Featured You may be teaching Justification by the Law !

So the Bible contradicts itself in multiple places? That is the only logical end I can see to your argument, savedbymercy. We have, in many posts, provided scriptures showing that actions are required by man to be saved, and you continue to argue that faith is a work, and the Bible says we are not saved by works. This has to be, according to your stated position, a contradiction.

 

Um......

[30] The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent, [31] because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead.” (Acts 17:30-31 ESV; emphasis mine)
​

[19] “Therefore, O King Agrippa, I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision, [20] but declared first to those in Damascus, then in Jerusalem and throughout all the region of Judea, and also to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, performing deeds in keeping with their repentance. [21] For this reason the Jews seized me in the temple and tried to kill me. (Acts 26:19-21 ESV; emphasis mine)
​

[9] Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, [10] nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. [11] And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. (1 Corinthians 6:9-11 ESV; emphasis mine)
​

So...

I guess Paul, then, is preaching salvation by works????

The Archangel

 

You are arguing out of the void of what the Bible does not forbid -- to affirm that the Bible does make your statement by not making it.

You invent a restriction that the Bible does not identify - and then argue that since the Bible does not identify it - it must be a valid restriction.

By contrast - I point out a freedom that the Bible does not forbid, an action the Bible commands - fully consistent with the texts listed.

Romans 10
“The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart”—that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, 9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; 10 for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.

The very sequence Calvinism forbids - the Bible affirms!

Calvinism is often expressed as an exact negation of scripture.

God sovereignly chose - free will and conditional salvation, conditional forgiveness.

The Bible never claims that to repent, or to confess, or to receive Christ is "salvation by works" --

Rather the Bible says "IF WE Confess our sins HE is faithful and just to Forgive" 1John 1:9

it never says "And such would be salvation by works"

The Bible says "I STAND at the door and knock - IF anyone hears My voice AND OPENS the door - I will come in" Rev 3

It never says "and such would be salvation by works"

In Calvinism there is no such thing as "He came to HIS OWN and HIS OWN received Him not" John 1:11 no matter what the Bible says to the contrary because in Calvinism the way that the lost person is saved is that first "HE comes to His OWN" those whom He abitrarily selects out from among the lost - causes "His own" to be born again - regenerated - THEN compels them to accept the Gospel for they are already regenerate - already born-again already saved, already the New Creation old things passed away all things become new.

In that form of Calvinism - no such thing as "He came to HIS OWN and HIS OWN received Him not" John 1:11

in Christ,

Bob

 

Gentlemen - you miss the point. In order for sbm to have her argument, a strawman must first be in place: "if you trust in doing those things." Her claim is that we trust in our confession, in our belief, instead of in the finished work of Christ on the cross.

But she does take it further, and I'm still trying to suss out what her ultimate claim about who will actually be in heaven...if we could get to the end of her profession, all of what she's presented thus far might make more sense....

 

Indeed but it never calls confession/repentance/ receiving Christ as "salvation by works" -- not one single text in that regard.

Rather it commands it - and even gives a "sequence" for what "results in salvation" that Calvinism does not permit.

Romans 10
“The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart”—that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, 9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; 10 for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.

According to the Bible - God sovereignly chose - free will and conditional salvation, conditional forgiveness.

Thus even in the context of God's own "selection" --- "HE came to HIS OWN and His OWN received Him not" John 1:11

 

The definition being used is that IF you accept the Bible statements on conditional salvation, conditional forgiveness .. free will then, by definition you are claiming salvation by works, by definition you cannot claim the Rom 10 "sequence" as anything other than salvation by works in the Calvinist model .

But as with all of Calvinism it is a claim based on extreme inference alone -- there is no actual Bible statement that says it.

in Christ,

Bob

 

The Bible forbids salvation by works, yet the Bible says we are saved by grace through FAITH, yet you say faith is a work. This is a contradiction, yet you say the Bible does not contradict itself.

We are left with two options. Either:
a. The Bible does actually contradict itself
or
b. You have established a contradiction in your theology, but you are too stubbornly set in your mind to acknowledge it.

I'm going with option b.

 

Honestly, how do you not see the contradiction your stated position places you in when considering the writings of Paul? For your theology on this point to be correct, then the divinely inspired writings of Paul must be incorrect.

 

Not in the Bible.

you may "breathe" and it is not "Salvation by works" -- in the Bible.

you may receive Christ and it is not "salvation by works" - in the Bible.

Calvinism condemns that which is not condemned in scripture by playing around with definitions that the Bible does not support.

It's doctrines are merely "extreme inference"

 

According to the Bible - God sovereignly chose - free will and conditional salvation, conditional forgiveness.

Indeed the Bible never calls confession/repentance/ receiving Christ as "salvation by works" -- not one single text in that regard.

Rather it commands it - and even gives a "sequence" for what "results in salvation" that Calvinism does not permit.

Romans 10
“The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart”—that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, 9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; 10 for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.

According to the Bible - God sovereignly chose - free will and conditional salvation, conditional forgiveness.

It is only by ignoring texts such as those given above - in this case Romans 10 specifically that Calvinism's system of "extreme inference" and "redefinition of terms" can even survive.

in Christ,

Bob

 

I don't believe Calvinism survives that point above - or the problem with "God's Lament".. just MHO.

Having said that - I have a peace offering for Calvinists.

On this board you sometimes find that a debate between Calvinists and Arminians sometimes gets to the nature of God, divinity, Trinity etc. And one side will say that the other side has the wrong definition of God or is not really believing in the Trinity.

But that is not the focus of this board area - we are not here to debate the trinity. Still it is a valid argument if you think that a certain view of the Gospel and salvation - how one gets saved - how one stays saved reflects on the divinity/diety power ability of God. Hard to avoid that.

In the same way the Romans 10 discussion about how one gets saved - and how this thoroughly defeats Calvinism - leads to another claim that is possible for Calvinists. So I will grant them this.

The Calvinist response to Arminians upholding Romans 10 could well be of the form "Well if you believe salvation is conditional as in Romans 10 where the actions of man are included that RESULT in salvation as the text says - then you have just defeated your own argument for OSAS".

This is a solid objection on their part. IF man does nothing to get saved - then man does nothing to become lost.

But IF salvation is conditional - if man does do something to get saved - the entire foundation for OSAS is undercut.

Impossible to get around that one - even though this section of the board is not to debate it - it is a logical consequence of the Arminian argument in Romans 10 for free will and conditional salvation.

If I was a Calvinist I would be camped out on that objection to the Arminian POV - as much as BobRyan is camped out on the problem of "God's Lament" for Calvinists. (Just being fair to both sides)

in Christ,

Bob

 

Even Calvinists are not arguing that breathing is salvation by works - I think we all admit that by now.

 

Breathing is not "Salvation by works"

And following the Romans 10 model that "results in salvation" is not salvation by works.

Dismissing the texts and details that prove the Calvinism model to be flaws is not a compelling solution to the problem for Calvinism in this case.

in Christ,

Bob