Featured The result of loving Jesus and keeping His commandments

Not rebelling is surrender or giving up the rebellion It isn't a work but just plain stopping your rebellion. How can, not doing something any longer be a work? Why are you so set on works?
MB

 

You are doing something you are loving God. The only good works is Love God and Love neighbor.

When you sin you cease loving God. When you cease sinning you are doing the GOOD WORK of loving God.

"Why are you so set on works?"
Because once I get rid of your idea that faith alone involves synergism on your part rather then the monergism implied by having nothing on your part then you'll understand faith alone ultimately leads to Calvinism.

You came close to stumbling over the line when you said "If Christ does not come looking for you then you were never His to begin with."

I'm not Calvinist. But if I run your theology and thought things through I'd certainly would have to be. Its my opinion you haven't thought these things thru.

And plenty of the regular Calvinist need to take to the next level of hyper Calvinism , accept the double predestination and the unconditional hatred Jesus christ has over people.

When you get on the level of westboro baptists, thats perfect Calvinism.

 

the sheep don't attain sheepdom by hearing and following the shepherd, they are born that way.

 

I believe you are confused Samuels.
Jesus has given me eternal life, not life for a day, a week, a month, a year but for eternity. He has promised me that I will never perish - good enough for me.

it is not nonsense.

Since you ask, yes, i have walked with the LORD for 56 years.
I was saved while sitting on my bunk in a barracks reading a bible.

He turned my life upside down (actually right side up).

 

OK

 

Well here is why you are misunderstanding me.I have never believed in faith alone or grace alone. Faith has to be accepted and tested by the Lord. He knows of whether it is real or not. Salvation requires our convictions our repentance our Love of Jesus, Our surrender of our will to the will of the Lord and our faith All of these from us, and most importantly it requires the will of the Lord and His Grace..Calvinist practice easy Salvation they do not believe they have to have any of these I've mention
Our predestination is to be eventually conformed to the likeness of Christ. There is no such thing as double predestination. Nor is what I believe about it anything like what Calvinist believe. Calvinist believe they are predestined to be saved which is not possible.
You need to read the Bible brother because Christ is the Good Shepard and does go looking for His lost sheep. If He doesn't look for them then they were never His
MB

 

If you're so inclined, please define "OSAS".

 

Yes we are aware of that Samuels

 

I'm aware of what it means.
I'm also aware of what it means to those who believe and teach loss of salvation.

I no longer subscribe to "Once Saved, Always Saved", though I once did.

To me,"OSAS" comes from a misunderstanding of God's word that mainly "Semi-Pelagians" teach...
That a person becomes saved at the point of belief ( when they successfully choose to "accept Christ as Saviour", "surrendering" their lives to Him ), and then are kept by the power of God through that faith unto salvation ( 1 Peter 1:5 ).

As I see it, those who teach "OSAS" think that their faith and belief of the Gospel is what saved them, instead of faith being the evidence ( Hebrews 11:1 ) of that salvation...and they then rightly teach that God's power keeps them.

Rather, I believe and teach, "IF Saved, Always Saved".

From my perspective, this comes from a proper understanding of Scripture that salvation ( God's decision to save someone ) occurred long before they were born ( Romans 8:29-30, Ephesians 1:4-6 ), and they were notified of their salvation by the preaching of the Gospel ( Romans 10:8-20 ) and the Holy Spirit's "calling" ( Romans 8:29-30 ).

This also takes into account the parables of the "tares", as well as the parable of the sower, the wedding and all the other parables about abiding in the vine, the prodigal son, etc.

 

I agree.
To me, the doctrine that a man can perform an act or set of acts that will gain him God's favor comes, not from God's word, but from somewhere other than His word.

I agree.

Most don't, and most don't really take into account the reality that there are false teachers among them ( Matthew 7:15-16, Acts of the Apostles 20:29, 2 Peter 2:1 ), and that Paul actually feared that even Christ's sheep would listen to them ( 2 Corinthians 11:3-4 ).

But they don't have to continually be swayed by them:

The believer shall know true teachers and false ones by their fruits ( Galatians 5:19-23 ).
Please read verses 19-21 carefully, in Galatians 5.
These are the fruits that the believer shall know them by.

The gospels and epistles contain warnings about this, especially in 2 Corinthians, 2 Peter, and Galatians.

I agree, most wholeheartedly.

As a former angel who can transform himself into an angel of light ( 2 Corinthians 11:14 ), he can even make his ministers to look, outwardly, like the real ones ( 2 Corinthians 11:14 ).
He is the spirit that works in the children of disobedience ( Ephesians 2:2 ), and he is the original liar and the father of them ( John 8:44 ).

Again, I agree.

Loss of salvation is one of them, while another is that spiritually dead men can gain God's favor by our actions and strength of will.
Salvation is by grace through faith ( Ephesians 2:8 ), not by it, and not by works of righteousness which we have done ( Titus 3:5-6 ).

It is all according to His mercy.

 

This topic is something our departed brother Dr. Tom Cassidy and others debated. Although Tom would get into a heated discussion concerning one aspect of "OSAS" so-called at least he was knowledgeable. Personally I am undecided as to this point of doctrine that affects OSAS.

We both believed that salvation could not be lost. There is another area in which the debate depends. Predestination/Election.

These historical facts are documented in the discussions many of us had with Tom.

Namely - there was (at the historical beginning of the C v. A debate) only one difference between the two:

Arminius : Before the beginning of time, God looked ahead and chose the elect out of His foreknowledge.
IOW the choice of election was made before the passage of time began - God looked into the future and chose those who would accept His Son as His elect. John 1:12.

Calvin : Again, before the beginning of time, God chose the elect after the counsel of His own will by decree not by foreknowledge. Ephesians 1:11.

So in historical reality of the two Systematic Theologies for both C and A election/salvation was a done deal for any given individual. And in fact Arminianism seems a subset of Calvinism - it answers to what the "counsel" is of "the counsel of His own will".

Now there have been many enhancements to both systems between then and now.

Therefore IF SAVED ALWAYS SAVED would have worked quite well then as now.
Adherents to either system had far fewer differences in the beginning.

 

Great post. You are exactly right...Westboro Baptists represent the logical end and perfection of Calvinism.

The God of Calvinism not only hates, he but actually created people in order to take pleasure in dooming them to destruction.

 

But not the Biblical commands to love their neighbor, and as much as lies in them, to be at peace with all men.
I think that if the people at Westboro Baptist really took His words seriously, they would recognize that they are not acting in accordance with God's commands.

In my opinion, when it comes to "logical ends and perfectionism", you really should take a look at all sides, and not simply condemn those who believe in God's choice of the sinner to salvation as automatically being the "bad guys", no matter what you may have heard.

I've seen "Calvinists" go on the offensive, calling the "other side" all sorts of things.
I've also seen "Wesleyan Arminians" and "Traditionalists" tear "Calvinists" apart for their beliefs, not "sparing the whip".
It may not be as well-publicized...
But it still happens every day, while many "Calvinists" simply sit back and take it.

For example, go on over to a certain "Do Right " site and watch how the site owner rips apart "Calvinists"...

Then get into a discussion about loss of salvation with some "Wesleyan Arminians" on other sites, like I have, and simply stand your ground and share Scriptures with them.
It won't take long until the true "fruits" ( or lack of them ) come out.
I've been called everything from a charlatan, to "007 License to Sin", to a wolf in sheep's clothing and worse.

I've even seen treatment that begins to approach this sort of behavior on this forum, and I've only been here for about 15 months.
Finally, I won't dig into the historical aspect much, but one thing I'd like to bring to your attention...

The St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre of 1572, where Roman Catholic ( read, "free will Molinist" )-backed authorities and members of the churches went all over France, murdering Huguenots ( "Calvinists" ) by the thousands...simply for being "Calvinists".
This took place only 9 short years after the Council of Trent ended, where the Roman Catholic Church pronounced all things "Calvinist" as, "anathema".

So, what is that "logical end and perfection", again?
Of what...religious zeal?

Any group of men with any set of doctrines can have that.

 

At this point, you might get the idea that I'm intentionally trying to be mean...
That couldn't be further from the truth.

But one thing I'm attempting to get across to you, is the stark reality of the situation that we as men, find ourselves in according to His word:

Yes, He does hate ( Psalms 5:5, Psalms 11:5, Romans 9:13 ), and yes, He does love ( Psalms 37:28-38, Romans 9:13, Ephesians 2:4-10, 1 John 4:19 ).

As for creating some for mercy, and the rest for destruction ( Romans 9:22-24 )...
It's not like we all don't deserve Hell.
He knows each and every man and woman, and how they will respond, given the "chance":

Rebellious refusal to repent, and a willful enjoyment of sin... despite knowing that it brings death ( Romans 1:32 ).
There is no such thing as an "innocent person" ( Psalms 58:3, Romans 1:18-25 ).
in other words, left to ourselves, we would throw the "chance" right out the window, and try to hit Him in the face, if we could.

So...
If He wants to save some of us and cast the remainder into Hell, then that's His prerogative.
I encourage you to take up your objections regarding His justice and mercy with Him, if you think that He will listen.

 

"I think that if the people at Westboro Baptist really took His words seriously, they would recognize that they are not acting in accordance with God's commands."

Its perfect Calvinism. Tell me what is false message they are giving.

This is about teaching not who is more evil. IN teaching they are the smartest Calvinists, they've taken it to the full conclusion of perfect Calvinism.

I'm not saying this to demonize you or them. Show me where their teachings are wrong.

Even Calvinist universalists exists.


"you really should take a look at all sides, and not simply condemn those who believe in God's choice of the sinner to salvation as automatically being the "bad guys""

There is a saying treat those the way you want to be treated. So if Jesus Christ doesn't look at all sides and simply has an unconditional hatred for people, he is our example to follow.

Here's a challenge pull up one of the Westboro Baptist teachings you don't agree with.

 

I think that you've missed the point of the post that you quoted...

Religious people, no matter what their doctrines are, persecute and malign other people.
They see that anyone outside of their "box of righteousness" is the enemy, and they attempt to justify their actions by picking out pieces of the Bible that seem to suit their purposes...if it even goes that far.

"Perfect religion" does that...just like the Pharisees did.
They hate the message, and go about to discredit, defame or otherwise kill the messenger.
They treat people badly, and they don't seem to care...even when someone pulls up other parts of Scripture, and asks them why they are not obeying His commands.

I've seen "Arminians", "Traditionalists", "Calvinists", "Molinists", Roman Catholics, Baptists, and many more all do it.
Religion and religious zeal have no doctrinal limitations, Utilyan.

But a true relationship with God and His Son by way of the Holy Spirit?

That always results in obedience to His commands, at some point in a person's life.
God's children do not persecute their fellow man.

That salvation is entirely of God?
That is what the Bible teaches.

That we, as believers, are to treat others as we would be treated?
That is what the Bible teaches.

According to the above, which part of what the Bible teaches, is a group like Westboro not believing and following?

It seems that you've misunderstood again, Utilyan.
God does not have an unconditional hatred for people.

The condition that He hates, is sin.

Willful and persistent disobedience, even in the face of His goodness to them ( Romans 2:4 ).
God hates those who sin against Him, and refuse to repent and give it up.
Rebellious sinners are who He hates, not those who come to Him in true repentance.

He desires to show mercy ( Hosea 6:6, Matthew 9:13 )...
That is why He saved any of us, because of His desire to show mercy and kindness to men.
But that mercy is also shown to whosoever He wants ( Exodus 33:19, Romans 9:14-18 ), and is not dependent upon our desires.

So, if you truly desire mercy and forgiveness from Him because you recognize your sin, the fact that you've offended Him and the fact that He is your only hope for salvation from His wrath and those sins, it's because He has desired to show you that mercy and by revealing to you, by His word, your need of a Saviour ( Matthew 11:27, Luke 10:22 ).

If you truly love the Lord, it's because He first loved you ( 1 John 4:19 ).

Continue in His word, Utilyan, there's much more to it than simply John 3:16.