"Only God can save and He has chosen to save those that believe in His son."

[AustinC]

"Only God can save and He has chosen to save those that believe in His son."

That is the claim of a regular poster here at the BB.

Let's explore this claim and see how it contradicts itself.

First: "Only God can save."
Every Christian will agree with this truth. No one can save themselves. No one, by their "cooperation", adds assistance to their salvation. Truly, "only God can save."

Second: He has chosen to save."
The Bible also teaches this truth, that God chose His children before the foundation of the world. Whether you argue election or foreknowledge, the reality is that God chose.

Third: "those that believe in His son."
Notice the twist and the contradiction this phrase adds to the sentence. Truly, only God can save and he has chosen to save. If the sentence ended there, we would agree that we all have been saved by grace alone. But, the author of the sentence injects human effort and will into the process and thereby denies the first two universal points. By stating "those that believe in His son" the author makes human will more important than God's will. God, by that last phrase, is forced to not choose and not save...until...the human has willed God to action by his/her own request/demand that Jesus save them. The human is responsible for believing and that human effort forces God to choose that person and save them.

Notice that such a teaching removes grace and inserts works. It tries to hide behind two truths and then deny the two truths by inserting a lie that contradicts the two truths. It inserts human will as the cause agent that effects God and forces God to save the person who wills themselves to believe. That teaching is entirely graceless.

The graceless teaching then attempts to insert prooftexts where God tells people to believe, yet ignores all the verses stating that God first elects, chooses, predestines, and adopts those whom He saves. God does the work of regeneration and reconciliation before a person has the capacity to believe. Passages like Romans 1, Romans 8, Romans 9, Galatians 3, Ephesians 1, Ephesians 2, Hebrews 9, John 6, John 10, and John 17, etc, are ignored or twisted in an attempt to keep man as the cause agent of his own salvation, which nullifies the first two phrases of the original sentence.
"Only God can save and He has chosen to save those that believe in His son."

The correct sentence is:
"God chooses to save and God empowers those He saves to believe they are saved."

That, is amazing grace.

 

[Silverhair]

"Only God can save and He has chosen to save those that believe in His son."

That is the claim of a regular poster here at the BB.

Let's explore this claim and see how it contradicts itself.

First: "Only God can save."
Every Christian will agree with this truth. No one can save themselves. No one, by their "cooperation", adds assistance to their salvation. Truly, "only God can save."

Second: He has chosen to save."
The Bible also teaches this truth, that God chose His children before the foundation of the world. Whether you argue election or foreknowledge, the reality is that God chose.

Third: "those that believe in His son."
Notice the twist and the contradiction this phrase adds to the sentence. Truly, only God can save and he has chosen to save. If the sentence ended there, we would agree that we all have been saved by grace alone. But, the author of the sentence injects human effort and will into the process and thereby denies the first two universal points. By stating "those that believe in His son" the author makes human will more important than God's will. God, by that last phrase, is forced to not choose and not save...until...the human has willed God to action by his/her own request/demand that Jesus save them. The human is responsible for believing and that human effort forces God to choose that person and save them.

Notice that such a teaching removes grace and inserts works. It tries to hide behind two truths and then deny the two truths by inserting a lie that contradicts the two truths. It inserts human will as the cause agent that effects God and forces God to save the person who wills themselves to believe. That teaching is entirely graceless.

The graceless teaching then attempts to insert prooftexts where God tells people to believe, yet ignores all the verses stating that God first elects, chooses, predestines, and adopts those whom He saves. God does the work of regeneration and reconciliation before a person has the capacity to believe. Passages like Romans 1, Romans 8, Romans 9, Galatians 3, Ephesians 1, Ephesians 2, Hebrews 9, John 6, John 10, and John 17, etc, are ignored or twisted in an attempt to keep man as the cause agent of his own salvation, which nullifies the first two phrases of the original sentence.
"Only God can save and He has chosen to save those that believe in His son."

The correct sentence is:
"God chooses to save and God empowers those He saves to believe they are saved."

That, is amazing grace.

And you continue to ignore what the Holy Spirit says and hold to a philosophy that has Gnostic roots. Why do you insist on doing that?

The Message of Salvation to All
Rom 10:5 For Moses writes about the righteousness which is of the law, "THE MAN WHO DOES THOSE THINGS SHALL LIVE BY THEM."
Rom 10:6 But the righteousness of faith speaks in this way, "DO NOT SAY IN YOUR HEART, 'WHO WILL ASCEND INTO HEAVEN?' " (that is, to bring Christ down from above)
Rom 10:7 or, " 'WHO WILL DESCEND INTO THE ABYSS?' " (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead).
Rom 10:8 But what does it say? "THE WORD IS NEAR YOU, IN YOUR MOUTH AND IN YOUR HEART" (that is, the word of faith which we preach):
Rom 10:9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.
Rom 10:10 For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
Rom 10:11 For the Scripture says, "WHOEVER BELIEVES ON HIM WILL NOT BE PUT TO SHAME."
Rom 10:12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him.
Rom 10:13 For "WHOEVER CALLS ON THE NAME OF THE LORD SHALL BE SAVED."
Rom 10:14 How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher?
Rom 10:15 And how shall they preach unless they are sent? As it is written: "HOW BEAUTIFUL ARE THE FEET OF THOSE WHO PREACH THE GOSPEL OF PEACE, WHO BRING GLAD TIDINGS OF GOOD THINGS!"
Rom 10:16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, "LORD, WHO HAS BELIEVED OUR REPORT?"
Rom 10:17 So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
Rom 10:18 But I say, have they not heard? Yes indeed: "THEIR SOUND HAS GONE OUT TO ALL THE EARTH, AND THEIR WORDS TO THE ENDS OF THE WORLD."
Rom 10:19 But I say, did Israel not know? First Moses says: "I WILL PROVOKE YOU TO JEALOUSY BY THOSE WHO ARE NOT A NATION, I WILL MOVE YOU TO ANGER BY A FOOLISH NATION."
Rom 10:20 But Isaiah is very bold and says: "I WAS FOUND BY THOSE WHO DID NOT SEEK ME; I WAS MADE MANIFEST TO THOSE WHO DID NOT ASK FOR ME."
Rom 10:21 But to Israel he says: "ALL DAY LONG I HAVE STRETCHED OUT MY HANDS TO A DISOBEDIENT AND CONTRARY PEOPLE."

 

[Silverhair]

Peace with God Through Faith
Rom 5:1 Therefore, since we have been declared righteous by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,
Rom 5:2 through whom we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in the hope of God's glory.

 

[DaveXR650]

"Only God can save and He has chosen to save those that believe in His son."

That statement is completely true as written. No one will be saved who does not believe. That's why Calvinist theologians like Owen and Edwards called faith a "condition" for salvation. That's why the great confessions and all the covenant oriented churches teach that faith is a condition you meet in order to be saved. There are in fact many conditions you have to do in order to be saved.

But some of the guys on here make that statement as a way of explaining election. It is not meant to be that. It is also not meant as a way of putting yourself in the drivers seat as far as the accomplishment of your salvation is concerned.

 

[AustinC]

And you continue to ignore what the Holy Spirit says and hold to a philosophy that has Gnostic roots. Why do you insist on doing that?

The Message of Salvation to All
Rom 10:5 For Moses writes about the righteousness which is of the law, "THE MAN WHO DOES THOSE THINGS SHALL LIVE BY THEM."
Rom 10:6 But the righteousness of faith speaks in this way, "DO NOT SAY IN YOUR HEART, 'WHO WILL ASCEND INTO HEAVEN?' " (that is, to bring Christ down from above)
Rom 10:7 or, " 'WHO WILL DESCEND INTO THE ABYSS?' " (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead).
Rom 10:8 But what does it say? "THE WORD IS NEAR YOU, IN YOUR MOUTH AND IN YOUR HEART" (that is, the word of faith which we preach):
Rom 10:9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.
Rom 10:10 For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
Rom 10:11 For the Scripture says, "WHOEVER BELIEVES ON HIM WILL NOT BE PUT TO SHAME."
Rom 10:12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him.
Rom 10:13 For "WHOEVER CALLS ON THE NAME OF THE LORD SHALL BE SAVED."
Rom 10:14 How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher?
Rom 10:15 And how shall they preach unless they are sent? As it is written: "HOW BEAUTIFUL ARE THE FEET OF THOSE WHO PREACH THE GOSPEL OF PEACE, WHO BRING GLAD TIDINGS OF GOOD THINGS!"
Rom 10:16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, "LORD, WHO HAS BELIEVED OUR REPORT?"
Rom 10:17 So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
Rom 10:18 But I say, have they not heard? Yes indeed: "THEIR SOUND HAS GONE OUT TO ALL THE EARTH, AND THEIR WORDS TO THE ENDS OF THE WORLD."
Rom 10:19 But I say, did Israel not know? First Moses says: "I WILL PROVOKE YOU TO JEALOUSY BY THOSE WHO ARE NOT A NATION, I WILL MOVE YOU TO ANGER BY A FOOLISH NATION."
Rom 10:20 But Isaiah is very bold and says: "I WAS FOUND BY THOSE WHO DID NOT SEEK ME; I WAS MADE MANIFEST TO THOSE WHO DID NOT ASK FOR ME."
Rom 10:21 But to Israel he says: "ALL DAY LONG I HAVE STRETCHED OUT MY HANDS TO A DISOBEDIENT AND CONTRARY PEOPLE."

Peace with God Through Faith
Rom 5:1 Therefore, since we have been declared righteous by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,
Rom 5:2 through whom we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in the hope of God's glory.

Already addressed. In providing these verses without acknowledging the passages I provided in the OP, you actually prove my point regarding your methodology and twisting of the Bible to make man supreme and God his servant.

 

[AustinC]

That statement is completely true as written. No one will be saved who does not believe. That's why Calvinist theologians like Owen and Edwards called faith a "condition" for salvation. That's why the great confessions and all the covenant oriented churches teach that faith is a condition you meet in order to be saved. There are in fact many conditions you have to do in order to be saved.

But some of the guys on here make that statement as a way of explaining election. It is not meant to be that. It is also not meant as a way of putting yourself in the drivers seat as far as the accomplishment of your salvation is concerned.

See the bolded red.
Your statement is incorrect. It is meant to put humans in the driver's seat. If it were not, then free will would be a moot point. But, the crux of the matter is the absolute demand that humans must have free will and therefore autonomy over God.
So, your bolded red statement is utterly wrong when free will is the demand of the poster.

 

[DaveXR650]

See the bolded red.
Your statement is incorrect. It is meant to put humans in the driver's seat. If it were not, then free will would be a moot point. But, the crux of the matter is the absolute demand that humans must have free will and therefore autonomy over God.
So, your bolded red statement is utterly wrong when free will is the demand of the poster.

Maybe I didn't express it clearly but I just meant that the original statement should not be used to make the fact that belief is necessary into a statement that supports a certain view of election and an elevation of free will as the determining factor in a person being saved. I don't think we disagree on the theology here although I don't share your view of the importance of it beyond just a theological debate.
For the record, I do not believe that anyone would ever be saved without the direct action and operation of the Holy Spirit on the individual. I do think the Holy Spirit's work is on your will and therefore you do come to faith and repentance as an act of your will - but it's a renewed will, by the operation of the Holy Spirit. I think that agrees with the major confessions. If I am wrong in that let me know.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Pure & simple, Arminian theology derived from the origins of Catholicism, then passed to Anglicans and Methodists, ie the sacramental works based practices.

 

[AustinC]

Maybe I didn't express it clearly but I just meant that the original statement should not be used to make the fact that belief is necessary into a statement that supports a certain view of election and an elevation of free will as the determining factor in a person being saved. I don't think we disagree on the theology here although I don't share your view of the importance of it beyond just a theological debate.
For the record, I do not believe that anyone would ever be saved without the direct action and operation of the Holy Spirit on the individual. I do think the Holy Spirit's work is on your will and therefore you do come to faith and repentance as an act of your will - but it's a renewed will, by the operation of the Holy Spirit. I think that agrees with the major confessions. If I am wrong in that let me know.

Dave, you complicate things with your view.
Either God causes us to be made alive apart from our efforts or our efforts cause God to make us alive. Which is it?

The sentence, "Only God can save and He has chosen to save those that believe in His son", posits that our efforts cause God to make us alive.

 

[DaveXR650]

Dave, you complicate things with your view.
Either God causes us to be made alive apart from our efforts or our efforts cause God to make us alive. Which is it?

I just think that there is a certain level of complexity that is irreducible and still have meaning. And some of the best theologians seemed to think the same way. Your belief is absolutely essential for salvation. Or Owen, Edwards, and the WCF and the other great confessions of faith are wrong. But these same guys and these same confessions put a high value, a decisive and essential value on the work of God in all this. You have to have both and it cannot be simplified to not include both.

I don't expect you to necessarily agree with that. But I want you or anyone else on this board to show me where my view does not agree with those theologians and the great confessions of faith. Do not come on here with a "which is it" demand when all I am doing is taking the position of most Calvinists and most of the confessions of faith. I could easily be wrong but show me where. Otherwise, I charge that you are presenting an aberrant, poor rendition of Calvinism that makes logical demands on people that should not be. I want to know where your support is in this and who backs this up. I've told you where I get what I'm saying. You tell me where you are coming from.

 

[AustinC]

I just think that there is a certain level of complexity that is irreducible and still have meaning. And some of the best theologians seemed to think the same way. Your belief is absolutely essential for salvation. Or Owen, Edwards, and the WCF and the other great confessions of faith are wrong. But these same guys and these same confessions put a high value, a decisive and essential value on the work of God in all this. You have to have both and it cannot be simplified to not include both.

I don't expect you to necessarily agree with that. But I want you or anyone else on this board to show me where my view does not agree with those theologians and the great confessions of faith. Do not come on here with a "which is it" demand when all I am doing is taking the position of most Calvinists and most of the confessions of faith. I could easily be wrong but show me where. Otherwise, I charge that you are presenting an aberrant, poor rendition of Calvinism that makes logical demands on people that should not be. I want to know where your support is in this and who backs this up. I've told you where I get what I'm saying. You tell me where you are coming from.

Sigh, you always go to secondary sources and rarely address the primary source.

 

[DaveXR650]

Sigh, you always go to secondary sources and rarely address the primary source.

Yes. That is on purpose. You and Silverhair are using the same verses. The problem seems to be in explaining how those scriptures should be applied. That's why you have confessions and writings of theologians, secondary sources. I think I actually agree with you on this in principle but I would not dissect a statement too far. The original statement by itself is OK but I admit that further discussion with some people seems to indicate they mean more by it than the statement itself says.

The correct sentence is:
"God chooses to save and God empowers those He saves to believe they are saved."

I mean if you were to pick people's statements apart this statement is worse than the original. People aren't saved "to believe they are saved". Believing you are saved is not saving faith. Reliance on Christ and believing the gospel is saving faith. But of course if you take a theology to an extreme you get to where you can't even have a concept of "saving faith". After all, saving faith implies that faith has something to do with salvation and you are trying to tell people they are saved first and then believe. You have to explain these things and it is good to use secondary sources and to be patient with people that don't yet see it like you do. It wouldn't hurt to admit that they too are just looking at scripture and may have a point too.

 

[AustinC]

Yes. That is on purpose. You and Silverhair are using the same verses. The problem seems to be in explaining how those scriptures should be applied. That's why you have confessions and writings of theologians, secondary sources. I think I actually agree with you on this in principle but I would not dissect a statement too far. The original statement by itself is OK but I admit that further discussion with some people seems to indicate they mean more by it than the statement itself says.

I mean if you were to pick people's statements apart this statement is worse than the original. People aren't saved "to believe they are saved". Believing you are saved is not saving faith. Reliance on Christ and believing the gospel is saving faith. But of course if you take a theology to an extreme you get to where you can't even have a concept of "saving faith". After all, saving faith implies that faith has something to do with salvation and you are trying to tell people they are saved first and then believe. You have to explain these things and it is good to use secondary sources and to be patient with people that don't yet see it like you do. It wouldn't hurt to admit that they too are just looking at scripture and may have a point too.

People are saved because God wrote their names in his will (Hebrews 9:15-17). He chose them before the foundation of the world and he graciously saved each one, marking them as his own rather than leaving them to be marked by the beast. It is a great act of grace that God intended from the beginning. God's method of saving them is to preach the good news to them and then cause them to be made alive. Faith is the effect of all these mechanisms of God happening on our behalf. Faith is not some magic key that opens the door to God's house so we can walk in and declare that we made it in by our faith.
Faith is a confirmation of our salvation. This is precisely why Satan prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking to devour our faith. But Hebrews tells us that Jesus ever intercedes for us (just as Jesus did for Peter before the cross). This gift of faith is what God uses to accomplish the good works that he has ordained us to do.

People, likely due to bad teaching, end up worshipping faith as an idol of their own making and thus they take away God's deserved glory and give it to another.

 

[DaveXR650]

Faith is a confirmation of our salvation.

The Westminster Confession of Faith says concerning saving faith in Chapter 14 that "The grace of faith, whereby the elect are enabled to believe to the saving of their souls, is the work of the Spirit of Christ in their hearts..."

I think, if you are wanting to be precise, that the way you put it, that it's a "confirmation of our salvation" is substantially different in meaning than "enabled to believe to the saving of their souls", which, while not minimizing the importance of the work of the Holy Spirit also does not make faith of less importance than it is. I think you are in error here, not in actual orthodoxy, but just in the way you are expressing it.

I do think it's possible to emphasize "faith" to the point of making it the merit or cause of salvation, which it isn't. And I also think that a teaching of free will being the primary reason for a person coming to faith has and does lead to the use of various techniques and reliance on the persuasive abilities of the worker or preacher. You end up trying to create moods in services, and using techniques to persuade. The result of that is people who by being argued into or psychologically manipulated into "making a decision" are left puzzled or made cynical when it doesn't last. In fact, they were not born again and the Holy Spirit has not done any work in their lives. I believe that like in the case of the Philippian jailer he really had to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ in order to be saved. But I agree with you if you are just saying that the Holy Spirit had already done His work on him when he said "What must I do to be saved?"

 

[AustinC]

The Westminster Confession of Faith says concerning saving faith in Chapter 14 that "The grace of faith, whereby the elect are enabled to believe to the saving of their souls, is the work of the Spirit of Christ in their hearts..."

I think, if you are wanting to be precise, that the way you put it, that it's a "confirmation of our salvation" is substantially different in meaning than "enabled to believe to the saving of their souls", which, while not minimizing the importance of the work of the Holy Spirit also does not make faith of less importance than it is. I think you are in error here, not in actual orthodoxy, but just in the way you are expressing it.

I do think it's possible to emphasize "faith" to the point of making it the merit or cause of salvation, which it isn't. And I also think that a teaching of free will being the primary reason for a person coming to faith has and does lead to the use of various techniques and reliance on the persuasive abilities of the worker or preacher. You end up trying to create moods in services, and using techniques to persuade. The result of that is people who by being argued into or psychologically manipulated into "making a decision" are left puzzled or made cynical when it doesn't last. In fact, they were not born again and the Holy Spirit has not done any work in their lives. I believe that like in the case of the Philippian jailer he really had to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ in order to be saved. But I agree with you if you are just saying that the Holy Spirit had already done His work on him when he said "What must I do to be saved?"

When we study scripture we see the "already, not yet" even in regards to salvation. God saved us by his grace because we were chosen before the foundation of the world. There is nothing we ever did to cause that. It is all God working out what always was determined. Yet, we are told to work out our salvation and that our salvation will occur when we meet Christ Jesus face to face. Therefore the perseverance of the saints is needed in our salvation. It isn't like some who erroneously teach. "say the sinners prayer and your saved by virtue of once saved always saved." The work of salvation is an already, not yet work of God in us.

 

[percho]

Is the gospel, A. good news of the word of God concerning how salvation was wrought for man or B. good news of how man can secure his salvation?

 

[DaveXR650]

Is the gospel, A. good news of the word of God concerning how salvation was wrought for man or B. good news of how man can secure his salvation?

It's both. Even the dimmest among us, if we are able to know right from wrong, must respond to the gospel message of Christ and Him crucified. It's not a work and it may be all wrought by the Holy Spirit but there must be a conscious response on the part of the person or they are not saved. Even the most basic definition of faith as a ceasing from all works and relying on Christ to save you requires that you consciously do this. Even Gordon Clark, with his idea that the Reformers were wrong and that saving faith is nothing more than "an assent to the propositions" of the gospel, still thought that you had to actually assent to the propositions.

The idea that you are already saved if you are elect and the salvation experience is really just you coming to the knowledge of that is not the gospel.

 

[MrW]

Dave is correct in #4.

Calvinism has unbelieving sinners, who are STILL unbelieving sinners, saved, yet Scripture says they are lost and will die lost—unless they become believers.

Contrary to Calvinist theology, which they say has already saved Christ-rejecting sinners, the Lord Jesus says they will die lost, if they are unbelievers.

John 8:24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.

 

[AustinC]

Dave is correct in #4.

Calvinism has unbelieving sinners, who are STILL unbelieving sinners, saved, yet Scripture says they are lost and will die lost—unless they become believers.

Contrary to Calvinist theology, which they say has already saved Christ-rejecting sinners, the Lord Jesus says they will die lost, if they are unbelievers.

John 8:24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.

Your statement has nothing to do with Calvinism. It has everything to do with understanding a Covenant Community and that within the community there will be unsaved members. (Think of Israel and all the faithless who were still a part of Covenant Israel, but not children of the Promise.) Your inability to understand New Covenant Community causes you to misunderstand scripture.

 

[DaveXR650]

Calvinism has unbelieving sinners, who are STILL unbelieving sinners, saved, yet Scripture says they are lost and will die lost—unless they become believers.

"The means of justification on our part is faith. That we are justified by faith, is so frequently and expressly affirmed in the Scripture, as that it cannot directly and in terms by any be denied." John Owen

"Calvinism" does not assert that faith is not necessary for your salvation. John Owen, I would consider a Calvinist. If you read his work on "The Doctrine of Justification by Faith" you will find a defense of the necessity of faith alone for salvation. You will also find terms familiar to any Baptist like "receiving Christ" for example. You will also find a belief that the Holy Spirit drives all of this and that faith is a gift. Also, you will find that those who are lost, in the end, are lost because of their refusal to believe.

Contrary to Calvinist theology, which they say has already saved Christ-rejecting sinners, the Lord Jesus says they will die lost, if they are unbelievers.

In all fairness, even looking at the theology of the most hyper-Calvinists I know of, I have not come across any that say that a person can go on, through their lives, refusing to believe in Christ and end up saved. To say that a person is born again before they believe, if what is meant by that is that such a person because of God's providence, will inevitably believe is in my view not a problem at all. I have learned that there are some Primitive Baptist groups who do teach that an elect person is saved no matter what they do or believe but I personally know some Primitive Baptists and that is not a universal teaching among them. I have found zero statements by mainstream Calvinists that in any way hint that faith is not necessary for salvation. The quotes that trouble some people are found in discussing the logical order of salvation and it is not fair to apply them in a way they were not intended.