Featured Does Faith, in either system, merit salvation?

The disagreement is due to attempting to define it chronologically instead of logically. As I told James, look at a door handle, now take it and turn it. You supply the power for turning it. However, you turn it and it being turned are simeltaneous actions. "Turn...us O God and we shall be turned."

1 John 5:1 provides the same truth of simeltaneous action in Greek grammar. The verb "born of God" represents a perfect tense verb. The word "believeth" represents a present tense participle. A simplistic look would conclude that the action of the verb (perfect tense) which is a completed action precedes chronologically the action of the participle and thus new birth chronologically precedes faith. The actionsart of the term translated "born" demands a completed action as birth is not a progressive incompleted action. Whereas, "beleiveth" is a progressive action.

However, a more careful consideration of the Greek grammar will demonstrate the KJV translation using the present tense "is" to be the correct translation as the action of the participle in relationship to the action of the verb shows identical action. If the participle was future tense then its action would be future to the action of the verb. If the participle was Aorist/perfect/imperfect then its action would be antecedent to the action of the verb. However, if the action of the participle is present tense then the action of the participle is PRESENT with the action of the verb. However, the new birth LOGICALLY precedes the action of believing as the writer did not use a present tense verb.

 

You are wrong and are dodging my last question which I will present again after I present the initial question you refuse to answer using as an excuse that I am "beggin". You are correct in one way Skan, I am begging for an answer!

You tell me and the Forum that salvation is unmerited, all of Grace. I agree, Then I asked a simple question: Why are some saved and others not?

You dodge the question by insisting I am presuming a deterministic response, whatever that is and that, therefore, I am "beggin the question". Some people are apparently saved and others apparently are not. I asked you why this is true since we both agree that Salvation is by Grace alone. That seems sufficiently simple that you can provide an answer and I am begging for an answer.

Now to my other question which you also refuse to answer:

Really Scan, if you are going to start a thread it seems you are obligated to answer questions regarding the assertions/assumptions/whatever made in the OP and subsequent posts.

I will pose another question which you should be able to answer. I place emphasis in hopes you will not overlook it!

How can a person exercise faith without making a choice?

 

It appears now that you are contradicting your OP. Can you explain? Which is it: God regenerates us by faith or God regenerates us by Grace as your OP claims.

 

You still fail to answer the question: Why are some saved and others not?

That is a valid question based on everything you say in the OP. Accusing me of "begging the question" is a false statement and simply a dodge on your part. The question is particularly valid given the following claim you make in the OP:

Just what basis does God use in the salvation of one individual while leaving another in their sins? You have already said above that repentance, faith, asking for forgiveness, humility and so on are irrelevant to salvation.

 

You have said faith does not merit salvation now you are saying that accepting truth does. In the same post you said the above you also said:

So it appears that God honors man's choice but not his faith, repentance, humility, etc.!

 

I did not ask what determined the choice of each individual. I asked:

Why is faith a merit and accepting truth not?:BangHead::BangHead::tonofbricks::tonofbricks:

 

Not really!!

Perhaps I should be more precise in my semantics! Why does faith not merit salvation and accepting truth merit salvation?

In response to my question: Why are some saved and others not?

You responded:

 

1 John 5 is pretty interesting as it speaks to the already born-again alive-in-Christ saved saint contrasted with the lost.

5 Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves Him who begot also loves him who is begotten of Him. 2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and keep His commandments. 3 For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome. 4 For whatever is born of God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that has overcome the world—our faith. 5 Who is he who overcomes the world, but he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?


As for "tenses" -



Ps 9:5-6 comes to mind.


You have rebuked the nations,
You have destroyed the wicked;
You have blotted out their name forever and ever.
6 O enemy, destructions are finished forever!
And you have destroyed cities;
Even their memory has perished.


So also Romans 4 for the "tenses"

16 For this reason it is by faith, in order that it may be in accordance with grace, so that the promise will be guaranteed to all the descendants, not only to those who are of the Law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all, 17 (as it is written, “A father of many nations have I made you”) in the presence of Him whom he believed, even God, who gives life to the dead and calls into being that which does not exist. 18 In hope against hope he believed, so that he might become a father of many nations according to that which had been spoken, “So shall your descendants be.” 19 Without becoming weak in faith he contemplated his own body, now as good as dead since he was about a hundred years old, and the deadness of Sarah’s womb; 20 yet, with respect to the promise of God, he did not waver in unbelief but grew strong in faith, giving glory to God, 21 and being fully assured that what God had promised, He was able also to perform.

 

I don't agree with such a simplistic understanding. Changing what about a human? Subjectively changing his disposition, or objectively changing his metaphysical makeup?

Repent/believe are expressions of a man's THINKING being changed.

When someone believes the gospel, his mind has been changed - not by himself, or by deciding to believe differently, but by the enlightening power of the Holy Spirit using God's word

faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God
gospel is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes [it]

I don't agree with such a mystical definition. I do agree that quickening is synonymous with regeneration, but it is objective. When Jeremiah and Ezekiel speak of the New Covenant, using terms like washing, new heart, new spirit, etc it is not merely symbolic or poetic language.

Hebrews 9-10 contrast the Old and New
The blood of bulls and goats could never REMOVE sins

The obvious implication is that the blood of Jesus DOES remove sins.

If any man be in Christ, he is and new creation. The old has gone and the new is come. Yet it is postulated by most that the "creation" amounts to nothing more than a change in disposition. That hardly spells creation

Regeneration is used only twice in the NT - Titus 3:5 and Matt 19:28
The latter is speaking of the physical universe and is promised to be future. The essence of that regeneration will be to destroy the old and a new one created that it s not tainted by sin

The former is said to be now. He saved us...by the washing of regeneration. This cannot be a simple "turning" of the man's will and desires. It is a destruction of the sinful spirit within a man, and a new creation of his spirit. One which is not tainted by sin - NOW

I agree that in terms of eternity, and God's existence outside of time, everything is now. There is no eternity past, or eternity future. I would even say that, eternally speaking, sequential is not synonymous with chronological

But we do not leave this time/space realm at the time of our conversion in order that chronology is set aside for sequence. In or dimension, they are synonymous

In God's eternity, Jesus was born now, and I was born now. But from our standpoint, within time, He beat me to this earth by almost 2,000 years. Just like at the resurrection. Christ rose first. Then the dead in Christ will rise. Then we who are alive will be changed.

There is an obvious sequence and chronology. No matter how much or how little time elapses, if it happens within time, then sequence equates to chronological

Regeneration is instant, not a process. And it does not happen until after one is justified by faith.

Regeneration is a removal of sin. And God doesn't use a washing machine with various soak/rinse/spin cycles

 

Skan,

First: I am not a child and I resent your condescending remarks. That is a habit you have which appears to come from a sense of superiority. Furthermore, the so-called illustrations you present are designed for one who is mentally challenged!

Second: I am perfectly capable of using a dictionary if I do not understand a word.

Third: Your OP does not present the traditional view of Calvinists or non-Calvinists regarding Salvation. They seem to present a whim aimed at instigating debate at best and animosity at worst.

Fourth:You have failed to answer any question that I have posed to you. You may give a response but that does not necessarily constitute an answer. When I asked why some are saved and others not, since Salvation is by Grace alone, you insist I am seeking a deterministic response and the discussion deteriorated from there. You have yet to explain why some are saved and others are not saved. In post #33 you attempted to answer as follows:

. Is that really your answer? If so explain how "accepting the truth" is different than faith and why it has more to do with Salvation than Faith.

 

Skan,

You have not explained how "accepting the truth" is different than faith and why it has more to do with Salvation than Faith.

 

Amen!

Well said!

in Christ,

Bob