Soteriology 102

[Reformed1689]

A

Ephesians 2:8 NASB
For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this salvation is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;

The Greek construction of "though faith" is "dia pisteos." The preposition "dia" has the instrumentality meanings of "by means of" and "by reason of" and "because of." Calvinism claims the meaning of the phrase is "not through faith" or the opposite of what scripture teaches. But for those who believe scripture means what it says, then faith provides either the means by which we are saved or faith is the reason for which we were saved. The second meaning is the correct one, as the means by which we are saved is the precious blood of Christ.

Romans 4:23-24 teaches God will credit the faith of those who believe - God raised Jesus from the dead - for the believer's benefit. Some deny that benefit is salvation, but it would be absurd to say God saves those whose faith He does not credit as righteousness.

Again this is false. We accept by means of faith, not by reason of faith. Those are not the same thing. Apparently you believe they are.

 

[Reformed1689]

Ephesians 2:8 NASB
For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this salvation is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;

The Greek construction of "though faith" is "dia pisteos." The preposition "dia" has the instrumentality meanings of "by means of" and "by reason of" and "because of." Calvinism claims the meaning of the phrase is "not through faith" or the opposite of what scripture teaches. But for those who believe scripture means what it says, then faith provides either the means by which we are saved or faith is the reason for which we were saved. The second meaning is the correct one, as the means by which we are saved is the precious blood of Christ.

Romans 4:23-24 teaches God will credit the faith of those who believe - God raised Jesus from the dead - for the believer's benefit. Some deny that benefit is salvation, but it would be absurd to say God saves those whose faith He does not credit as righteousness.

I would also recommend you take a hermeneutics class. I am not saying that to be snarky. But it seems like you just look at the lexicon, find the definition that fits your theology and go with that despite it not being the proper usage.

 

[Dave G]

@JonC :
Since you are here, would you please give some thought to addressing the comments of individuals in this thread ( and other threads as well ) who seem to consider themselves above God's commands regarding personal conduct....
Or do the rules of this forum over-rule the commands of God, my friend?

Are comments like:

" Strawman arguments flow from Calvinist defenders of falsehood like water from a fire hose...",
" The endless question to change the subject ploy should be rejected as demonic..",
"More demonic endless questions from the found of endless questions.",

....and others ( even from the other side of the discussion ) edifying and constructive, or do they do nothing but insult the person to which they are aimed at...individual or otherwise?

What's more, this appears to me to be somewhat tame in the Baptist sections when compared to the "Other Denominations" sections, and far more seems to go on "under the radar" over there...Is it the policy of this forum to overlook such things, or is there a "three strikes rule where a chronic insultor is given the time to correct one's behavior before the mods take further action?

If so, I confess to needing to re-read the rules by which this forum operates, and come to grips with the fact that there are people here ( and some that have been here a long, long time ) that are indeed being allowed to treat others like trash, and yet never be reprimanded for it...

and seriously ask the question "How is this Christian?"

This has always baffled me since the first week that I joined here.

 

[JonC]

@JonC :
Since you are here, would you please give some thought to addressing the comments of individuals in this thread ( and other threads as well ) who seem to consider themselves above God's commands regarding personal conduct....
Or do the rules of this forum over-rule the commands of God, my friend?

Are comments like:
" Strawman arguments flow from Calvinist defenders of falsehood like water from a fire hose...",
" The endless question to change the subject ploy should be rejected as demonic..",
"More demonic endless questions from the found of endless questions.",

....and others ( even from the other side of the discussion ) edifying and constructive, or do they do nothing but insult the person to which they are aimed at...individual or otherwise?

What's more, this appears to me to be somewhat tame in the Baptist sections when compared to the "Other Denominations" sections, and far more seems to go on "under the radar" over there...
Is it the policy of this forum to overlook such things?

If so, I confess to needing to re-read the rules by which this forum operates, and come to grips with the fact that there are people here ( and some that have been here a long, long time ) that are indeed being allowed to treat others like trash, and yet never be reprimanded for it.

A lot of room is given in a few sections. Unfortunately members often fill the space.

I recommend reporting any post you think inappropriate and simply ignore the comments.

Many times members are reprimanded, but its unseen....and often it does not good.

That said, what you include in this posts (the quotes) are inappropriate and would be addressed of reported.

 

[JonC]

Jon,
As I see it, answering the underlined would result in another thread, and one in which I doubt I would participate...

Because it would make me the focus of the discussion and not God's words and His commands for us to edify one another with them, and with the Spirit that He has given to each of us as believers in Jesus Christ.

Same here, Brother.

 

[Dave G]

Many times members are reprimanded, but its unseen....and often it does not good.

Then if it does no good, you have a method by which you can make it stop, don't you?

That said, what you include in this posts (the quotes) are inappropriate and would be addressed of reported.

I would think that they would be obvious to the mods, Jon, but I understand the mechanic that is relied upon for such things...
However, since you are here, I shouldn't have to report them, should I?

 

[Van]

Van the victim is not a good move on your part. You are the one who habitually hurls insults left, right and center. You avoid questions that are relevant to the themes of these threads.
Tell you what, see if you can put a stop on using the word "Calvinists." You use it like a curse word. See if you are able to post without resorting to that tactic.

More off topic attacks on me personally. Why these never-ending violations are allowed is beyond me.

 

[Van]

"From the found" you say? Instead of avoiding questions that are pertinent to the thread --answer them and you will gain some respectability.

More off topic gratuitous insults from the fount.

 

[Van]

Van, SNIP.

The Calvinists are being allowed to spam the thread until the length allows closure.

 

[Van]

You did shoddy hermeneutic work by finding a lexicon that gives a definition that supports your view and inserted it into the passage even though that is not the usage of the word.
.

Shoddy? You quoted the post containing the link then said you had not seen it. That is beyond shoddy. Now you deny we are saved by means of the blood of Christ. How many more verses can Calvinism rewrite before someone says "enough!"

We were chosen individually for salvation by reason of faith as credited by God.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

The Calvinists are being allowed to spam the thread until the length allows closure.

There was nothing in Austin's post that was out of line. Don't throw a fit toward everyone. Examine yourself.

 

[Van]

Again this is false. We accept by means of faith, not by reason of faith. Those are not the same thing. Apparently you believe they are.

More mind reading from Calvinists. More false charges.

Does scripture say we are chosen "through faith" or "not through faith?"
Does scripture say "your faith" or "not your faith?"

And the Calvinist them claim to use "proper hermeneutics!" I kid you not.

 

[Van]

There was nothing in Austin's post that was out of line. Don't throw a fit toward everyone. Examine yourself.

Yet another off topic personal attack allowed to go on non-stop.

 

[Van]

Consider how people were "chosen" for salvation through or by reason of faith in the truth, 2 Thessalonians 2:13. If people were chosen for salvation before creation individually, they did not have faith as they did not exist. In order to cram the Calvinist or Arminian view into the text Ephesians 1:4 must be rewritten by liberals to read: God chose us as foreseen individuals with or without foreseen faith before God created us. In other words God created individuals before He created individuals. A liberal redefinition of creation. But it gets worse:

How were the people of Matthew 23:13 entering the kingdom. Because they have at least some spiritual ability. So what verse says they were enabled by "prevenient grace" or "Irresistible grace." None. But at least the verse supports the idea that whatever the grace used to reveal God and His kingdom to the lost, that grace is not irresistible.

Now lets address the verses that Calvinists and Arminians claim support for total spiritual inability. What verse says we cannot put our faith in God's revelation? They might say Romans 3:11. But what does Romans 3:11 say? No one EVER seeks God while unregenerate. Nope. It says no one seeks God and leaves to interpretation whether the meaning is no one seeks God all the time, some of the time or at any time. Certainly Paul's argument is no one seeks God when sinning, therefore we are all under sin. The verse does not say or imply that no one ever seeks God. And if the interpretation, "no one ever seeks God" were valid, then prevenient grace would be shown a fiction.

 

[Van]

Romans 3:25
whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, [because in God’s merciful restraint He let the sins previously committed go unpunished;

Galatians 3:14 in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham would come to the Gentiles, so that we would receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.

Galatians 3:26 For you are all sons and daughters of God through faith in Christ Jesus.

Ephesians 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this salvation is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;

Ephesians 3:12 in whom we have boldness and confident access through faith in Him.

Colossians 2:12 having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead.

2 Timothy 3:15 and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

Liberal Calvinists claim all these verses are wrong, and through faith means "not through faith" but through unconditional election.

 

[AustinC]

Let us address this: (see the bolded)
Ephesians 2:4-9
But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved— and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.

The bolded is of the foremost importance in understanding what "through faith" refers to.

Add:
Hebrews 12:2
looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God.

One cannot ignore these important verses as they define what "through faith" means.

 

[Reformed1689]

W

More mind reading from Calvinists. More false charges.

Does scripture say we are chosen "through faith" or "not through faith?"
Does scripture say "your faith" or "not your faith?"

And the Calvinist them claim to use "proper hermeneutics!" I kid you not.

What Calvinist has said we are not saved through faith? I sure have not said that. Why do you keep bearing false witness against me?

 

[Reformed1689]

Shoddy? You quoted the post containing the link then said you had not seen it. That is beyond shoddy. Now you deny we are saved by means of the blood of Christ. How many more verses can Calvinism rewrite before someone says "enough!"

We were chosen individually for salvation by reason of faith as credited by God.

Van where did I say we are not saved by means of the blood of Christ? YOu are again bearing false witness.

 

[JonC]

Then if it does no good, you have a method by which you can make it stop, don't you?

I would think that they would be obvious to the mods, Jon, but I understand the mechanic that is relied upon for such things...
However, since you are here, I shouldn't have to report them, should I?

We do. Members are warned for inappropriate behavior. They are given points. Once they accumulate 4 points they are locked out until a point drops off.

Yes, you will need to report them. I do not read through every post. Sometimes people antagonize one other. Sometimes a member just attacks.

So typically we consider something as being inappropriate based on the person targeted by the comment.

Reports also give other staff members a way of stepping in as well.

If it's bad enough, or a strong enough history, an Administrator may consider banning the person. I'm not an Administrator so I can't ban people.

 

[SavedByGrace]

Van, that I'm not a "Calvinist" and never have been