Biblical vs Reformed Salvation

[Dave G]

so repentance of sins for forgiveness and salvation is not a requirement?

It's evidence, my friend.
If they were requirements that we as men could meet ( outside of the new birth, anyway ), then that would make it all of works,
and God would be dependent upon us as men doing those things, not because of His work of grace in us, but in order to choose who to bestow His work of grace upon.

 

[Dave G]

Just look at those words again, slowly.

I have, my friend, and for many years now.

A literal reversing of Bible truth - and spoken with all the gravity of a great-horned owl.

George, God's children do not persecute and mock people.

I respect that you have a different opinion than I do...
But if you're going to express it, why not do so in accordance with the Lord commands pertaining to Christian conduct?

 

[Dave G]

Tranlsation: "The Bible passage which, by virtue of its correlative language to Calvinistic philosophy, most fortuitously lends itself to being molded into the Calvinistic mold, is Romans 8:29-30".

George, if you like, we can go through Romans 8:29-30 again,
and I would be happy to show you how I see it revealing how and why God saves someone.

In fact, I think an even better passage to look at, is Psalms 65:4;
To me, that one is even more simplistic, and does an even better job of showing just how salvation is completely of God's grace outside and totally apart from, the efforts of men.

 

[Dave G]

Why does it say that God "endures with much longsuffering" with those who are "fitted to destruction"? Is it because God is not willing that any of these perish?

No.

Rather, in 2 Peter 3:9 ( if that is what you are referring to in the underlined ), the context that I see for the "us-ward" is not all of mankind, but the beloved from verse 8.
He is longsuffering for the elect's sake.
Take a look at the entire passage from 2 Peter 3:1 to 2 Peter 3:10.

I'm also reminded of this:

" Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord. Behold, the husbandman waiteth for the precious fruit of the earth, and hath long patience for it, until he receive the early and latter rain." ( James 5:7 ).

The precious fruit of the earth are God's children, who bear spiritual fruit...30, 60 and 100-fold.
He is very patient and loving toward them, and waits.
Paul emphasized this in 2 Timothy 2:10 by stating how he endured all things for the sake of God's elect.

In addition, see Matthew 13:30,
where the angels bind the "tares" into bundles and casts them into the furnace, but He has them gather the "wheat" into His barn.

The "wheat" are the ones the Lord Jesus is referring to when He says, "...behold, I say unto you, Lift up your eyes, and look on the fields; for they are white already to harvest." ( John 4:35 )...
For truly, when He went to the cross, the vast number of people who were to be called, had not yet been called.

 

[Dave G]

for starters, you believe in the "free will" in all humans? Otherwise your reasoning here is moot!

No, I do not believe that we as human beings possess a will that is completely free.
The way I see the Scriptures presenting, our will is bound by our nature;

If unregenerate ( not born again ), we sin and love it.
Our will is enslaved to that which we love ( Romans 1:18-32 ).
If regenerate ( born again ), that love of sin is broken and we are now become willing servants to Christ and His commands ( Romans 6 ).

Again, our will is enslaved that that which we love...
God, or us.

It takes the power of God to break the connection... we will not do it ourselves ( John 3:19-20, John 5:40 ).

 

[AustinC]

Huh? in verse 34 Jesus tells these Jews, "but I say these things so that you may be saved". And again, 39-40, "You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me, yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life.". These Jews were the ones that refused to come to Jesus that they may have eternal life, not that Jesus did not want them saved!

Jeremiah 29:13, "You will seek me and find me, when you seek me with all your heart."

Deuteronomy 4:29, " But if from there you seek the LORD your God, you will find him if you seek him with all your heart and with all your soul."

Proverbs 8:17, "I love those who love me, and those who seek me find me."

Acts 8:27, "God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us."

Are all of these verses of no value?

These two posts prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are clueless regarding the covenants God has made. Please study the covenants and perhaps then you will grasp what Jesus is saying in his sermon.on the mount. It is obvious to me that your ignorance of the covenants is a major reason for your struggles in interpreting scripture.

The title of this thread should really be: "Why sbg's interpretation is correct while everyone else can suck it." That is really what you have been attempting in the roughly dozen threads you have created on the same subject where no one agrees with you.

 

[Reformed1689]

What does Jesus mean by His words in verse 34

He simply is giving the Gospel that those who have ears to hear may be saved. It says nothing about that being for each one of them. That is something you have added into the text.

 

[Dave G]

Huh? in verse 34 Jesus tells these Jews, "but I say these things so that you may be saved". And again, 39-40, "You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me, yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life.". These Jews were the ones that refused to come to Jesus that they may have eternal life, not that Jesus did not want them saved!

The Lord Jesus came to do the will of the Father;
His Father's will is and was that He save all the ones ( and raise them up ) that He was given:

" All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.
39 And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.
40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day." ( John 6:37-40 ).

Whether or not it is or was Christ's will to save anyone, He came to do His Father's will...not His own.

While He has power over all flesh, He only gives eternal life to as many as were given to Him by the Father ( John 17:2 ).
Jesus preached to them anyway, but it was still His Father's will that He save only those that believed;
And why did they believe?

Because they were "of God" ( John 8:47 ), heard His voice and followed Him ( John 10:27 ), had ears to hear ( Matthew 11:15 ) and had had it revealed to them by the Father who He is ( Matthew 11:27 ).

Question:
Why did Peter believe on Christ?

" And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed [it] unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven." ( Matthew 16:17 ).

 

[George Antonios]

I have, my friend, and for many years now.

George, God's children do not persecute and mock people.

I respect that you have a different opinion than I do...
But if you're going to express it, why not do so in accordance with the Lord commands pertaining to Christian conduct?

This from the man who believes men who reject Calvinism are probably lost!



It's therefore a little rich on your part to play the persecuted part.
And slapping "sir" at the end of your opinions doesn't elevate them to nobility, it's nothing but a white glove on a slapping hand.
Some of us have learned to smell a sanctimonious brother (yes, I consider you a brother) when we come across one and to cut through the veneer of soberness. That's what ruffled your...feathers...sir.

 

[Dave G]

This from the man who believes men who reject Calvinism are probably lost!

Probably, but I never said definitely.
After all, the only one who has the absolute authority to tell someone that they are not saved is the Lord Himself, and that will happen on Judgment Day.

It's therefore a little rich on your part to play the persecuted part.
And slapping "sir" at the end of your opinions doesn't elevate them to nobility, it's nothing but a white glove on a slapping hand.
Some of us have learned to smell a sanctimonious brother (yes, I consider you a brother) when we come across one and to cut through the veneer of soberness. That's what ruffled your feathers.

George,

I'm not sanctimonious, neither do I try to come off as such.
If you're taking it that way, I'm sorry about that... but how you read my posts ( and what you read into them ) is beyond my control.
Also, my using "sir" is a sign of respect that I learned long before I enlisted in the U.S. Navy 35 years ago, and I genuinely mean it when I type it.

I hold no ill will towards you or anyone else on this forum.

The truth is, I'm doing my best to remain as respectful as possible towards you, all the while disagreeing with what you teach and preach.
I will always show those who disagree with me as much respect as I'm able to, and as much as lies within me, to be at peace with all men.


If I've offended you by calling you out on a comment that I believe was intended to ridicule me ( and you didn't intend to ), then I offer my apologies.
But if you did indeed intend to ridicule me, do you think that's a Christian thing to do, even to one's enemies?
I hope not.

That said, having my feathers ruffled doesn't bother me near as much as it used to;
What bothers me more, is seeing all the people that throw insults around on Christian forums, and don't seem to think there's anything wrong with it.
I do, and I'd much prefer that we were all more mindful of our actions, and that we all do our best to remain civil in our discussions...
No matter which "side" we are on.


I wish you a good evening, sir.

 

[SavedByGrace]

No, I LOVE the truth found in scripture. I have just seldom observed an exchange of single verses ripped from their context leading to TRUTH. So this game of Scripture pong is unlikely to yield “Scripture truth”.

clarify?

 

[SavedByGrace]

It's evidence, my friend.
If they were requirements that we as men could meet ( outside of the new birth, anyway ), then that would make it all of works,
and God would be dependent upon us as men doing those things, not because of His work of grace in us, but in order to choose who to bestow His work of grace upon.

I think that you are following the "Reformed" undersatnding of this. No person can ever "merit" (work) towards their salvation, which is very clear from Romans 11:6, "But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace". However, when a person actually complies with a just demand made by the Lord, this "work" is not for "merit", but the "doing" of what the Lord requires. Take a look at a couple of examples.

Jonah 3:10, "And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not" (KJV)

This is in response to the people of Nineveh, who acted upon the preaching of Jonah, as commanded by the Lord, that they sould repent, which they all did, from the King down to the lowest person. Note how the KJV translates, "And God saw their WORKS". But then goes on to explain what this is, "that they turned from their evil way". There is no "merit" on their behalf here, but simply their obeying what the Lord had required from them.

Likewise, as in the passage from Acts 2 I have used in the OP, after Peter had preched his message, those who head him were, "cut to the heart" (37), which no doubt is the conviction of the Holy Spirit. How did they respond? They asked, "what shall we DO?". Peter did not say, "do nothing", but instead told them that they must "repent...for the remission of sins" (38), and then they would receive the "Gift of the Holy Spirit" (38), and get themselves saved. Which is what Peter again says in the next chapter, "Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord." (3:19)

This has got nothing to do with a person "earning" their salvation, but following the just demands of the Lord.

 

[SavedByGrace]

If unregenerate ( not born again ), we sin and love it.

how about those who are "unregenerate", like the Roman Catholic nuns, and others, who do not live lives of sin, and morally are probably very upright? They might not "know" the Lord, or even be "saved", but they do "choose" to live lives that would to some extent be "pleasing" to the Lord. This is seen in Acts 10:34-35, "So Peter opened his mouth and said: “Truly I understand that God shows no partiality, but in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him.". Works?

 

[SavedByGrace]

He simply is giving the Gospel that those who have ears to hear may be saved. It says nothing about that being for each one of them. That is something you have added into the text.

you are ignoring what the Bible says, because it goes against your "theology"! It is very clear, that everything that Jesus had told these murdering Jews, from verse 17 till now in verse 34, was for this purpose, "but I say these things so that you may be saved". Two things here. Firstly, Jesus desired their salvation, this is very clear. Secondly, by Jesus saying this, must mean that His Death on the cross and shedding of His blood, was also for these, or else He would not have told them what He does in this verse!

 

[SavedByGrace]

These two posts prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are clueless regarding the covenants God has made. Please study the covenants and perhaps then you will grasp what Jesus is saying in his sermon.on the mount. It is obvious to me that your ignorance of the covenants is a major reason for your struggles in interpreting scripture.

The title of this thread should really be: "Why sbg's interpretation is correct while everyone else can suck it." That is really what you have been attempting in the roughly dozen threads you have created on the same subject where no one agrees with you.

I think that you need to let the Holy Bible teach you, and not some theological nut! You cannot respond to the OP because you know that it is right!

 

[SavedByGrace]

without any outside Reformed influences

Do you know this for a fact, that he does not have any Reformed books on theology, or reads them online, or attends a Church that is "Reformed"?

 

[Reformed1689]

I think that you are following the "Reformed" undersatnding of this. No person can ever "merit" (work) towards their salvation, which is very clear from Romans 11:6, "But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace". However, when a person actually complies with a just demand made by the Lord, this "work" is not for "merit", but the "doing" of what the Lord requires. Take a look at a couple of examples.

Jonah 3:10, "And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not" (KJV)

This is in response to the people of Nineveh, who acted upon the preaching of Jonah, as commanded by the Lord, that they sould repent, which they all did, from the King down to the lowest person. Note how the KJV translates, "And God saw their WORKS". But then goes on to explain what this is, "that they turned from their evil way". There is no "merit" on their behalf here, but simply their obeying what the Lord had required from them.

Likewise, as in the passage from Acts 2 I have used in the OP, after Peter had preched his message, those who head him were, "cut to the heart" (37), which no doubt is the conviction of the Holy Spirit. How did they respond? They asked, "what shall we DO?". Peter did not say, "do nothing", but instead told them that they must "repent...for the remission of sins" (38), and then they would receive the "Gift of the Holy Spirit" (38), and get themselves saved. Which is what Peter again says in the next chapter, "Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord." (3:19)

This has got nothing to do with a person "earning" their salvation, but following the just demands of the Lord.

Why do you think Calvinists disagree with repentance? We don't.

 

[Reformed1689]

you are ignoring what the Bible says, because it goes against your "theology"! It is very clear, that everything that Jesus had told these murdering Jews, from verse 17 till now in verse 34, was for this purpose, "but I say these things so that you may be saved". Two things here. Firstly, Jesus desired their salvation, this is very clear. Secondly, by Jesus saying this, must mean that His Death on the cross and shedding of His blood, was also for these, or else He would not have told them what He does in this verse!

No, what is clear is that you are taking things out of context. And it says may be, not will be. And you are reading things into the passage that simply are not there.

 

[SavedByGrace]

In other words, godly sorrow is the fruit of salvation.

Please read the verse again, "For godly sorrow produces a repentance that leads to salvation without regret, whereas worldly sorrow produces death."

If the "godly sorrow", "produces a repentance that leads to salvation"; how then can this be a "fruit", which is something that is "after"?. A sinner does not first bear the "fruits of repentance" what John the Baptist speaks of, and then is required to get baptised, "for repentance" (Matthew 3:11). It is the other way round!

 

[SavedByGrace]

Why do you think Calvinists disagree with repentance? We don't.

There are some, like R C Sproul, that teach that a sinner does not require to "repent and believe in the Gospel", as Jesus teaches in Mark 1:15, so that they may be saved. They see "repentance" as a "work", which is complete rubbish, as it is the obeying of the just demand by God for all sinners, and not any "merit" involved by the sinner.