the first century, a paramount problem was the reversion to Judaism, which was and is characterized by the rejection of Jesus as the Son of God. Apparently that problem plagued the Christians in Galatia: "Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free. (Gal 5: 1) That statement is the equivalent of saying they are saved. -Annanicole

PGA: Just like DH46, I also question, based on other Scriptures, whether these Scriptures are discussing saved people or just those who profess to believe?

Anna: LOL, it must be "based upon other scriptures", for the doctrine cannot find a glimmer of hope in the scripture cited. Most assuredly Paul did not tell unsaved people to "stand fast in the liberty". The epistle was written to saved people, the church. Paul is encouraging, exhorting, and warning these saved people to hold their ground, stand fast.

*****************

Now what? Well, the instructions: "be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage." The yoke of bondage was Judaism. Notice that the warning implies possibility? It could happen. Continue to Gal 5: 4: "Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace." That is how one can "lose that grace": he can simply reject it. And if he does, then Christ "is become of no effect unto you." He once was "of effect," now he has "become of no effect." Thus, the warning which, like any warning, implies danger. Therefore, "let him that thinks he stands take heed lest he fall." (I Cor 10: 12) -Annanicole

PGA: "Again, if God alone saves then He will save and save completely and perfectly. If salvation is part of God and part of man - synergism - then I don't see how you can reconcile the various passages that suggest otherwise."


Anna: "Saved" quite often simply means the remission of past sins along with the concomitant promise: "if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin". "Saved" does not mean "cleansed from all sin - past, present, and future - whether one walks in the light or not."

As stated in the debate, I believe: the question often reduces to, "Can a saved person - a child of God, a Christian - revert to unbelief, including Judaism?" Is that possible? If not, then old Paul wasted a ton of time.

PGA: "Isaiah 43:10-13 and Isaiah 45:21"

Anna: Do you intend to employ the Old Testament to prove the impossibility of apostasy? I am asking first, because I've never seen a Calvinist yet who wouldn't use the OT as far as it suited him - but when it turns on him, as it inevitably does, he will cry, "You're going back to the old law." So I'll just ask first.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
PGA
Posts: 4,032
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 4:45:17 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Hi again. To continue with your second response:

"If we were to believe that we could lose salvation then that would lead us to try and keep it by works and this is not the case." -DH46

"Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling." (Phil 2: 12)How about you re-word your statement just a tad to this: "If we were to believe that we could lose salvation then that would lead us to try and keep it by continuing to believe, and this is not the case. See? That won't work, will it? -Annanicole


Working out our salvation is different from working for our salvation as the very next verse of Philippians 2 explains:

Philippians 2:13

New International Version (NIV)

13 for it is God who works in you to will and to act in order to fulfill his good purpose

Again, it is God who works, not you. He uses your will in a way that does not compromise or interfere with your volition. It is something you will to do in love, not out of compulsion to earn or work for your salvation, and thus maintain it by works. IOW's, you do it because you want to, not because you have to. Working was something required by the Old Covenant. It was something you tried to earn - merit or favor - and that is what these people were in danger of reverting to instead of trusting the sacrifice of Christ. When you do something in love you do it not to earn the wages of salvation or maintain them, but out of love for the One who has given it to you freely. If it is free then you do not have to pay for it or merit it by working for it.

Is salvation a free gift? For you it appears it is not.

2 Corinthians 5:14-15

New International Version (NIV)

14 For Christ"s love compels us, because we are convinced that one died for all, and therefore all died. 15 And he died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for him who died for them and was raised again.

When you do something in love for someone do you do it because you fell obligated or because you value them and set them above yourself? If it is an obligation, a duty, then are you working out of bondage, not out of freedom, IMO. I believe Galatians 5:3 puts such an obligation under the law of the Old Covenant, not under Christ and the new.
***

"Our salvation is by accepting Christ by His sacrifice and by no works of the self." -DH 46

Well, that's not the topic, but I'll simply point out that the statement itself is contradictory. You are telling people, "There's nothing you can do", then turning around and telling them what they have to do. Who had to "accept Christ""? Somebody did. If someone "accepts Christ", then he has done something. And if he did something, he "worked" either mentally or physically.

Hear your words: -Annanicole

Man has done nothing that contributes to his salvation. What kind of works would earn our salvation? That would only be perfect works, something that no man other than Christ can do. Faith believes in His sacrifice as the only sacrifice that is pleasing to God for salvation.

If we could lose salvation then that would mean that we are not justified by Christ blood alone but by our own actions. The only action required from us is the action of acceptance." -Dh46

Look at that. You attempt to prove that salvation is not maintained based upon actions. And what is your basic argument? That initial salvation was not based upon, in any way, your own actions. Then you do a two-step and say, "The only action required from us ..." "Sir, I could care less if it's one action or one thousand prior to salvation: you still conceded your entire point by saying, "The only action required ..." -Annanicole

The work we are justified by is not any work of our own - none. It is the work that Jesus Christ did in our behalf and that God does in us and through us. It is our faith, our trust, our reliance, our dependance on this work, not on a single thing we can do. That is the work of salvation, to BELIEVE/trust in what Jesus has done for us. IN WHAT HE HAS DONE FOR US.

John 12:37

New International Version (NIV)
Belief and Unbelief Among the Jews

37 Even after Jesus had performed so many signs in their presence, they still would not believe in him.

It is always what Jesus does. Unless God works in you you will not believe.

John 6:28-29

New International Version (NIV)

28 Then they asked him, "What must we do to do the works God requires?"

29 Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent."

Again, I see it is a work of God, not us. Believing is putting you trust, faith, reliance, your everything in Jesus Christ.From that trust God's works follow, those works that He works in us. That faith in Jesus is what counts, what earns salvation for us. His sacrifice, His intercessor, His priesthood, His perfect obedience to the Father, His offering, His blood, His grace and so on.

***

"Once salvation is given then works do follow and we see this throught the book of James." -DH46

What we see in James is: "What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him? " Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone " Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only." (v. 14, 17, 24) Your doctrine seems to me to be: "I was given salvation based upon a dead faith " and I can ride my dead faith on to heaven."

I look at it this way: God gives us the works through faith, faith that comes from believing Him/His Son, His word, not faith in our works, but faith in what He has prepared to do in and through us. These are what count, what earn reward, what God does through us. But this does not in any way mean that these works earn us any of our salvation. That work is by God alone. It is all through the sovereign grace of God.

Acts 13:47-48

New International Version (NIV)

47 For this is what the Lord has commanded us:

""I have made you[a] a light for the Gentiles,
that you[b] may bring salvation to the ends of the earth."[c]"

48 When the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and honored the word of the Lord; and all who were appointed for eternal life believed.

Again, This passage suggests to me that belief that leads to salvation is from the sovereign Lord God. It is not a work that originates from me.

Peter
janetsanders733
Posts: 288
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 5:32:03 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
How can there be assurance of salvation of there is no eternal security? Obviously eternal security is from God. We can not lose our salvation. Our security is in the Father and the son a double act. Over and Over Jesus repeatedly said that we would not perish, be taken, snatched, or removed.
PGA
Posts: 4,032
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 8:28:15 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
PGA: "That is basically what this discussion is about."

Anna: The question is whether a child of God can be severed from Christ and fall from grace, specifically.

Granted, and that brings into play the Calvin verse Arminian positions. The question of whether a child of God can severe the relationship boils down to whether Christ's sacrifice is able to obtain our eternal salvation and God alone saves or whether there is something we must also do to earn it. Is Christ's sacrifice of Himself not enough? If salvation is from God alone, by His grace alone, then it nullifies us earning or doing anything or taking ourselves out. Does He purchase us, or do we contribute to that purchase. Are we drowning and He throws us a lifeline in order to save us, then we do the rest, or does He dive in and grab hold of us, then bring us safely to shore. I contend that if He saves us then it is His work alone and He saves us completely by doing everything that is needed to be done. I also contend that there is a great difference between the Old and New Covenants, most particularly the old was based on works whereas the new is based solely on grace, the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ in what He has done.

The Old Covenant required constant works by man to make himself right with God. It is always a temporary sacrifice which is followed by more works, then more again. In contrast I do not believe the new does require anything else because of the work of Christ. Ephesians 2:8 is clear that salvation is not by works so that no man can boast - it is a gift of God. If a gift then you cannot work for it. You either believe God has done all that is necessary to obtain our salvation or you need to work along with Him to secure it.

If we are partly responsible, then we can take ourselves out of that salvation, but if He alone saves then He has a firm grip of us.

If Christ Jesus died on the cross just to make salvation possible then it is possible that He died in vain for then we too have to do something also and that something might not be enough to appease a righteous, holy, pure, God. It would require other sacrifices other than the once for all sacrifice of Christ. It would mean that His sacrifice was not sufficient, just like the OT sacrifices were not sufficient.

**************

I will hit the high points - or what I consider to be the high points - for the most part simply pointing out the differences.

In the first place, the topic in question is not the beginning, but rather the end as we will see in the responses.

PGA: "as starters seem to express the view that it is God who enables or draws someone to His Son."

Anna: God draws us by the gospel. As pointed out to DoubleHelix, his position starts out by demanding miracles - and in his case he continued to demand them. It was never a question of whether God draws: the question was ever and always, "How?" My position is that God draws us by the good news, the gospel. -Annanicole

So the question still is whether God saves or whether we have a part in it through our works. If He saves then what kind of salvation would it be if He can't save us completely? How could you trust in a God who may or may not be able to truly save you?

Also, if it partly depends on us then How does a dead man respond to anything? If we are dead in our sins and our hostile nature how do we get that jump start?. We are incapable of anything. Ever seen a dead man move?

Ephesians 2:1-3

New International Version (NIV)
Made Alive in Christ

2 As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, 2 in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. 3 All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our flesh[a] and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature deserving of wrath. 4 But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5 made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions"it is by grace you have been saved.

So in these verses we see that God acts to save. Where is our part? We also know from John 3:3-5 or 1 Corinthians 2 that the Spirit works in the life of the believer to give them understanding and also regenerate them. The person without the Spirit is incapable of understand the deep things of God. So it is not something that we do to save ourselves, at least as of yet in any way. Where are the acts/works that we are responsible for in our salvation to make it a joint effort?

1 Corinthians 2:14-16

New International Version (NIV)

14 The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit. 15 The person with the Spirit makes judgments about all things, but such a person is not subject to merely human judgments, 16 for,

"Who has known the mind of the Lord
so as to instruct him?"[a]

But we have the mind of Christ.

PGA: "Will a man come to God unless God first enables him to? Ephesians 2:1-3 suggests not"

Anna: I am surprised that a person who seems to understand the salient points of certain difficult prophesies would think that a person cannot believe and obey the gospel unless God has first mysteriously and inexplicably acted on him in some way.

See 1 Corinthians 2:14

"For I am not ashamed of the gospel: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek."

There are plenty of atheists on this site. Your position is that you may talk and type til the cows come home, but unless the God of heaven directly "draws" - or "illuminates" or "enlightens" or "reveals" or whatever word you choose - these people, then they are helpless, hapless, and hopeless. My response is that I doubt that such is the case, but if it is, then God evidently draws everyone just the same - and the power still lies with man to either accept or reject the gospel message. -Annanicole

Sure, because unless God's Spirit is at work in their lives to draw them to Christ they do not have ears to hear or eyes to see and believe, just like those in the first century did not.

I agree that God uses the gospels to draw men to Himself, but if God wanted every man to be saved and it is evident that not all men are saved then His power to draw all men or save all men is pathetic (heaven forbid). In such a case the lowly creature can thwart the Almighty. But it also makes verses like the one in Isaiah 43 and 45 a mockery because it shows that God alone cannot save. He requires the creature He is trying to save to help Him.

Another issue, as I mentioned before is, does man in his sinful nature really have the power or freedom to choose God without first God offering His grace to man? Well if man is indeed dead to God and needs to be made alive, then God must first act on mans behalf, and He has done that in Christ and by His Spirit. The gospel is the good news of what Christ has done, what He has accomplished on our behalves. It is finished! Yet two atheists can read the gospels and one come to faith and another reject it. Surely God is powerful enough to save both through the power of His word?

Thirdly, can man satisfy God's justice by any other act other than the action that Christ took on man's behalf? If man can satisfy God's justice then what did Christ die for?

If man cannot satisfy God's justice by saving himself then God saves alone and sufficiently to keep us saved. He is able, therefore. If God saves you He gives you the means to persevere in His salvation. If He saves you then how can you not be saved?

Peter
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 9:23:48 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
This passage was mentioned in the debate with DoubleHelix and has been also mentioned here:

"Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise. But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, so also it is now. Howbeit what saith the scripture? Cast out the handmaid and her son: for the son of the handmaid shall not inherit with the son of the freewoman. Wherefore, brethren, we are not children of a handmaid, but of the freewoman. For freedom did Christ set us free: stand fast therefore, and be not entangled again in a yoke of bondage. Behold, I Paul say unto you, that, if ye receive circumcision, Christ will profit you nothing. Yea, I testify again to every man that receiveth circumcision, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Ye are severed from Christ, ye would be justified by the law; ye are fallen away from grace."

Paul is writing, of course, to the churches of the province of Galatia, and the thrust of his letter is a demonstration of the superiority of the Law of Christ over the Law of Moses, with a goal of preventing falling back to the dead works of Judaism. Those who did so were said to "crucify the Son of God afresh".

The idea that the above passage is directed towards people who were never saved to start with is, to me, a pure fabrication borne out of desperation. It basically boils down to, "It doesn't mean what it says, because it can't mean what it says."

"For freedom did Christ set us free". An unsaved person has not been "set free" in any sense of the phrase. Yet Paul is including the objects of the first several verses of Galatians as those who have been "set free".

" ... be not entangled again in a yoke of bondage." A person cannot become "entangled again" in something from which he has never been extricated.

"Ye are severed from Christ". Again, a limb or branch cannot be severed from that of which it was never a part.

"ye are fallen away from grace" And once again, a person cannot fall away from a place where he never was.

I did not look back at the old debate, but I'm sure I said pretty much the same thing there. I do recall stating that the entire proposition boils down to the question, "Can a believer become an unbeliever?" or "Can a Christian embrace Judaism, and can a Jew embrace Christianity?"

Those who answer "No, No, Yes" are faced with the daunting task of explaining why Paul and other inspired men constantly warned his fellow believers, most of whom were converts from Judaism, of the danger of reverting to it - when such a danger was impossible.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 9:50:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
PGA: "The question of whether a child of God can severe the relationship boils down to whether Christ's sacrifice is able to obtain our eternal salvation and God alone saves or whether there is something we must also do to earn it."

Anna: LMAO! Well, I'll give ya credit for one thing: Christ's sacrifice is indeed "able to obtain everyone's eternal salvation" + God alone saves + God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance = universalism

Of course, that is just too silly to be true - and even you do not affirm it; however, you argue right along those lines. In fact, every Calvinist cozies right up to univeralism, then tries to shy away from it right before the door closes. They must do so.

I'm not exactly sure that I understand your doctrine.

The jailer inquired, "Sirs, what must I do ... get that ... what must I DO ... in order to be saved?" Had you been there, you could have said (as I think I told Helix), "Nothing. There's not a thing you can do. Just 'be saved'."

With a view to that, exactly how would you answer the question, "What must I do to be saved?" Remember, I'm not asking you what God is going to do. I'm not asking what I must sit around and wait on God to do in me or for me. I'm asking, "What must I do?"

**********

PGA: "Is Christ's sacrifice of Himself not enough?"

Anna: I'll answer that when you tell us what one must do in order to be saved - once again, not confusing the matter with what God might do for us or in us.

**********

PGA: "Ephesians 2:8 is clear that salvation is not by works so that no man can boast - it is a gift of God. If a gift then you cannot work for it."

Anna: Do you honestly think that anyone believes that he can work for and earn his salvation, or is this just a smokescreen that you throw up? I'd like a "yes" or "no" on that. If you have met someone who says, "I can work for and earn my own salvation", then I'd like to know that person's name.

**********

Anna: "The question is whether a child of God can be severed from Christ and fall from grace, specifically."

I never this specifically answered. Well, I take that back. I have seen it answered, by Paul. I haven't seen it specifically answered here.

*********

So the question still is whether God saves or whether we have a part in it through our works.

Well, the question would be whether or not you claim to be saved by a dead faith or by no faith at all.

I'll stop right here and ask again, "What must we do?" or "What must I do to be saved?" Is your answer, "Nothing. You can't do a thing." I'll just wait on that before proceeding - and, please, I beg of you, don't start doing like some have done and proceed to tell us about what all God does as if God somehow directly flips you from an unbeliever into a believer. I am asking specifically what you must do .... you .... you .... you .... in order to be saved, or have the remission of past sins.

Another question: Is the word "saved" used in very different senses, depending upon the passage? Or does "saved" mean the same thing every time is seen? If different senses, could you rattle off the most common senses, ranging from the most limited to broadest?

***********

"Sure, because unless God's Spirit is at work in their lives to draw them to Christ"

Does not God's spirit draw through His established means, the scriptures or word of God? Or is there something additional needed?

**********

I agree that God uses the gospels to draw men to Himself, but if God wanted every man to be saved and it is evident that not all men are saved then His power to draw all men or save all men is pathetic (heaven forbid). In such a case the lowly creature can thwart the Almighty. But it also makes verses like the one in Isaiah 43 and 45 a mockery because it shows that God alone cannot save. He requires the creature He is trying to save to help Him.

Well, we'll see. No doubt you are familiar with the case of King Saul. If not, here are the high points of Saul's "conversion":

A.King Saul was chosen. "Samuel said to all the people, See ye him whom the Lord hath chosen." (I Sam 10: 24)
B.King Saul was anointed. "Samuel took a vial of oil, and poured it upon his head ... .the Lord hath anointed thee." (I Sam 10: 1)
C.The Spirit of God was promised to come upon Saul. "And the Spirit of the LORD will come upon thee." (I Sam 10: 6)
D.Likewise, the ability to prophesy was promised to Saul. "...and thou shalt prophesy with them." (I Sam 10: 6)
E.Saul would be turned into 'another man.' "... and shalt be turned into another man." (I Sam 10: 6)
F.The signs promised to Saul (in 10: 6) came to pass. "... and all those signs came to pass that day." (I Sam 10: 9)
G.Saul was given another heart. "God gave him another heart." (I Sam 10: 9)
H.The Spirit of God came upon Saul. " .. the Spirit of God came upon him." (I Sam 10: 10)
I.Saul prophesied. " ... he prophesied among them." (I Sam 10: 10)
J.Again, the Spirit of God came upon Saul. (I Sam 11: 6)
K.Saul offered sacrifices to God. "And Saul said, Bring hither a burnt offering to me, and peace offerings. And he offered the burnt offering." (I Sam 13: 9)
L.Saul built an altar (worshiped) the Lord. "And Saul built an altar unto the LORD." (I Samuel 14: 35)

Chosen, anointed, Spirit upon him, prophesied, turned into another man with another heart, and worshiped. Was he saved? Tell us - because later events certainly imply that he did not remain saved.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 9:58:09 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I forgot to answer:

"Another issue, as I mentioned before is, does man in his sinful nature really have the power or freedom to choose God without first God offering His grace to man?"

Certainly a man who has, through the force of habit, developed sinful tendencies does not have the power nor ability to turn to God without understanding God's word. Faith comes by hearing - not direct operations - and hearing is derived from the word of God, the gospel.

The gospel - not direct operations of the Spirit - is God's power unto salvation; in fact, the word of God is the medium which the Spirit employs. Do you mean to imply that an atheist cannot possibly believe, for instance, John 3: 16 or Acts 2: 38 unless the Holy Spirit swoops in and enables him to believe it?

The question again revolves around "What must I DO to be saved?" I have actually had a few strict Calvinists who stood up and said, "Nothing. You can't do anything." Most, however, simply will not say it. The majority never answer, and enter into this long, drawn-out harangue about God making believers, implying that He does so separate and distinct from the word of God.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
PGA
Posts: 4,032
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2013 6:52:35 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/31/2013 9:23:48 PM, annanicole wrote:
This passage was mentioned in the debate with DoubleHelix and has been also mentioned here:

"Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise. But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, so also it is now. Howbeit what saith the scripture? Cast out the handmaid and her son: for the son of the handmaid shall not inherit with the son of the freewoman. Wherefore, brethren, we are not children of a handmaid, but of the freewoman. For freedom did Christ set us free: stand fast therefore, and be not entangled again in a yoke of bondage. Behold, I Paul say unto you, that, if ye receive circumcision, Christ will profit you nothing. Yea, I testify again to every man that receiveth circumcision, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Ye are severed from Christ, ye would be justified by the law; ye are fallen away from grace."

Paul is writing, of course, to the churches of the province of Galatia, and the thrust of his letter is a demonstration of the superiority of the Law of Christ over the Law of Moses, with a goal of preventing falling back to the dead works of Judaism. Those who did so were said to "crucify the Son of God afresh".

The idea that the above passage is directed towards people who were never saved to start with is, to me, a pure fabrication borne out of desperation. It basically boils down to, "It doesn't mean what it says, because it can't mean what it says."

In the body of believers did Jesus not say to let the wheat grow with the weeds?

I believe that Paul issued warnings to encourage, test and make sure that these people professing Christ were in fact grasping the significance of the difference between the old and new covenants. These warnings were checks and balances to make sure those professing Christ actually did. It was not for Paul, or you or I, to decide who would go to heaven, but to ensure that these professing Christ understood the significance of what Christ had done on their behalf. Some were in danger of turning back to Judaism, meaning they did not understand the full implications of Christ's sacrifice or the new covenant. Jesus Himself warned in the gospels that the tares and wheat would grow together until the harvest, that for some the gospel message would get choked out before it had time to get fully established, produce fruit and multiply.

So, in answer to your question, yes, I believe it is possible that some of these people were not truly saved (at least up to the present time of Paul's writing) because they had not fully trusted Christ or understood what He had done to secure the salvation of those who would believe. Paul was writing to both wheat and tares. He was helping the true believer to work out their salvation with fear and trembling, because it was the Lord working in them. He was also giving those who doubted a chance to grasp the significance of Christ over the old covenant system so that they too could fully turn to Him and be saved.

"For freedom did Christ set us free". An unsaved person has not been "set free" in any sense of the phrase. Yet Paul is including the objects of the first several verses of Galatians as those who have been "set free".
" ... be not entangled again in a yoke of bondage." A person cannot become "entangled again" in something from which he has never been extricated.

"Ye are severed from Christ". Again, a limb or branch cannot be severed from that of which it was never a part. -Anna

Again, I see in these congregations or bodies of believers (those professing Christ as Lord), those who truly believed and were understanding the significance of what Christ had done, yet others were tasting of this freedom by being part of the true body of believers, yet had not placed full trust in Christ. They were in the process of leaving Judaism, yet kept looking back to it. Some were still clinging to dead works because of the influence the Old Testament still had over them. Paul had to reform the image of Christ in them, instruct them over again until Christ took root in them. They did not want to fully let go of these OT works. Paul is reminding them of their freedom in Christ as opposed to the bondage of the Old Covenant. If the significance of the message did not take effect then they would be crucifying Christ all over again because they would return to something that could not save.


"ye are fallen away from grace" And once again, a person cannot fall away from a place where he never was. -Anna

You can fall when you falsely believe. They had seen and tasted the grace of God in Christ in their fellowship with believers rooted in their faith, now they were falling away from this fellowship of grace with these believers because Judaism was seeping back into their lives.

I did not look back at the old debate, but I'm sure I said pretty much the same thing there. I do recall stating that the entire proposition boils down to the question, "Can a believer become an unbeliever?" or "Can a Christian embrace Judaism, and can a Jew embrace Christianity?"

Those who answer "No, No, Yes" are faced with the daunting task of explaining why Paul and other inspired men constantly warned his fellow believers, most of whom were converts from Judaism, of the danger of reverting to it - when such a danger was impossible. -Anna

Again, I do not think you are grasping the difference between those professing but not truly believing and those truly believing.

I believe, as I have stated numerous times now, that once a person has fully trusted in Christ this is not possible, but not everyone who attends church now or back then had placed their full reliance, faith, trust, dependence on Christ. Paul warned of the double-minded, of those who were about to shipwreck their faith because they would not fully let go of that which cannot truly save. If a person lets go of Christ did he truly believe in Him to start with? I don't think so because I believe that it is God who starts a good work in the true believer, and it is God who is able to bring it to completion.

Some people are not willing to let the message of the gospel fully sink in. They go along with what they hear for awhile concerning salvation yet turn back once they see that God wants them to rely fully on the work of Christ alone, not on what work they can do along with God to obtain their salvation. IMO, they don't want to be fully indebted to Christ by placing full trust in Him for their salvation.

Peter
PGA
Posts: 4,032
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2013 7:07:44 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/31/2013 5:32:03 PM, janetsanders733 wrote:
How can there be assurance of salvation of there is no eternal security? Obviously eternal security is from God. We can not lose our salvation. Our security is in the Father and the son a double act. Over and Over Jesus repeatedly said that we would not perish, be taken, snatched, or removed.

That is a good question. If God saves but rely doesn't what assurance do you have?

If salvation is of the Lord, as numerous passages lead us to believe, then how can it be of us too? I keep asking Annanicole if Jesus came to save a people or just make salvation possible. If He just came to make salvation possible then we can walk away from the faith. How would we know we are truly saved if, in part, salvation depended on us? But if God says "I will never leave you or forsake you" then that is a different matter. If it is God alone doing the saving it is a different matter. Then we can know that He has truly saved us and that nothing can separate us from the love of Christ Jesus the Lord.

If salvation also relies on our works then, just like the Jews, we will always be trying to secure our salvation by what we do. Where is the rest in that? How can we prepare for and yield to the work God has created for us if we are always trying to obtain and secure our own salvation by our own works or merit. If we are relying on our own merit in part then what was the merit, the work, of Christ for in the first place?

I feel safe and secure knowing that Christ Jesus is what my salvation rests upon. The burden has been lifted off of me.

Peter
PGA
Posts: 4,032
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2013 9:05:59 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/31/2013 9:50:21 PM, annanicole wrote:
PGA: "The question of whether a child of God can severe the relationship boils down to whether Christ's sacrifice is able to obtain our eternal salvation and God alone saves or whether there is something we must also do to earn it."

Anna: LMAO! Well, I'll give ya credit for one thing: Christ's sacrifice is indeed "able to obtain everyone's eternal salvation" + God alone saves + God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance = universalism

Of course, that is just too silly to be true - and even you do not affirm it; however, you argue right along those lines. In fact, every Calvinist cozies right up to univeralism, then tries to shy away from it right before the door closes. They must do so.

Again, it depends on how you define "God wants all men to be saved" as to being every single man without exception or every type of man without distinction, such as poor men, rich men, beggar men, thieves, male and female, tall men short men, etc.

If God wants every man without exception to be saved and He also is the author of salvation in that He secures it then salvation is universal and every man is saved. But I do not believe that is what the Bible teaches. I believe that it teaches that 'all men' means every kind of man, but that some will be judged according to their actions rather than the action of Christ in their place.

What kind of a savior cannot save his people from their sins because they get in his way? I don't see Christ as that kind of savior. That kind of savior has no ability to save anyone. That kind of savior relies on his people saving themselves.

I'm not exactly sure that I understand your doctrine.

The jailer inquired, "Sirs, what must I do ... get that ... what must I DO ... in order to be saved?" Had you been there, you could have said (as I think I told Helix), "Nothing. There's not a thing you can do. Just 'be saved'."

With a view to that, exactly how would you answer the question, "What must I do to be saved?" Remember, I'm not asking you what God is going to do. I'm not asking what I must sit around and wait on God to do in me or for me. I'm asking, "What must I do?"

I would answer it as Paul and Silas answered it:

Acts 16:31

New International Version (NIV)

31 They replied, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved"you and your household."

What is true belief? I believe it is a trust, reliance, dependence on the Lord Jesus Christ and what He has done before God on behalf of those He saves.

**********

PGA: "Is Christ's sacrifice of Himself not enough?"

Anna: I'll answer that when you tell us what one must do in order to be saved - once again, not confusing the matter with what God might do for us or in us.

Simply put, believe in the Lord Jesus Christ.

IOW's, have a true belief in who Jesus is and what He has done and rely/trust on Him. Not everyone is willing to do this. In order to have this true belief one has to place their trust in Him by the Spirit's leading which is through the word and through witness to the Person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ. The Spirit regenerates the heart and mind, creates a new creation that grows in holiness and learning what is true about God and His creation.

Paul was struggling for the church at Colosse and Laodicea to make this Spirit filled connection of right belief by a knowledge and understanding of who Jesus was.

Colossians 2:1-3

New International Version (NIV)

2 I want you to know how hard I am contending for you and for those at Laodicea, and for all who have not met me personally. 2 My goal is that they may be encouraged in heart and united in love, so that they may have the full riches of complete understanding, in order that they may know the mystery of God, namely, Christ, 3 in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.


**********

PGA: "Ephesians 2:8 is clear that salvation is not by works so that no man can boast - it is a gift of God. If a gift then you cannot work for it."

Anna: Do you honestly think that anyone believes that he can work for and earn his salvation, or is this just a smokescreen that you throw up? I'd like a "yes" or "no" on that. If you have met someone who says, "I can work for and earn my own salvation", then I'd like to know that person's name.

Yes and no. I believe they show this by what they do or say rather than relying on what Christ has done or said. So they show that they have not placed full trust in His work. The NT is replete with such examples. Paul and others continually had to correct these professing Christ as to what He has done because they would not abandon the covenant of works completely for the covenant of grace. I think we have a similar disposition today.

I don't believe they would outwardly say 'I can work for my salvation' and yet they do not believe that Christ has died for all their sins, just for past sins. Those present and future sins they believe still need to be atoned for in some way. Did Christ cancel the written code against us or not? (Colossians 2:13-15)

**********

Anna: "The question is whether a child of God can be severed from Christ and fall from grace, specifically."

I never this specifically answered. Well, I take that back. I have seen it answered, by Paul. I haven't seen it specifically answered here.

I don't understand what you are implying.

*********

So the question still is whether God saves or whether we have a part in it through our works.

Well, the question would be whether or not you claim to be saved by a dead faith or by no faith at all.

What do you mean?

I'll stop right here and ask again, "What must we do?" or "What must I do to be saved?" Is your answer, "Nothing. You can't do a thing." I'll just wait on that before proceeding - and, please, I beg of you, don't start doing like some have done and proceed to tell us about what all God does as if God somehow directly flips you from an unbeliever into a believer. I am asking specifically what you must do .... you .... you .... you .... in order to be saved, or have the remission of past sins.

The answer is the same - by God's grace and mercy, believe in the Lord Jesus Christ. Through belief in Christ we are led. What must you do to be saved - believe. What works must you do. None. The works have been completed through Christ. He has finished the work of God that is necessary for salvation. Do you believe He has finished this work or not?

Why only past sins? Is Christ not capable of saving you completely from all sin? What did His sacrifice accomplish if not for all sin?

Another question: Is the word "saved" used in very different senses, depending upon the passage? Or does "saved" mean the same thing every time is seen? If different senses, could you rattle off the most common senses, ranging from the most limited to broadest?

Yes, saved can mean different things, but I refer to what it means when used in the work of salvation. If Christ only died for past sins then the work is not complete. Do you think the Bible tells you that Christ only died for past sins, because you refer only to those in a discourse above?

***********

"Sure, because unless God's Spirit is at work in their lives to draw them to Christ"

Does not God's spirit draw through His established means, the scriptures or word of God? Or is there something additional needed?

Yes, through word and witness of Christ. But why is it that some men can read the gospels and understand the word and yet still not believe so turning from Christ? Did the Spirit not convict them?

Peter
PGA
Posts: 4,032
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2013 9:32:13 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Continuing with you post:

I agree that God uses the gospels to draw men to Himself, but if God wanted every man to be saved and it is evident that not all men are saved then His power to draw all men or save all men is pathetic (heaven forbid). In such a case the lowly creature can thwart the Almighty. But it also makes verses like the one in Isaiah 43 and 45 a mockery because it shows that God alone cannot save. He requires the creature He is trying to save to help Him. -Me

Well, we'll see. No doubt you are familiar with the case of King Saul. If not, here are the high points of Saul's "conversion":

A.King Saul was chosen. "Samuel said to all the people, See ye him whom the Lord hath chosen." (I Sam 10: 24)
B.King Saul was anointed. "Samuel took a vial of oil, and poured it upon his head ... .the Lord hath anointed thee." (I Sam 10: 1)
C.The Spirit of God was promised to come upon Saul. "And the Spirit of the LORD will come upon thee." (I Sam 10: 6)
D.Likewise, the ability to prophesy was promised to Saul. "...and thou shalt prophesy with them." (I Sam 10: 6)
E.Saul would be turned into 'another man.' "... and shalt be turned into another man." (I Sam 10: 6)
F.The signs promised to Saul (in 10: 6) came to pass. "... and all those signs came to pass that day." (I Sam 10: 9)
G.Saul was given another heart. "God gave him another heart." (I Sam 10: 9)
H.The Spirit of God came upon Saul. " .. the Spirit of God came upon him." (I Sam 10: 10)
I.Saul prophesied. " ... he prophesied among them." (I Sam 10: 10)
J.Again, the Spirit of God came upon Saul. (I Sam 11: 6)
K.Saul offered sacrifices to God. "And Saul said, Bring hither a burnt offering to me, and peace offerings. And he offered the burnt offering." (I Sam 13: 9)
L.Saul built an altar (worshiped) the Lord. "And Saul built an altar unto the LORD." (I Samuel 14: 35)

Chosen, anointed, Spirit upon him, prophesied, turned into another man with another heart, and worshiped. Was he saved? Tell us - because later events certainly imply that he did not remain saved. -Anna

Chosen for what? Chosen to be saved or chosen for other purposes such as to display God's glory or might? The Spirit worked in the chosen people, to reveal and lead, just like in Saul, yet not all entered the Promised Land, not all were saved. Were they chosen to be saved? Some were. It was a different covenant. Was the purpose of the Old Covenant the same as that of the New Covenant? No, the old was the covenant of works of the law rather than a covenant of grace in Christ, even though it pointed to Christ in many ways, many object lessons of patterns and symbols. Some who lived by this OT standard, we are told in Hebrews, were looking ahead to Christ. Others, such as Abraham believed God and it was credited to Him as righteousness. He did not work for his salvation, but trusted God in what God said and God saved him. The method of salvation was the same, the Lord Jesus Christ. None of them received what they were waiting for. It was received in Christ. These people who trusted God we are told, got it together with the 1st century believers:

Hebrews 11:40

New International Version (NIV)

40 since God had planned something better for us so that only together with us would they be made perfect.

They, just like the NT believers were also made perfect through Christ, not through anything they had done.

Peter
PGA
Posts: 4,032
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2013 9:59:51 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/31/2013 9:58:09 PM, annanicole wrote:
I forgot to answer:

"Another issue, as I mentioned before is, does man in his sinful nature really have the power or freedom to choose God without first God offering His grace to man?"

Certainly a man who has, through the force of habit, developed sinful tendencies does not have the power nor ability to turn to God without understanding God's word. Faith comes by hearing - not direct operations - and hearing is derived from the word of God, the gospel.

The gospel - not direct operations of the Spirit - is God's power unto salvation; in fact, the word of God is the medium which the Spirit employs. Do you mean to imply that an atheist cannot possibly believe, for instance, John 3: 16 or Acts 2: 38 unless the Holy Spirit swoops in and enables him to believe it?

I believe the atheist can believe what it says (i.e. John 3:16, that God gave His one and only Son, that whosoever believes) but not believe or apply it to his life unless the Spirit convicts him. He will not come to God under any conditions but his own. He wants God to show him a new miracle or convince him in some other way rather than taking God at His word. He questions, just like Satan lead Eve to question - 'Did God really say?' The atheist places his own authority above that of Scripture.

You say that the Spirit not in direct operation, but through the word employs to bring about salvation. I personally think it goes further because of my personal experience. I think the Spirit brings circumstances into a persons life that together with the word bring about conversion.

When I look back to my coming to faith in Christ I see how over and over again circumstances kept pointing me that way. When my father died I went back to Africa. My uncle preached to me as we went about our daily tasks. Then I went to the Northern Transvaal and got a job on a game reserve. The person I roomed with was a believer. The people he brought me in contact with were believers. It seemed that this happened more than I wanted it to happen, day in and day out.

I went into town one day for supplies, me and three others in the car, me driving. I hit a truck doing road repairs and we all suffered serious injury. In fact I passed out. It's like you never existed from that time until you come around again. I think the prayers of my room mate and other Christians, along with my circumstances, is what caused me to start attending church when I returned to Canada.

Thankfully God spared every one of us, even though one African was partially paralyzed along one arm, one of the boys in the car broke his neck and leg, the other received a broken arm. I received a broken hip and concussion.

But my dads death, the constant influx of Christians into my life plus my circumstances brought me to seek out this God of the Bible. Yes, I believe His word gave me life, but it was through His Spirit that I was convicted of my sin and my need of the Savior. Now I know that Jesus is Lord!

Peter
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2013 12:45:45 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
PGA: " What must you do to be saved - believe. What works must you do. None."

Anna: Must we believe or have faith in Jesus Christ? If I am an unbeliever, then I must do something to become a believer. I must hear the gospel, contemplate it, recognize my own condition, weigh the evidence - as many do on here, and decide in favor of Jesus Christ. I must at least do that. In addition, I must repent of my past sins. As you said, "Not everyone is willing to do this."

What you have is an unbeliever who must be willing to "do this", who must hear, grasp, and contemplate the gospel. Then the person must weigh the evidence and decide in favor of Jesus. Then the person must repent of his sins. So at least a person must do that much.

Now you, as did DoubleHelix, wish to stand up and say, "He didn't do a thing." Yeah, he did. Most assuredly. In fact, he did the hardest part. What you need to find is a man who did nothing, who was just milling about as as confirmed unbeliever and .... POOR ... became a saved man. A man who listens, usually repeatedly listens, to the gospel, contemplates on it, and decides in favor of Jesus does not really help you much.

It's like this: who heard the gospel? You did. Who contemplated the pros and cons of the gospel? You did. Who decided in favor of Jesus Christ? You did. Who trusted in Jesus Christ? You did. Who developed that "joyful trust conjoined with obedience" with regard to Jesus Christ? YOU did! Who repented of his sins? YOU did! Then you turn right around and say, "I didn't do a thing! Not a thing! He just saved me, for had I done anything, I would think I earned my salvation." That makes no sense whatsoever.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2013 12:51:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Anna: Well, the question would be whether or not you claim to be saved by a dead faith or by no faith at all.

PGA: What do you mean?

Anna: I mean that, at the point that I asked the question, I didn't know whether you claimed salvation at the point of no faith (as some do) or you claimed salvation at the point of a dead faith. As it turns out, based upon your answers, you claim salvation based upon faith without works, a dead faith. I suppose that's better than claiming it based upon no faith at all.

Most Calvinists do not particularly like that parallel, but nonetheless, it hold firmly: at that very POINT (not before, not later, but at the point) of salvation, they of necessity claim salvation based upon a faith that is dead as a doornail.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2013 12:58:30 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Well, we'll see. No doubt you are familiar with the case of King Saul. If not, here are the high points of Saul's "conversion":

A.King Saul was chosen. "Samuel said to all the people, See ye him whom the Lord hath chosen." (I Sam 10: 24)
B.King Saul was anointed. "Samuel took a vial of oil, and poured it upon his head ... .the Lord hath anointed thee." (I Sam 10: 1)
C.The Spirit of God was promised to come upon Saul. "And the Spirit of the LORD will come upon thee." (I Sam 10: 6)
D.Likewise, the ability to prophesy was promised to Saul. "...and thou shalt prophesy with them." (I Sam 10: 6)
E.Saul would be turned into 'another man.' "... and shalt be turned into another man." (I Sam 10: 6)
F.The signs promised to Saul (in 10: 6) came to pass. "... and all those signs came to pass that day." (I Sam 10: 9)
G.Saul was given another heart. "God gave him another heart." (I Sam 10: 9)
H.The Spirit of God came upon Saul. " .. the Spirit of God came upon him." (I Sam 10: 10)
I.Saul prophesied. " ... he prophesied among them." (I Sam 10: 10)
J.Again, the Spirit of God came upon Saul. (I Sam 11: 6)
K.Saul offered sacrifices to God. "And Saul said, Bring hither a burnt offering to me, and peace offerings. And he offered the burnt offering." (I Sam 13: 9)
L.Saul built an altar (worshiped) the Lord. "And Saul built an altar unto the LORD." (I Samuel 14: 35)

Chosen, anointed, Spirit upon him, prophesied, turned into another man with another heart, and worshiped. Was he saved? Tell us - because later events certainly imply that he did not remain saved. -Anna

PGA: Chosen for what? Chosen to be saved or chosen for other purposes such as to display God's glory or might?


Anna: I do not see any answer to the query, "Was he saved?" It would be awfully difficult, painfully difficult, to have to say that Saul was never saved - mainly because of the many attendance circumstances. He was chosen at least to be the leader of God's people; thus, God chose an unsaved sinner to lead His people. If you want that conclusion, take it. It has a bad ring, as far as I'm concerned. He was anointed, not by men, but by God - yet unsaved? The Spirit of God came upon him - yet unsaved? Really? He prophesied, and was counted among the prophets - yet unsaved? Not only all of that, but he was given a new heart - yet unsaved?

I tender the query again, "Was King Saul at any point a saved man?" You never quite said, and do you know what? I've not once had a Calvinist to answer that question on the first try! I actually thought you might. You talked all around it, as others have done.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2013 1:07:17 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Anna: Another question: Is the word "saved" used in very different senses, depending upon the passage? Or does "saved" mean the same thing every time is seen? If different senses, could you rattle off the most common senses, ranging from the most limited to broadest?

PGA: Yes, saved can mean different things, but I refer to what it means when used in the work of salvation. If Christ only died for past sins then the work is not complete. Do you think the Bible tells you that Christ only died for past sins, because you refer only to those in a discourse above?


Anna: Well, at least you say that "saved" is used in different senses, even if no definitions or examples of those senses were forthcoming. The answer is that there are certain conditions to be met before the blood of Christ saves in regard to past sins.

I refer to Acts, the 2nd chapter, in which the querists inquired, "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" Once again, had you been there, you could have answered, "Nothing. You can't do anything. Christ did it all. If I say that you must do something, why, that reflects poorly on the blood. Just be saved." However, Peter's answer comes ringing back: "Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." That answer refers to past sins. As far as future sins, "if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanseth us from all sin."
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2013 1:26:34 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Anna: "Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise. But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, so also it is now. Howbeit what saith the scripture? Cast out the handmaid and her son: for the son of the handmaid shall not inherit with the son of the freewoman. Wherefore, brethren, we are not children of a handmaid, but of the freewoman. For freedom did Christ set us free: stand fast therefore, and be not entangled again in a yoke of bondage. Behold, I Paul say unto you, that, if ye receive circumcision, Christ will profit you nothing. Yea, I testify again to every man that receiveth circumcision, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Ye are severed from Christ, ye would be justified by the law; ye are fallen away from grace."

Paul is writing, of course, to the churches of the province of Galatia, and the thrust of his letter is a demonstration of the superiority of the Law of Christ over the Law of Moses, with a goal of preventing falling back to the dead works of Judaism. Those who did so were said to "crucify the Son of God afresh".

The idea that the above passage is directed towards people who were never saved to start with is, to me, a pure fabrication borne out of desperation. It basically boils down to, "It doesn't mean what it says, because it can't mean what it says."


I want to look at the this reply in detail, because it is very telling:

PGA: In the body of believers did Jesus not say to let the wheat grow with the weeds?

Anna: Jesus - nor anyone else - ever said that there was such a thing as an unsaved person in the church. Never. And such is impossible, for the church is the saved - and the saved is the church.

PGA: I believe that Paul issued warnings to encourage, test and make sure that these people professing Christ were in fact grasping the significance of the difference between the old and new covenants.

Anna: Indeed he did. For what reason?

PGA: These warnings were checks and balances to make sure those professing Christ actually did.

Anna: Ummm, that's not what the passage says.

PGA: It was not for Paul, or you or I, to decide who would go to heaven, but to ensure that these professing Christ understood the significance of what Christ had done on their behalf.

Anna: I call for some kind of evidence that this statement in Galatians was written to those "professing Christ", yet not members of the church.

PGA: Some were in danger of turning back to Judaism, meaning they did not understand the full implications of Christ's sacrifice or the new covenant.

Anna: They didn't understand? Apparently they had understood in the past.

PGA: Jesus Himself warned in the gospels that the tares and wheat would grow together until the harvest, that for some the gospel message would get choked out before it had time to get fully established, produce fruit and multiply.

Anna: Repeat: Jesus Christ nor any apostle ever stated that an unsaved person was added to the church. In fact, such is impossible. Paul had just said:

"For ye are all sons of God, through faith, in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ did put on Christ. There can be neither Jew nor Greek, there can be neither bond nor free, there can be no male and female; for ye all are one man in Christ Jesus. And if ye are Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, heirs according to promise."

Questions:

How many of the original recipients of the Galatian letter were children of God by faith in Christ?

How many of the original recipients of the Galatian letter had been baptized into Christ?

How many of the original recipients of the Galatian letter were a part of the "one man in Christ"?

What is the "one man in Christ"?

PGA: So, in answer to your question, yes, I believe it is possible that some of these people were not truly saved (at least up to the present time of Paul's writing) because they had not fully trusted Christ or understood what He had done to secure the salvation of those who would believe.

Anna: Oh, I know that you think that ^ ^ ^ . You have to. I hope you understand that such a position is purely fabricated and constructed upon wish rather than fact. There is absolutely no evidence within the Galatian letter that warrants such a conclusion.

PGA: Paul was writing to both wheat and tares. He was helping the true believer to work out their salvation with fear and trembling, because it was the Lord working in them.

Anna: I call for evidence that Paul was writing to people who had never been saved. That is your position.

PGA: He was also giving those who doubted a chance to grasp the significance of Christ over the old covenant system so that they too could fully turn to Him and be saved.


Anna: Again, I call for some kind of internal evidence from the book of Galatians itself that warrants such a conclusion. I say that there is no such evidence; that is, you will look in vain for any semblance of hope that Paul was writing to people who had never been saved. What you are doing (and in fact what DoubleHelix did to a lesser extent) is a form of special pleading. You are saying in effect that Paul was talking to unsaved people because there is no way he could have been talking to saved people!
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2013 1:35:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
PGA: "I believe the atheist can believe what it says (i.e. John 3:16, that God gave His one and only Son, that whosoever believes) but not believe or apply it to his life unless the Spirit convicts him."

Anna: The Spirit convicts, illuminates, and quickens through the word. Do you not believe the Holy Spirit was capable of inspiring scriptures that will convict a person?

A person can "believe and apply to his life" the false prophet Mohammed without any particular "direct enlightening" - but the same person cannot come to Jesus Christ unless the Spirit of God somehow miraculously, directly, and immediately "convicts" him? Hmmmmmm. The Koran is more powerful that the Bible?

I have stated by way of a challenge the italicized statement below. Nobody has ever taken me up on it.

Name one thing that the Spirit of God does in the conviction and conversion of a sinner but what the same effect is just as easily and scripturally attributed to the word of God.

I say you can't name a thing - and that there's a very good and apparent reason that you can't. And that reason is: the Spirit operates through the word - not around it. The Spirit operates mediately - not immediately, indirectly - not directly. I have also said many times that you surely can find ONE person who the Spirit made a believer without the word of God.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2013 1:51:26 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
PGA: "What kind of a savior cannot save his people from their sins because they get in his way? I don't see Christ as that kind of savior."

Anna: No, what you apparently see is a savior who dispatches the Spirit to directly convict and convert one person while denying the same converting power to the next person.

"Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light."

Sounds good, until someone knocks along and says, "Come unto me, if the Spirit directly and supernaturally convicts you in some inexplicable manner, and I will give you rest. Notice that this very passage is admonishing men to "come". It is conditional. No coming = no rest.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
PGA
Posts: 4,032
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2013 9:25:03 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Hi Annanicole,

At 11/1/2013 12:45:45 PM, annanicole wrote:
PGA: " What must you do to be saved - believe. What works must you do. None."

Anna: Must we believe or have faith in Jesus Christ? If I am an unbeliever, then I must do something to become a believer. I must hear the gospel, contemplate it, recognize my own condition, weigh the evidence - as many do on here, and decide in favor of Jesus Christ. I must at least do that. In addition, I must repent of my past sins. As you said, "Not everyone is willing to do this." -Anna

Does any of this earn our salvation? Surely not. It is the perfect life of holy obedience lived by Jesus as my substitute that secures my salvation. Therefore it cannot be done by me in any way because I have not lived that perfect life before God. I am desperately helpless.

What you have is an unbeliever who must be willing to "do this", who must hear, grasp, and contemplate the gospel. Then the person must weigh the evidence and decide in favor of Jesus. Then the person must repent of his sins. So at least a person must do that much. -Anna

What will any of that do to secure my salvation. What is needed for my redemption that I can do? God requires a life of perfect obedience. How do I meet that standard with anything I can do of my own accord? Who has lived such a life other than Christ?
Salvation is a gift of God's grace to me. He gives it freely in giving the life of His Son to meet all my needs. (John 3:16) Do you not want to give glory to God where glory is due?

Now you, as did DoubleHelix, wish to stand up and say, "He didn't do a thing." Yeah, he did. Most assuredly. In fact, he did the hardest part. What you need to find is a man who did nothing, who was just milling about as as confirmed unbeliever and .... POOR ... became a saved man. A man who listens, usually repeatedly listens, to the gospel, contemplates on it, and decides in favor of Jesus does not really help you much.

It's like this: who heard the gospel? You did. Who contemplated the pros and cons of the gospel? You did. Who decided in favor of Jesus Christ? You did. Who trusted in Jesus Christ? You did. Who developed that "joyful trust conjoined with obedience" with regard to Jesus Christ? YOU did! Who repented of his sins? YOU did! Then you turn right around and say, "I didn't do a thing! Not a thing! He just saved me, for had I done anything, I would think I earned my salvation." That makes no sense whatsoever.

I don't think you are looking at this the proper way.

What would it take to earn my salvation? It would take a life of perfect obedience before God. Only one who is holy and pure can enter into God's presence. Have I done that in and of myself? No. Then how, in any way, can I earn my salvation? It is too late for a perfect sacrifice of my life. It was never possible in the first place. There is a lesson that was taught in the OT about a sacrificial lamb, without spot or blemish, but that was only a shadow of the good things to come. It was a substitute offering in the place of the one who had sinned. Jesus is that offering.

Who provided me with the circumstances to believe? God did. Who opened my eyes to the truth of the gospel of salvation? He did. Who convicted me of my sins and brought me to repentance? The Spirit did. Who secured my salvation? Jesus did. Who met God's perfect standard of righteousness and lived the perfect life of obedience to the law before God? Jesus did. Who atoned for my sins (all of them?)? Jesus did. Who mediated for me before God? Jesus did. Who provided the perfect sacrifice for my sins - unblemished? Jesus did. Who took the penalty and wrath that I deserved? Jesus did. Who justified me before God? Jesus did. Who did every work required by God for salvation? Jesus did. Who sanctifies me? The Spirit does. Who glories me? God does? Who lived a holy life before God? Jesus did. Who substituted His life for mine? Jesus did.

How did I earn a righteous standard before God? What righteous acts did I do of my own accord to secure my salvation? How did any act I did to secure my salvation please God? What sacrifice of mine paid for my salvation? Nothing.

Psalm 65:4

New International Version (NIV)

4 Blessed are those you choose
and bring near to live in your courts!
We are filled with the good things of your house,
of your holy temple.

I leave you with this passage:

2 Timothy 1:8-12

New International Version (NIV)

8 So do not be ashamed of the testimony about our Lord or of me his prisoner. Rather, join with me in suffering for the gospel, by the power of God. 9 He has saved us and called us to a holy life"not because of anything we have done but because of his own purpose and grace. This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time, 10 but it has now been revealed through the appearing of our Savior, Christ Jesus, who has destroyed death and has brought life and immortality to light through the gospel. 11 And of this gospel I was appointed a herald and an apostle and a teacher. 12 That is why I am suffering as I am. Yet this is no cause for shame, because I know whom I have believed, and am convinced that he is able to guard what I have entrusted to him until that day.

Peter
PGA
Posts: 4,032
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2013 9:42:14 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/1/2013 12:51:04 PM, annanicole wrote:
Anna: Well, the question would be whether or not you claim to be saved by a dead faith or by no faith at all.

PGA: What do you mean?

Anna: I mean that, at the point that I asked the question, I didn't know whether you claimed salvation at the point of no faith (as some do) or you claimed salvation at the point of a dead faith. As it turns out, based upon your answers, you claim salvation based upon faith without works, a dead faith. I suppose that's better than claiming it based upon no faith at all.

We do nothing to earn our salvation. The works that God prepares us to do are not works for salvation. The works that accomplished our salvation was won at the cross and resurrection and not by us. Christ Jesus purchased our redemption, not us.

Most Calvinists do not particularly like that parallel, but nonetheless, it hold firmly: at that very POINT (not before, not later, but at the point) of salvation, they of necessity claim salvation based upon a faith that is dead as a doornail.

Ephesians 1:3-11

New International Version (NIV)
Praise for Spiritual Blessings in Christ

3 Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ. 4 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love 5 he[a] predestined us for adoption to sonship[b] through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will" 6 to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves. 7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God"s grace 8 that he lavished on us. With all wisdom and understanding, 9 he[c] made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, 10 to be put into effect when the times reach their fulfillment"to bring unity to all things in heaven and on earth under Christ.

11 In him we were also chosen,[d] having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will,

Where is the us in any of this? Who is doing all the action? What has changed from the 1st century until now in the way God secures our salvation? Christ still is needed to be right with God and to purchase our redemption as far as I can see the Scriptures teaching.

Peter
PGA
Posts: 4,032
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2013 11:17:37 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/1/2013 12:58:30 PM, annanicole wrote:
Well, we'll see. No doubt you are familiar with the case of King Saul. If not, here are the high points of Saul's "conversion":

A.King Saul was chosen. "Samuel said to all the people, See ye him whom the Lord hath chosen." (I Sam 10: 24)
B.King Saul was anointed. "Samuel took a vial of oil, and poured it upon his head ... .the Lord hath anointed thee." (I Sam 10: 1)
C.The Spirit of God was promised to come upon Saul. "And the Spirit of the LORD will come upon thee." (I Sam 10: 6)
D.Likewise, the ability to prophesy was promised to Saul. "...and thou shalt prophesy with them." (I Sam 10: 6)
E.Saul would be turned into 'another man.' "... and shalt be turned into another man." (I Sam 10: 6)
F.The signs promised to Saul (in 10: 6) came to pass. "... and all those signs came to pass that day." (I Sam 10: 9)
G.Saul was given another heart. "God gave him another heart." (I Sam 10: 9)
H.The Spirit of God came upon Saul. " .. the Spirit of God came upon him." (I Sam 10: 10)
I.Saul prophesied. " ... he prophesied among them." (I Sam 10: 10)
J.Again, the Spirit of God came upon Saul. (I Sam 11: 6)
K.Saul offered sacrifices to God. "And Saul said, Bring hither a burnt offering to me, and peace offerings. And he offered the burnt offering." (I Sam 13: 9)
L.Saul built an altar (worshiped) the Lord. "And Saul built an altar unto the LORD." (I Samuel 14: 35)

Chosen, anointed, Spirit upon him, prophesied, turned into another man with another heart, and worshiped. Was he saved? Tell us - because later events certainly imply that he did not remain saved. -Anna

PGA: Chosen for what? Chosen to be saved or chosen for other purposes such as to display God's glory or might?


Anna: I do not see any answer to the query, "Was he saved?" It would be awfully difficult, painfully difficult, to have to say that Saul was never saved - mainly because of the many attendance circumstances. He was chosen at least to be the leader of God's people; thus, God chose an unsaved sinner to lead His people. If you want that conclusion, take it. It has a bad ring, as far as I'm concerned. He was anointed, not by men, but by God - yet unsaved? The Spirit of God came upon him - yet unsaved? Really? He prophesied, and was counted among the prophets - yet unsaved? Not only all of that, but he was given a new heart - yet unsaved?

I tender the query again, "Was King Saul at any point a saved man?" You never quite said, and do you know what? I've not once had a Calvinist to answer that question on the first try! I actually thought you might. You talked all around it, as others have done.

Let me see if I can find an answer to whether or not he was saved. If he was then God saved him forever. I will re-read the accounts later.

Hebrews 9:11-12

New International Version (NIV)
The Blood of Christ

11 But when Christ came as high priest of the good things that are now already here,[a] he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not made with human hands, that is to say, is not a part of this creation. 12 He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, thus obtaining[b] eternal redemption.

If Saul is saved then he must have obtained eternal redemption through the blood of Christ. I do not see his name recorded in Hebrews 11 which says:

Hebrews 11:13-19

New International Version (NIV)

13 All these people were still living by faith when they died. They did not receive the things promised; they only saw them and welcomed them from a distance, admitting that they were foreigners and strangers on earth. 14 People who say such things show that they are looking for a country of their own. 15 If they had been thinking of the country they had left, they would have had opportunity to return. 16 Instead, they were longing for a better country"a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared a city for them.

17 By faith Abraham, when God tested him, offered Isaac as a sacrifice. He who had embraced the promises was about to sacrifice his one and only son, 18 even though God had said to him, "It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned."[a] 19 Abraham reasoned that God could even raise the dead, and so in a manner of speaking he did receive Isaac back from death.

Peter
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/2/2013 12:52:38 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
PGA: "Let me see if I can find an answer to whether or not he was saved. If he was then God saved him forever. I will re-read the accounts later."

Anna: Well, go ahead - although I believe I furnished you with enough high points, I certainly left out a few details. To me, the detail are insignificant, but have at it:

A.King Saul was chosen. "Samuel said to all the people, See ye him whom the Lord hath chosen." (I Sam 10: 24)
B.King Saul was anointed. "Samuel took a vial of oil, and poured it upon his head ... .the Lord hath anointed thee." (I Sam 10: 1)
C.The Spirit of God was promised to come upon Saul. "And the Spirit of the LORD will come upon thee." (I Sam 10: 6)
D.Likewise, the ability to prophesy was promised to Saul. "...and thou shalt prophesy with them." (I Sam 10: 6)
E.Saul would be turned into 'another man.' "... and shalt be turned into another man." (I Sam 10: 6)
F.The signs promised to Saul (in 10: 6) came to pass. "... and all those signs came to pass that day." (I Sam 10: 9)
G.Saul was given another heart. "God gave him another heart." (I Sam 10: 9)
H.The Spirit of God came upon Saul. " .. the Spirit of God came upon him." (I Sam 10: 10)
I.Saul prophesied. " ... he prophesied among them." (I Sam 10: 10)
J.Again, the Spirit of God came upon Saul. (I Sam 11: 6)
K.Saul offered sacrifices to God. "And Saul said, Bring hither a burnt offering to me, and peace offerings. And he offered the burnt offering." (I Sam 13: 9)
L.Saul built an altar (worshiped) the Lord. "And Saul built an altar unto the LORD." (I Samuel 14: 35)
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/2/2013 12:55:30 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Anna: Well, the question would be whether or not you claim to be saved by a dead faith or by no faith at all.

PGA: What do you mean?

Anna: I mean that, at the point that I asked the question, I didn't know whether you claimed salvation at the point of no faith (as some do) or you claimed salvation at the point of a dead faith. As it turns out, based upon your answers, you claim salvation based upon faith without works, a dead faith. I suppose that's better than claiming it based upon no faith at all.

PGA: We do nothing to earn our salvation.


Anna: I thought you said we must hear the gospel, believe it, trust in Jesus Christ, and repent. I thought you at a minimum said that we must do that much.

PGA: The works that accomplished our salvation was won at the cross and resurrection and not by us. Christ Jesus purchased our redemption, not us.

Anna: That looks more like rhetoric than an attempt to deal with the point. The point was that you teach that one is either (1) saved at the point of no faith at all or (2) saved at the point of a dead faith. There is no other possibility.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/2/2013 1:16:32 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Now you, as did DoubleHelix, wish to stand up and say, "He didn't do a thing." Yeah, he did. Most assuredly. In fact, he did the hardest part. What you need to find is a man who did nothing, who was just milling about as as confirmed unbeliever and .... POOR ... became a saved man. A man who listens, usually repeatedly listens, to the gospel, contemplates on it, and decides in favor of Jesus does not really help you much.

It's like this: who heard the gospel? You did. Who contemplated the pros and cons of the gospel? You did. Who decided in favor of Jesus Christ? You did. Who trusted in Jesus Christ? You did. Who developed that "joyful trust conjoined with obedience" with regard to Jesus Christ? YOU did! Who repented of his sins? YOU did! Then you turn right around and say, "I didn't do a thing! Not a thing! He just saved me, for had I done anything, I would think I earned my salvation." That makes no sense whatsoever.

PGA: I don't think you are looking at this the proper way.

Anna: Ha! Well, I think I am - and I think we are about to get to see the old Calvinist two-step, what I used to call the Baptist Hokey-Pokey.

PGA: "Who provided me with the circumstances to believe? God did."

Anna: Yes, God provided you with a mind and His word, the sword of the Spirit - the weapon wielded by the Spirit in accomplishing conviction and conversion. Who did the believing? YOU did.

PGA: "Who opened my eyes to the truth of the gospel of salvation? He did."

Anna: Yes, He did. How? Through His word: "Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, And light unto my path." (Psalm 119: 105)

PGA: "Who convicted me of my sins and brought me to repentance? The Spirit did."

Anna: Yes, the Spirit did. How? Through His word: you were born and begotten of the word. "Of his own will he brought us forth by the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures." (James 1: 18) and "For though ye have ten thousand tutors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers; for in Christ Jesus I begat you through the gospel." (I Cor 4: 15)

PGA: "Who secured my salvation? Jesus did."

Anna: Jesus did. When?

"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. Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness." (Rom 6: 17-18)

Notice the order: (1) you were a servant of sin; however, (2) you obeyed that form of doctrine which was delivered unto you, then (3) you were made free from sin. It looks quite a bit as if you think you were "then made free from sin" before you ever obeyed anything.

In the rest of the post, you once again - as you ever do - confute and confuse (a) complying with the conditions set forth by Jesus Christ and His apostles with (b) earning salvation.

You are twisted like a pretzel on "What must I do to be saved?" because in reality you'd really like for your answer to be, "Nothing!" After all, that's what you believe, and that's what you have repeatedly stated. Just as DoubleHelix did, you will say that one must at least hear, believe, and repent, but then you'll do your best to say that even though you did it, you didn't do it! It's "I did it". Then, "Well, no, God did it." Then, "But it sure looks as if I did it." Then, "But I couldn't have. No, God did it."

In all honesty, if someone asks you "Sir, what must I do to be saved?", you should answer, "Nothing." I have scarcely met a person who was willing to do so.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
PGA
Posts: 4,032
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/2/2013 11:03:32 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/1/2013 1:07:17 PM, annanicole wrote:
Anna: Another question: Is the word "saved" used in very different senses, depending upon the passage? Or does "saved" mean the same thing every time is seen? If different senses, could you rattle off the most common senses, ranging from the most limited to broadest?

PGA: Yes, saved can mean different things, but I refer to what it means when used in the work of salvation. If Christ only died for past sins then the work is not complete. Do you think the Bible tells you that Christ only died for past sins, because you refer only to those in a discourse above?


Anna: Well, at least you say that "saved" is used in different senses, even if no definitions or examples of those senses were forthcoming. The answer is that there are certain conditions to be met before the blood of Christ saves in regard to past sins.

Again you missed answering my question. When Christ offered His sacrifice for sin, and God accepted it, which sins did He die for, only past sins or all sins? If it is only past sins then we work for our salvation in part, because we have to pay for present and future sins. Is this what you believe? With such a scenario no one would be saved and therefore Christ died for nobody, because the soul that sins dies.

I refer to Acts, the 2nd chapter, in which the querists inquired, "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" Once again, had you been there, you could have answered, "Nothing. You can't do anything. Christ did it all. If I say that you must do something, why, that reflects poorly on the blood. Just be saved." However, Peter's answer comes ringing back: "Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." That answer refers to past sins. As far as future sins, "if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanseth us from all sin."

You are confusing what is needed to be saved, a perfect life lived in obedience, with the process of sanctification that comes after salvation. When you quote 1 John 1:7 with 1 John 1:9 standing right after it, you think it implies a lose of salvation unless we repent, but I believe it implies a lose of fellowship and reward while we live this earthly life.

1 John 1:5-10

New International Version (NIV)
Light and Darkness, Sin and Forgiveness

5 This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is no darkness at all. 6 If we claim to have fellowship with him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live out the truth. 7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all[a] sin.

8 If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word is not in us.

Chapter 2 explains we have an Advocate with the Father, but it also goes on to show how we test our faith to see if we are truly saved. Thee are always checks and balances to ensure our salvation is not taken for granted,once it is granted by God, or to ensure we do not feel like we have a license to sin.

1 John 2:1-12

New International Version (NIV)

2 My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have an advocate with the Father"Jesus Christ, the Righteous One. 2 He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.
Love and Hatred for Fellow Believers

3 We know that we have come to know him if we keep his commands. 4 Whoever says, "I know him," but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in that person. 5 But if anyone obeys his word, love for God[a] is truly made complete in them. This is how we know we are in him: 6 Whoever claims to live in him must live as Jesus did.

7 Dear friends, I am not writing you a new command but an old one, which you have had since the beginning. This old command is the message you have heard. 8 Yet I am writing you a new command; its truth is seen in him and in you, because the darkness is passing and the true light is already shining.

9 Anyone who claims to be in the light but hates a brother or sister[b] is still in the darkness. 10 Anyone who loves their brother and sister[c] lives in the light, and there is nothing in them to make them stumble. 11 But anyone who hates a brother or sister is in the darkness and walks around in the darkness. They do not know where they are going, because the darkness has blinded them.
Reasons for Writing

12 I am writing to you, dear children,
because your sins have been forgiven on account of his name.


There are various things to take note of here. Jesus' death is connected to His mediation for us. Even when we sin, if we are adopted children of God, He is our Advocate for sin. He intercedes for us, by His perfect life lived and death for sin, before the Father. The one time for all time sacrifice for all sin is the means of our salvation, not what the creature does after the fact, or anything the creature could ever do. If Christ did not die for you as your substitute then you are still in your sins, or if He only died for past sins then you are not right with God. You would still be responsible for them (atoning for all sins after conversion) to obtain salvation before a holy God. If that were the case then Christ's sacrifice accomplished nothing because by just one sin we are guilt before a holy God.

But when we are saved, the new creation we are, loves and wants to keep His commands, which are confession of sins, being baptized to show we are in the faith, that we identify with being dead and buried in Christ and coming out of the water/ground a new creature, etc, etc.

All the do's as a Christian are part of our sanctification, not our work for salvation.

Do you think that anyone that Christ died for and that truly comes to Him can be lost? Hear His prayer for the 1st century believers and also us:

John 17:9

New International Version (NIV)

9 I pray for them. I am not praying for the world, but for those you have given me, for they are yours.

Do you think that God in Jesus is not capable of saving every single person in this world if He wanted to? Our High Priest is different from OT high priests. He lives forever, they did not. He always intercedes for those He saves.

Isaiah 53:11

New International Version (NIV)

11 After he has suffered,
he will see the light of life[a] and be satisfied[b];
by his knowledge[c] my righteous servant will justify many,
and he will bear their iniquities.

The passage, just like elsewhere does not say that Jesus will bear their past sins. So how do you read this into the text?

Hebrews 10:10-14

New International Version (NIV)

10 And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

11 Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties; again and again he offers the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12 But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, 13 and since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool. 14 For by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.

Peter
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/2/2013 11:30:22 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
PGA: "Again you missed answering my question. When Christ offered His sacrifice for sin, and God accepted it, which sins did He die for, only past sins or all sins?"

Anna: Which sins did He die for? He died for the sins of the whole world.

"And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for our's only, but also for the sins of the whole world." (I Jn 2: 2)

There are too many passages (I Jn 2: 2 just happened to be the first that came to mind) which state that Jesus Christ died for the sins of the entire world - which stretched back to Eden and forward into the future. He did not specifically die for past sins, or future sins, or present sins - if that's what you are asking.

PGA: "If it is only past sins then we work for our salvation in part, because we have to pay for present and future sins."

Anna: No, he died for all sins, past and present and future. There may be differing conditions attached to past sins versus present sins, but nonetheless He died for all sins - even the sins of the lost, i. e. those who refuse to comply with His terms for forgiveness.

********

Anna: " refer to Acts, the 2nd chapter, in which the querists inquired, "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" Once again, had you been there, you could have answered, "Nothing. You can't do anything. Christ did it all. If I say that you must do something, why, that reflects poorly on the blood. Just be saved." However, Peter's answer comes ringing back: "Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." That answer refers to past sins. As far as future sins, "if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanseth us from all sin."

PGA: You are confusing what is needed to be saved, a perfect life lived in obedience, with the process of sanctification that comes after salvation."


Anna: When the people on Pentecost asked, "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" - did they want to know what to do in order to receive the remission of their sins?

*********

PGA: When you quote 1 John 1:7 with 1 John 1:9 standing right after it, you think it implies a lose of salvation unless we repent, but I believe it implies a lose of fellowship and reward while we live this earthly life.


Anna: Well, I'll happily cite them both:

"but if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanseth us from all sin."

"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness."

You have ascertained that "the blood of Christ cleanseth us from all sins" simply refers to "fellowship and reward while we live this earthly life". That's quite an interpretation! And the next passage: "he is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness". That means ""fellowship and reward while we live this earthly life"?????????? Ummm ... I'm not sure that I know what to say to that. What would John have said if he wanted to refer to the forgiveness of present sins?

PGA: "Even when we sin, if we are adopted children of God, He is our Advocate for sin. He intercedes for us, by His perfect life lived and death for sin, before the Father. The one time for all time sacrifice for all sin is the means of our salvation, not what the creature does after the fact, or anything the creature could ever do. If Christ did not die for you as your substitute then you are still in your sins, or if He only died for past sins then you are not right with God. You would still be responsible for them (atoning for all sins after conversion) to obtain salvation before a holy God. If that were the case then Christ's sacrifice accomplished nothing because by just one sin we are guilt before a holy God."

Anna: That's well and good as long as one is a faithful believer. That's what "walking in the light" is. As long as one remains a faithful believer, he will not and cannot be lost.

*******

PGA: "being baptized to show we are in the faith, that we identify with being dead and buried in Christ and coming out of the water/ground a new creature, etc, etc."

Anna: I never said - the Bible never says - that baptism is "to show that we are in the faith". Where did you come up with that?

"But thanks be to God, that, whereas ye were servants of sin, ye became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching whereunto ye were delivered, being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness" (Rom 6: 17-18)

When exactly were you made free from sin? Before or after you obeyed the doctrine?

"And Peter said unto them, Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins; and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." (Acts 2: 38)

I'll ask a few questions about this passage:

As previously asked, when those Jews who had been cut to the heart by Peter's message (not by direct Spirit operation, but by the words of Peter), "What shall we do?" ... what did they want to know?

When Peter made the statement in verse 38, did he answer their question?

If repentance and baptism were unto the remission of sins, i. e. antecedent to the remission of sins - and antecedent to the reception of the gift of the Spirit, at what point were these people saved?

Does one repent because of (dia) the remission of sins or unto (eis) the remission of sins?

Is one baptized because of (dia) the remission of ins or unto (eis) the remission of sins?

Does one receive the gift of the Holy Spirit before or after repentance/baptism?

I think you'll do well to fully examine the conversion of the 3,000 in Acts 2, for it is the first example of conversion under the terms of the Great Commission.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."