'Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved'

[InTheLight]

The epistles are written to those who already have repented and believed the gospel as per the Apostolic preaching....why should believers be instructed to repent when they already have?

Oh, please tell me again that in the 2nd epistle of St. Peter chapter 3, verse 9:

The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.


.... is written to believers who have ALREADY REPENTED.

 

[Iconoclast]

Brother Icon,

The commentary writer WR Downing you quoted said, "
Evangelical or saving repentance unto life is the gift of God,
the immediate consequence of regenerating grace". In other words he is saying repentance is an immediate effect of being regenerated (born again), not the cause of becoming regenerated. I concur with this, do you?

I also agree when the author continues his statement regarding repentance stating, "
...and is evidenced in turning from sin to God." Here I take him to be saying repentance is not the actual turning from sin, but rather a change of mind toward the view of sin by the regenerated soul that surely results/produces a change in a believer's walk toward obeying God and not sinning in the future. Are you in agreement?

Yes Brother
I do agree with almost everything I find in this catechism. This Pastor knows the original languages and has gone over 8 other catechisms before compiling the data in this one.
the teaching checks out, over and over again...

 

[Internet Theologian]

The entire Bible was written to God's people.

Ya think? That means the epistles weren't written to the LOST then doesn't it? This refutes your weak flimsy argument that repentance isn't mentioned therefore it isn't needed.

Then all this would mean it would only be instruction and doctrine for the ELECT and wouldn't need to preach REPENTANCE because they are written to the converted. The other books are GOSPEL accounts which speak of the NECESSITY of REPENTANCE for salvation.

 

[Iconoclast]

Oh, please tell me again that in the 2nd epistle of St. Peter chapter 3, verse 9:

The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.


.... is written to believers who have ALREADY REPENTED.

Okay ...you offered a verse...good start.
The verse is teaching that God is longsuffering with the wicked around us, until each and every elect soul gets saved. God is "not willing" that any one of those beloved sheep in peter's day, or those yet to be born in our time....He is not willing that any be lost but that ALL...each and everyone will be saved.
Jesus seeks and saves them. God has ordained it to be so...

 

[Internet Theologian]

Okay ...you offered a verse...good start.
The verse is teaching that God is longsuffering with the wicked around us, until each and every elect soul gets saved. God is "not willing" that any one of those beloved sheep in peter's day, or those yet to be born in our time....He is not willing that any be lost but that ALL...each and everyone will be saved.
Jesus seeks and saves them. God has ordained it to be so...

Amen! Note also 2 Timothy 2:8-10 how Paul preached for the 'elects sake' and this truth is all over the NT epistles for those who have eyes to see.

 

[agedman]

I do not deny repentance. I deny your definition of repentance (especially Icon's), and your application of it. You also have not understood or read carefully my posts on repentance where I have carefully defined it.
Note part of my post is simply a question for you to answer. You (or others) never did. Again, where in the gospels is repentance required for salvation? That was my question. Did I say I denied repentance? No. I do note however, that the feeble attempts made to discuss this at all use scripture that are taken out of context.

The NT consistently teaches that salvation is by faith (sola fide). Apparently this present lot of Calvinists have thrown that doctrine out the window.
"Therefore being justified by faith we have peace with God" (Rom.5:1).
Ephesians 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Romans 3:28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

Salvation is by faith. Note in all these scriptures, scores of them, repentance is not mentioned.
Why?
Faith always has an object. In salvation the object of one's faith must be Jesus Christ and his atoning work on the cross. If that is not the object of one's faith then there is no salvation. If that is the object of one's faith regeneration will occur and change will take place. When a person puts his faith in Christ as Savior and Lord he is changing direction by trusting Christ and not trusting the world or any other religion any longer. His focus now is on Christ, not any other object.
What I have just described to you is a definition of repentance. Biblical faith and repentance are two sides of the same coin.
Repentance is a change of mind with respect to one's attitude to God.
Repentance says: Once I was in rebellion to God. Then my attitude toward God was changed.
Now I am submissive to the will of God. That is repentance.

Both faith in Christ and repentance happen at the same time. Thus repentance need not to be mentioned in NT soteriology. It is inherent in "believing in Christ," or in "faith."

Much of what you said I consider accurately portrayed in Scriptures.
However, I would seek your understanding to adjust one area.

If I have read correctly, you present that salvation is "When a person puts his faith in Christ as Savior and Lord he is changing direction by trusting Christ and not trusting the world or any other religion any longer. His focus now is on Christ, not any other object. "

Now this is an accurate statement, IF it is understood that the ability for a person to "put his faith in Christ as Savior" is from God ("To them gave He the power..."), and that such ability is not innate, and not self generated.

That being the case, then repentance by the believer flows from that regeneration work of God and is not the initiator of the regeneration work of God.

Perhaps that is the basic message of Icon.

Both of you are stating that repentance is integral.

Both of you are stating that the believer is compelled to repent.

What I think I see in your statement is that you consider a person's faith (the object) brings regeneration, and somewhere in their repentance takes place.

What Icon and I consider correct is that the person is given both the grace and faith as a gift from God, they are given the "power to become," and, from that "regeneration," the results are a new nature expressing repentance and faith in the object (Christ) "not of works..."

If I have perceived correctly, the sticking point is where is repentance in the sequence and not that there is no repentance that takes place.

Both you and Icon have made statements concerning the need and expressions of repentance, and have both done well in defining the parameters of repentance.

However, repentance is not the catalyst to bring change, rather it is what bubbles from within as the result of the catalyst of change in the mind and heart of the believer. Such change as only God can bestow, and marks the difference from the remorse/regret of the world, and the repentance without regret of the believer.

 

[Iconoclast]

Much of what you said I consider accurately portrayed in Scriptures.
However, I would seek your understanding to adjust one area.

If I have read correctly, you present that salvation is "When a person puts his faith in Christ as Savior and Lord he is changing direction by trusting Christ and not trusting the world or any other religion any longer. His focus now is on Christ, not any other object. "

Now this is an accurate statement, IF it is understood that the ability for a person to "put his faith in Christ as Savior" is from God ("To them gave He the power..."), and that such ability is not innate, and not self generated.

That being the case, then repentance by the believer flows from that regeneration work of God and is not the initiator of the regeneration work of God.

Perhaps that is the basic message of Icon.

Correct.....

Both of you are stating that repentance is integral.

Both of you are stating that the believer is compelled to repent.

What I think I see in your statement is that you consider a person's faith (the object) brings regeneration, and somewhere in their repentance takes place.

What Icon and I consider correct is that the person is given both the grace and faith as a gift from God, they are given the "power to become," and, from that "regeneration," the results are a new nature expressing repentance and faith in the object (Christ) "not of works..."

If I have perceived correctly, the sticking point is where is repentance in the sequence and not that there is no repentance that takes place.

Both you and Icon have made statements concerning the need and expressions of repentance, and have both done well in defining the parameters of repentance.

However, repentance is not the catalyst to bring change, rather it is what bubbles from within as the result of the catalyst of change in the mind and heart of the believer. Such change as only God can bestow, and marks the difference from the remorse/regret of the world, and the repentance without regret of the believer.

Bingo...except sometimes he says this????-

dhk said;
Just pointing out the absurdity of many unbiblical definitions of repentance there are. There is no concept of "repent of your sins" taught in the NT. That is not what repentance is.

 

[agedman]

Are you finished embarrassing yourself yet?
You seriously don't know the difference between a question and a declaration? Did you finish school?

DHK, I don't think this type of post is worthy of the BB, and you know it doesn't meet that high calling of Spirit control one should expect of a mature believer.

You are allowing others to determine how you approach a post, and the attitude of which drives the agenda of the word choice.

You and I both know that when one posts out of emotional response the tone and temperament used is usually not what we want to be proud. Rather, it brings a level of shame that no "saving of face" can erase. Please, go back and edit your words, or remove them all together that the enemy does not rejoice in the excess of inappropriate demeaning and demeanor.

 

[agedman]

Bingo...except sometimes he says this????-

dhk said;
Just pointing out the absurdity of many unbiblical definitions of repentance there are. There is no concept of "repent of your sins" taught in the NT. That is not what repentance is.

You are most kind in your response. Thank you.

The phrase "repent of your sins" is (as you know) one of those cute phrases preachers use that can be taken however one desires to interpret it to mean.

Because you and DHK have both extensively posted the results of repentance, and the need of repentance and generally I see agreement in those two areas, then it falls that when it comes to salvation, repentance is either to be taken as the initiation of or the resulting effect of the object (Christ).

It is in that single focus that I see the enemy of believers stirring the strife and clouding the truth as he so easily can do. Which is why ultimately the scheme of the Doctrines of Grace in comparison to other views is were these threads end up.

You and I have the wonderful understanding that Godly repentance is not natural to the heathen. That a God given change ("To them gave He the power...") must already have taken place in the core persons heart and mind in which repentance pours forth, not in a manner of regret, but Godly remorse with the assured hope as John states that the Father is both faithful and just to forgive and cleanse.

Such hope that the natural heathen has no ability in understanding or adequately expressing.

 

[DHK]

dhk said;
Just pointing out the absurdity of many unbiblical definitions of repentance there are. There is no concept of "repent of your sins" taught in the NT. That is not what repentance is.

And you have yet to point to one scripture that teaches that concept, right?
Complete silence on your part. You cannot prove me wrong, can you?

 

[DHK]

What I think I see in your statement is that you consider a person's faith (the object) brings regeneration, and somewhere in their repentance takes place.

What Icon and I consider correct is that the person is given both the grace and faith as a gift from God, they are given the "power to become," and, from that "regeneration," the results are a new nature expressing repentance and faith in the object (Christ) "not of works..."

If I have perceived correctly, the sticking point is where is repentance in the sequence and not that there is no repentance that takes place.

Both you and Icon have made statements concerning the need and expressions of repentance, and have both done well in defining the parameters of repentance.

However, repentance is not the catalyst to bring change, rather it is what bubbles from within as the result of the catalyst of change in the mind and heart of the believer. Such change as only God can bestow, and marks the difference from the remorse/regret of the world, and the repentance without regret of the believer.

Salvation is by faith, faith in Christ. That "decision" in and of itself will bring change in a person's life. The resulting change is what people refer to as repentance.
What happened to Zaccheus? He believed on Christ. And then??

Here is the fruit of repentance:
Luk 19:8 And Zacchaeus stood, and said unto the Lord; Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation, I restore him fourfold.
Faith came first. It wrought a great change in his life. What kind of publican would do what he just did?

 

[DHK]

Ya think? That means the epistles weren't written to the LOST then doesn't it? This refutes your weak flimsy argument that repentance isn't mentioned therefore it isn't needed.

Then all this would mean it would only be instruction and doctrine for the ELECT and wouldn't need to preach REPENTANCE because they are written to the converted. The other books are GOSPEL accounts which speak of the NECESSITY of REPENTANCE for salvation.

And who were these words of the Lord directed to:

, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:

What about these words:
Joh 8:44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

Or these words:
Act 13:10 And said, O full of all subtilty and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord?

Were all these statements made to believers, the elect, as you contend?

 

[agedman]

Salvation is by faith, faith in Christ. That "decision" in and of itself will bring change in a person's life. The resulting change is what people refer to as repentance.
What happened to Zaccheus? He believed on Christ. And then??

Here is the fruit of repentance:
Luk 19:8 And Zacchaeus stood, and said unto the Lord; Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation, I restore him fourfold.
Faith came first. It wrought a great change in his life. What kind of publican would do what he just did?

DHK,

I view Zacchaeus as being engaged by God's purpose to become first curious, then take to climbing a tree for a better look, and ready to respond favorably to the Lord "gladly" (Luke 19:6). It was a work of God's instigation and not human engineering.

Now most certainly, Salvation is by "grace through faith." Not doubt. Who has the grace and faith? Humankind? nope. It is the "gift of God."

The "decision" is not of human effort, for the Scriptures (as you know) are clear that there is no effort of humankind that can attain such authority (John 1).

Rather, such decision is oratory coming from an already changed heart. One does not confess and then get saved, one is saved and then confesses. This is the sequence of Romans 10: "for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.

DHK, we could both show many verses to support our view, but ultimately, what does John 3 say:

“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. “For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. “He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."
​

So John 1 shows that not all have the ability given, only those who do not turn from the light are given the power. That such power is not innately within the capacity of humankind, but is given directly and specifically by God. That such a gift by God results in belief. (John 1:12 & 13)

The ultimate question then comes to resolve on whether human effort is what saves or is it authored and finished by God?

There are those who would use popular phrases such as "put your faith in Christ," and even quote the Scriptures, "Trust in the Lord with all your heart." And, I suppose that some may be convinced in their mind that such is a plan to follow and a way to think. But, such ultimately fails the test of the heart.

For as you have pointed out, the truly saved will pour out true repentance from a changed heart and mind. And DHK, as you know, such a change cannot take place outside of and without the "power of God (John 1)."

 

[Iconoclast]

And you have yet to point to one scripture that teaches that concept, right?
Complete silence on your part. You cannot prove me wrong, can you?

Many scriptures have been offered that everyone other than you has seen and know they teach repentance of all sins.
That you cannot see it makes it a personal problem that you need to wrestle with.
RM is not a Cal and yet he speaks clearly on this issue.
Agedman is trying to bridge the gap and reach out to you.
You seem to not grasp it still.
Do not despair a new year is approaching full of new possibilities.
Perhaps even you might examine the fine links offered on this very thread and inform your understanding of this topic as well as all the others that have slipped away on you.
Maybe you can pretend someone else offered these truth's to you....someone you trust.
Maybe you can pm Skandelon. ...a non CAL for sure and perhaps he can be used of God to open up this whole teaching.
Many will pray for you as you continue in your struggle.

 

[Internet Theologian]

Many scriptures have been offered that everyone other than you has seen and know they teach repentance of all sins.
That you cannot see it makes it a personal problem that you need to wrestle with.
RM is not a Cal and yet he speaks clearly on this issue.
Agedman is trying to bridge the gap and reach out to you.
You seem to not grasp it still.
Do not despair a new year is approaching full of new possibilities.
Perhaps even you might examine the fine links offered on this very thread and inform your understanding of this topic as well as all the others that have slipped away on you.
Maybe you can pretend someone else offered these truth's to you....someone you trust.
Maybe you can pm Skandelon. ...a non CAL for sure and perhaps he can be used of God to open up this whole teaching.
Many will pray for you as you continue in your struggle.

Yes, I will pray for dhk as well.

 

[Internet Theologian]

Salvation is by faith, faith in Christ. That "decision" in and of itself will bring change in a person's life. The resulting change is what people refer to as repentance.
What happened to Zaccheus? He believed on Christ. And then??

Here is the fruit of repentance:
Luk 19:8 And Zacchaeus stood, and said unto the Lord; Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation, I restore him fourfold.
Faith came first. It wrought a great change in his life. What kind of publican would do what he just did?

You show what fruit of repentance is (which is Zacchaeus turning from his sinful ways) in Scripture and still do not see it is repenting of actual sins. The truly converted have done this. Some still hang on to sin, lying, anger, adultery, things of this nature which have the person in its grasp, to which they are in bondage so they do these things daily; 1 Cor. 6:9ff, Galatians 5:19ff.

The synergistic mindset you've been indoctrinated into has distorted your thinking and has caused many presuppositional errors on your part. Most of your errors are on soteriological truths. Two of them are repentance and faith, and now it is on the obtaining of the new birth. Salvation isn't decisional; John 1:13; Romans 9:16; James 1:18.

 

[DHK]

DHK,

I view Zacchaeus as being engaged by God's purpose to become first curious, then take to climbing a tree for a better look, and ready to respond favorably to the Lord "gladly" (Luke 19:6). It was a work of God's instigation and not human engineering.

Now most certainly, Salvation is by "grace through faith." Not doubt. Who has the grace and faith? Humankind? nope. It is the "gift of God."

This I believe is error. It is the Reformed or Calvinistic view. As I said before it makes God out to be schizophrenic, or at the very least it makes the Calvinistic to blatantly contradict the Scriptures having God contradict himself.

First, the ministry of the Holy Spirit is well defined in John 16:8-11.
Second, there is no scripture backing up this concept that faith and repentance are gifts from God to the unsaved.
Third, God commands all men every where to repent. He commands men to repent. He doesn't change his mind and then say: "Never mind I will do the repenting for you." Absurd.
Fourth, the same is true with faith. Well over a hundred times we are commanded to have faith or believe. Why would Christ command us to believe or have faith, and then turn around and say: "never mind, I will do it for you. I will give you the faith to believe."

God is not a schizophrenic. He commands us to repent. He commands us to believe. He never says he will do it for us, or give us repentance and faith. This is contrary to all teaching in the Bible and contrary to the very nature of God.

Furthermore faith in the Bible in spoken of in two ways: as a spiritual gift in 1Cor.12 and as a fruit of the Spirit in Gal.6. God would never give one of his gifts of the Spirit neither Spiritual fruit to the unregenerate. This is totally absurd. He commands all men to repent. He commands all men to believe. I still have never received an answer to the question "Whatever happened to sola fide?" Have they just all tossed it out the window. It is no longer believed. How many other "solas" do todays reformers no longer believe?

 

[DHK]

Many scriptures have been offered that everyone other than you has seen and know they teach repentance of all sins.
That you cannot see it makes it a personal problem that you need to wrestle with.
RM is not a Cal and yet he speaks clearly on this issue.
Agedman is trying to bridge the gap and reach out to you.
You seem to not grasp it still.
Do not despair a new year is approaching full of new possibilities.
Perhaps even you might examine the fine links offered on this very thread and inform your understanding of this topic as well as all the others that have slipped away on you.
Maybe you can pretend someone else offered these truth's to you....someone you trust.
Maybe you can pm Skandelon. ...a non CAL for sure and perhaps he can be used of God to open up this whole teaching.
Many will pray for you as you continue in your struggle.

If you think that by your many posts and much disputing you are going to convert me to Calvinism you are deceived. Calvinism is error.

 

[DHK]

You show what fruit of repentance is (which is Zacchaeus turning from his sinful ways) in Scripture and still do not see it is repenting of actual sins. The truly converted have done this. Some still hang on to sin, lying, anger, adultery, things of this nature which have the person in its grasp, to which they are in bondage so they do these things daily; 1 Cor. 6:9ff, Galatians 5:19ff.

The synergistic mindset you've been indoctrinated into has distorted your thinking and has caused many presuppositional errors on your part. Most of your errors are on soteriological truths. Two of them are repentance and faith, and now it is on the obtaining of the new birth. Salvation isn't decisional; John 1:13; Romans 9:16; James 1:18.

Your error and your opinions are noted. It is noted that you cannot refute the truth I have posted and thus will remain in your error. As you say: ""You have been indoctrinated and your mindset has distorted your thinking and has caused many presuppositional errors on your part."
What is it like to be a follower of a man--Calvin--instead of the Word?

 

[Internet Theologian]

Your error and your opinions are noted. It is noted that you cannot refute the truth I have posted and thus will remain in your error. As you say: ""You have been indoctrinated and your mindset has distorted your thinking and has caused many presuppositional errors on your part."
What is it like to be a follower of a man--Calvin--instead of the Word?

I've never read Calvin, and follow my LORD who loved me and gave Himself for me. Now, when I get around to it I will read his works it's just that I have some other books now such as by Tozer, Alcorn, Strobel, others.