Circumcision and OSAS

[RAdam]

"That means we contribute nothing, nothing at all, not even by way of voluntarily fulfilling any condition such as faith, repentance or obedience"

Exactly, you are finally getting it. The faith by which you believe is a free gift of God's grace, part of the fruit of the Spirit. God even gave you the grace to repent. Every good gift and every perfect give is from above and cometh down from the Father of lights.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK: Yes salvation is all of God.
What part in the sufficiency of the blood of Christ did you play? How much did you atone for the sins of the world, HP?

HP: You must consider discussion as a shell game to confuse the listener DHK. If I speak of the conditions of salvation, you point back to the grounds. If you have been listening in the least you should know by now the distinction between the grounds and conditions of salvation. The points you mention above have to do with the grounds of salvation in which I fully agree that we have nothing at all. Did you hear that? NOTHING AT ALL.

You are not interested in the truth DHK. You only desire to argue and falsely accuse, malign, and use me as a target for your insults and personal attacks. So why ask me?

 

[DHK]

HP: You must consider discussion as a shell game to confuse the listener DHK. If I speak of the conditions of salvation, you point back to the grounds. If you have been listening in the least you should know by now the distinction between the grounds and conditions of salvation. The points you mention above have to do with the grounds of salvation in which I fully agree that we have nothing at all. Did you hear that? NOTHING AT ALL.

You are not interested in the truth DHK. You only desire to argue and falsely accuse, malign, and use me as a target for your insults and personal attacks. So why ask me?

There are no conditions of salvation. Your premise is wrong.
Jesus paid it all!
Thus I ask you again. What part in the atonement did you play? How did you play a part in making a propitiation for our sins?
Don't you believe Jesus when he said "It is finished"

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK, the grounds of our salvation was finished on the cross, the Atonement was made and finished on the cross, but the conditions had not been met on our part to make it effective in our lives. We have to comply with the stated conditions by repentance and faith to have the blood applied to us personally. Hence we are commanded to repent, and exercise faith in the atonement for that which Christ had built a bridge (salvation) to be real in our hearts.

I understand FULLY that that is not what Calvinism teaches. It accepts the notion of a literal payment which automatically and of necesasity necessitates double predesitnation, a most horrible blight upon the Loving Character of Holy and Just God.

 

[RAdam]

How does the literal payment of sins by Christ on the cross necessitate double predestination?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

I want to be fair and kind, but DHK uses double talk at every turn. He speaks of repentance, but it obviously does not have to actually change ones actions, for he believes all men continue as liars. He speaks of regeneration but the old sins obviously continue on. He speaks of repentance but where is the change of heart? He tells us that sin brings a separation from God, yet tells us that sin is necessitated from birth through no choice of our own, as well as tells us that no sin can separate a believer. He speaks of needing to exercise faith but then he tells us that it is ‘all of God.’

Help us out DHK. Is not is reasonable to demand some semblance of consistency in our theology, or are you going to blame all of your inconsistent remarks on a Holy and Infinitely Just God?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

RAdam: How does the literal payment of sins by Christ on the cross necessitate double predestination?

HP: Why not read Calvin's Insitutes and find out from the horses mouth?:thumbs:

 

[DHK]

DHK, the grounds of our salvation was finished on the cross, the Atonement was made and finished on the cross,

You don't get it do you. You splice and dice too much. SALVATION WAS FINISHED AT THE CROSS!
No conditions. No grounds. That is it. The whole package. You either accept it unconditionally or you refuse it. That is it. And that is what makes it different from all the other religions of the world. You want to make it conditional on what you do! So what do you do? I keep asking. You don't answer. What part did you play in the sufferings of Christ. Salvation was finished on the cross--grounds and conditions--everything. If you played any part you may as well have played a part in the propitiation, the atonement for our sins--but you know that that is so absurd you won't even answer it. The fact is that we cannot play a part in the salvation Christ paid for us. Jesus paid it all.

SALVATION IS ALL OF GOD!!
Do you get it now?

but the conditions had not been met on our part to make it effective in our lives.

There are no conditions.
A gift has no conditions. Ephesians 2:8,9 states that it is the gift of God.
Romans 6:23 states again that it is the gift of God.
A gift has no conditions. It is given freely, to be accepted by faith and faith alone.

Romans 5:1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:
--We are justified by faith--by faith alone. There are no conditions here.
Salvation is a gift, a free gift.

We have to comply with the stated conditions by repentance and faith to have the blood applied to us personally.

Repentance is the flip side of faith. When one has faith they can't have faith without repentance. they both come at the same time. The object of our faith is Christ. If you have faith in Christ, it is evident that your life will change, and that is repentance. Both happen at the same time. These are not conditions. If you look at these as conditions then you have a religion of works. Ours is not a religion of works but of grace, where Jesus paid it all. Don't make the Scripture contradict itself by your own philosophy.

Romans 11:6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.
--It is evident that faith is not a work, and never was a work. Salvation is all of God. Salvation is by grace. It is to be accepted by faith and faith alone, but faith is not a work. Grace and works do not go together; they negate each other as Rom.11:6 teaches.

Hence we are commanded to repent, and exercise faith in the atonement for that which Christ had built a bridge (salvation) to be real in our hearts.

There are no conditions here; only the grace of God which has provided salvation full and free.
Salvation is all of God.

I understand FULLY that that is not what Calvinism teaches. It accepts the notion of a literal payment which automatically and of necesasity necessitates double predesitnation, a most horrible blight upon the Loving Character of Holy and Just God.

Your conclusions do not logically follow your premise.
Like many of your conclusions, it is like saying I must be a Calvinist because I believe in the deity of Christ and so do they. Non sequitor.
You don't make sense.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK: So what do you do? I keep asking. You don't answer.

HP: That is a flat out misrepresentation of the facts DHK. You simply will not (notice carefully that I DID NOT SAY ‘cannot’) read and comprehend.

I have told you that in reference to the grounds of salvation we do nothing. It is 'all of God.' According to the fulfilling of the conditions God has set forth to make salvation applicable in our lives, we must repent and have faith in the atoning work of Christ.


1Co 14:20 Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men.

 

[RAdam]

I don't care what Calvin said or didn't say, I care what the bible says. The bible says that God chose a people in Christ before the foundation of the world and predestinated them to be conformed to the image of His son. Jesus came down from heaven to do His Father's will, which was that of all the Father had given Him, He should lose nothing but raise it up again at the last day. Predestination is always referenced with regards to one thing: the salvation of God's people. It never refers to the damnation of the wicked. God didn't choose some men to everlasting life and others to everlasting damnation, He chose to save a people out of the already damned human race. Had God not chosen to save Peter, Peter would have gone to hell. Same with you and I. We are like brands plucked out of the fire.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

I mysteriously knew somehow that you would not give to hoots about what I would say either, that is why I directed you to the source, not only of the literal payment theory but the admission of the necessitated double predestination. I am beginning to understand how some of you think. That is a scary thought indeed!

By the way, the problem trying to explain the literal payment theory and the double predestination it imbibes is that it is NOT found in Scripture period. One has to go to the men that concocted that theory to understand what you can make of it. You should know all about it anyway, he seems to be your spiritual father.

At least your open admission to your closed mind right off the bat saved me the response time needed to clarify it. Thanks for the heads up. :thumbs:

 

[webdog]

Yes, I understand but to address the permanency issues you must have corresponding concepts. Comparing circumcision to baptism as both being permanent is comparing apples to oranges.

I disagree. Both are acts that once done cannot be undone.

I believe I was the one who initially used Scripture calling salvation God's "circumcision of the heart" (Rom. 2:29). It is a one time permanent act...and to say a circumcision can be undone is not even worthy of a response.

 

[Johnv]

I haven't contributed to this thread, but I've found it to be an interesting discussion. I've been reading all the posts... with my legs crossed!!

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Webdog; I disagree. Both are acts that once done cannot be undone.

I believe I was the one who initially used Scripture calling salvation God's "circumcision of the heart" (Rom. 2:29). It is a one time permanent act...and to say a circumcision can be undone is not even worthy of a response.

HP: You are right in that you were the first that I can remember who spoke of the ‘circumcision of the heart.’:thumbs: You were very close to some thoughts I had on this issue. Let me pick your brain for a minute. What is your take on this verse?


Ro 2:25 For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

John: I haven't contributed to this thread, but I've found it to be an interesting discussion. I've been reading all the posts... with my legs crossed!!

HP: Forget your legs. Uncross your fingers and get to typing responses. :thumbs::laugh:

 

[RAdam]

Calvin is not the source of the doctrines of grace. People were believing in election, predestination, the effectual calling, etc long before Calvin came along. Neither is Calvin the end all be all when it comes to the doctrines of grace.

The bibles teaches literal payment all over the place. It is not a man-made notion, it is something people have been believing since the days of the apostles. It does not necessitate double predestination.

I've yet to insult you, but you insult everyone that disagrees with you at every turn. I think you should stop this.

 

[Johnv]

HP: Forget your legs. Uncross your fingers and get to typing responses. :thumbs::laugh:

Okay, well, the first thing that comes to mind is that circumcision is not akin to salvation. Circumcision is akin to baptism. You can't lose your "baptizm" any more than you can lose your, well, you know.

Now, in regards to OSAS, if there's something you can do to lose your salvation, then it means salvation is merit based. A person who abhors works-based salvation cannot, by definition, claim that one's salvation can be lost.

 

[DHK]

Abraham believed God and it was counted unto him for righteousness.
David believed God and it was counted unto him for righteousness.
--Both of those statements are found in Romans 4.

The Philippian jailor "believed on the Lord Jesus Christ and was saved."

There is no difference in the method of salvation between the OT and the NT.
Both are by faith in the Lord.

 

[webdog]

HP: You are right in that you were the first that I can remember who spoke of the ‘circumcision of the heart.’:thumbs: You were very close to some thoughts I had on this issue. Let me pick your brain for a minute. What is your take on this verse?


Ro 2:25 For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision.

25Circumcision has value if you observe the law, but if you break the law, you have become as though you had not been circumcised. 26If those who are not circumcised keep the law's requirements, will they not be regarded as though they were circumcised? 27The one who is not circumcised physically and yet obeys the law will condemn you who, even though you have the[c] written code and circumcision, are a lawbreaker.

In context of speaking to the Jews in regards to keeping the law I believe v. 25 is speaking of the condition of the heart not one's race in determining justification.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Just wondering how you might respond. Thanks