Explain This:

[preacher4truth]

I have seen those who embrace DoG/Calvinism/Reformed theology go on the offensive when someone will say the following:

"I received Christ as my Savior", or; "I trusted Christ as my Savior", or; "I accepted Christ as my Savior" and for other salvation statements of this sort and along these same lines.

Generally, those who hold reformed views attack those who make statements such as these.

Also, in John 1:12, it does speak of those "who received Him."

Why then, when persons make a salvation statement similar to those I have mentioned, are they attacked or at the very least maligned for doing so?

What is at stake for saying this? Why is it wrong? Are those who do these things just being overly critical, or are they defending the faith?

 

[Amy.G]

Because to a Calvinist, "receiving" Christ implies that you have "done" something to ensure your salvation. To the Cal, that means you have contributed to your salvation and makes God non-sovereign. To the Cal, receiving Christ is a works based salvation.

 

[preacher4truth]

Because to a Calvinist, "receiving" Christ implies that you have "done" something to ensure your salvation. To the Cal, that means you have contributed to your salvation and makes God non-sovereign. To the Cal, receiving Christ is a works based salvation.

Yes. I want to see them explain this with Scripture. :smilewinkgrin:

Also, John 1:12 says some did receive Him.

 

[webdog]

Amy is correct. In the reformed camp, if you receive a gift...or are even capable of doing so, you are deemed a "self salvationist" as you somehow contributed to the gift that was given to you.
For all of the deep study of languages and church history that is claimed...the above rationale is about as ignorant a position as one can hold to.

I actually used this thinking Saturday. After opening the gifts given to me, I stood up and proclaimed to my family "I want to thank myself for these gifts. By me receiving them I contributed to this...you can thank me also, it was all me".

Hope everyone had a good Christmas and was as successful as I was in what I worked for

 

[webdog]

Another aspect of the flawed logic is man needs to receive the gift of saving faith to use to receive the gift. What gift do we need to receive the gift of saving faith to receive the gift of salvation?

Whether my hands are fully functional from birth, or I'm given prosthesis in order to be able to receive a gift, I'm still the one receiving the gift.

 

[pinoybaptist]

Because to a Calvinist, "receiving" Christ implies that you have "done" something to ensure your salvation. To the Cal, that means you have contributed to your salvation and makes God non-sovereign. To the Cal, receiving Christ is a works based salvation.

Chuck Swindoll, as far as I understand, is a Calvinist. Yet he does say the same thing. you need to receive Christ as your personal savior.

Alistair Begg is a Calvinist, and this morning he ended his message with a prayer of receiving Christ as personal Savior.

I have met many Calvinists and Reformed church men who also tell people who may have been "moved" by the Spirit to go and say a prayer similar to a sinner's prayer.

so I guess not all Cals oppose this.

And all these confusion and bad blood will disappear if people will only rightly divide the word and understand that ETERNAL salvation is a work wrought by God thru His Son Jesus Christ based entirely on grace and mercy and requires NOTHING of the sinner, while TEMPORAL salvation, which is the salvation most often expounded on by Paul and Peter and the rest is based on the sinner's response to the gospel, his obedience to Christ, his faith and trust in Christ, and the resulting blessings of this obedience.

 

[webdog]

Chuck Swindoll, as far as I understand, is a Calvinist. Yet he does say the same thing. you need to receive Christ as your personal savior.

Alistair Begg is a Calvinist, and this morning he ended his message with a prayer of receiving Christ as personal Savior.

I have met many Calvinists and Reformed church men who also tell people who may have been "moved" by the Spirit to go and say a prayer similar to a sinner's prayer.

so I guess not all Cals oppose this.

And all these confusion and bad blood will disappear if people will only rightly divide the word and understand that ETERNAL salvation is a work wrought by God thru His Son Jesus Christ based entirely on grace and mercy and requires NOTHING of the sinner, while TEMPORAL salvation, which is the salvation most often expounded on by Paul and Peter and the rest is based on the sinner's response to the gospel, his obedience to Christ, his faith and trust in Christ, and the resulting blessings of this obedience.

PB, rightly dividing the Word will lead one away from the two salvation view.

 

[glfredrick]

I have seen those who embrace DoG/Calvinism/Reformed theology go on the offensive when someone will say the following:

"I received Christ as my Savior", or; "I trusted Christ as my Savior", or; "I accepted Christ as my Savior" and for other salvation statements of this sort and along these same lines.

Generally, those who hold reformed views attack those who make statements such as these.

Also, in John 1:12, it does speak of those "who received Him."

Why then, when persons make a salvation statement similar to those I have mentioned, are they attacked or at the very least maligned for doing so?

What is at stake for saying this? Why is it wrong? Are those who do these things just being overly critical, or are they defending the faith?

Who?

Most of the people I know who hold a Reformed view would have no problems at all with someone saying the things above.

 

[Winman]

Yes, receiving a gift is not a work, you didn't work for or earn a gift freely given to you. But also, a gift must be received. A gift can be refused, at this moment there are thousands of people returning gifts they received because they don't like or want it.

 

[webdog]

Who?

Most of the people I know who hold a Reformed view would have no problems at all with someone saying the things above.

TCassidy is one. I believe he calls us, and I quote "self salvationists"

 

[preacher4truth]

Who?

Most of the people I know who hold a Reformed view would have no problems at all with someone saying the things above.

Just on some of the threads on here I have seen it.

I'm not going to name names, as this is not what this is about, but I would like to understand where they are coming from with this.

So it would be good to let those who believe this to explain it, and those who don't buy it let them do so without it turning ugly.

I have also heard this outside of BB, and if you claim, glfrederick, to be Reformed, and don't believe their view towards those who say these things (in the OP) they would take you to task to over your stance. I'm not saying this thinking you are ignorant of it (what they could say to you for your rejection of their view of it) and I believe you just wouldn't care what they thought anyhow.

I simply say this to get it out in the open concerning how they can react to others who say they are in the same camp, if you will.

 

[glfredrick]

Yes, receiving a gift is not a work, you didn't work for or earn a gift freely given to you.
But also, a gift must be received. A gift can be refused, at this moment there are thousands of people returning gifts they received because they don't like or want it.

Are you now a Calvinist? Who GIVES the gift that we receive? Is it not God? And does that not mean that God is there first?

Just picture in literal terms your picture above. You have a man, arms outstretched awaiting a gift that he cannot have unless it is given! Down reaches God, Almighty God, who alone has the power to offer the gift.

The fine distinction between true Arminian theology and Reformed theology is this: Whether the man can reach out his arms and grasp the gift, or whether God places the gift directly into the hands of the man who cannot reach.

You seem to indicate that the man can venture into God's territory and take the gift from the hands of God, or perhaps better state, from the floor of the throne room of God, then open the gift, then with the contents of the gift approach God. That can never be, neither from the Scriptures nor from logic, for we have no means with which to enter God's domain.

 

[webdog]

Are you now a Calvinist? Who GIVES the gift that we receive? Is it not God? And does that not mean that God is there first?

Where did Winman imply it wasn't God

Just picture in literal terms your picture above. You have a man, arms outstretched awaiting a gift that he cannot have unless it is given! Down reaches God, Almighty God, who alone has the power to offer the gift.

Who has disagreed with this

The fine distinction between true Arminian theology and Reformed theology is this: Whether the man can reach out his arms and grasp the gift, or whether God places the gift directly into the hands of the man who cannot reach.

What is the difference? Who is ultimately receiving the gift?

You seem to indicate that the man can venture into God's territory and take the gift from the hands of God, or perhaps better state, from the floor of the throne room of God, then open the gift, then with the contents of the gift approach God. That can never be, neither from the Scriptures nor from logic, for we have no means with which to enter God's domain.

Strawman...he indicated no such thing from his short post.

 

[glfredrick]

Just on some of the threads on here I have seen it.

I'm not going to name names, as this is not what this is about, but I would like to understand where they are coming from with this.

So it would be good to let those who believe this to explain it, and those who don't buy it let them do so without it turning ugly.

I have also heard this outside of BB, and if you claim, glfrederick, to be Reformed, and don't believe their view towards those who say these things (in the OP) they would take you to task to over your stance. I'm not saying this thinking you are ignorant of it (what they could say to you for your rejection of their view of it) and I believe you just wouldn't care what they thought anyhow.

I simply say this to get it out in the open concerning how they can react to others who say they are in the same camp, if you will.

Let me clarify... From a very "technical" theological point of view, I would agree that we do not do anything to enter into a salvific relationship with Christ. From a very pragmatic, every-day language standpoint, we often say things that are not precisely true if argued out theologically.

I don't find it worth the argument over a few words like those. Not that my position has somehow shifted away from Reformed doctrine. It has not and it can not. As Luther, "Here I stand, so help me God."

At the end of the day, I really don't care if someone says, "I recieved Christ" when they may or may not know what they are saying. I am excited that God has saved another soul!

 

[glfredrick]

Where did Winman imply it wasn't God
Who has disagreed with this
What is the difference? Who is ultimately receiving the gift?
Strawman...he indicated no such thing from his short post.

Wasn't asking you, thanks. :wavey:

 

[preacher4truth]

Are you now a Calvinist? Who GIVES the gift that we receive? Is it not God? And does that not mean that God is there first?

Just picture in literal terms your picture above. You have a man, arms outstretched awaiting a gift that he cannot have unless it is given! Down reaches God, Almighty God, who alone has the power to offer the gift.

The fine distinction between true Arminian theology and Reformed theology is this: Whether the man can reach out his arms and grasp the gift, or whether God places the gift directly into the hands of the man who cannot reach.

You seem to indicate that the man can venture into God's territory and take the gift from the hands of God, or perhaps better state, from the floor of the throne room of God, then open the gift, then with the contents of the gift approach God. That can never be, neither from the Scriptures nor from logic, for we have no means with which to enter God's domain.

I've shown him this many times. He believes our faith earns grace. He hasn't said it in word for word, but has in expressing his beliefs. I'm waiting for the light to go on with him.

:thumbsup:

 

[webdog]

Wasn't asking you, thanks. :wavey:

Doesn't make a difference...when you misrepresent my view, you misrepresent me. Oh, and this is a public forum...and you didn't "ask" anything. :wavey:

 

[annsni]

I have seen those who embrace DoG/Calvinism/Reformed theology go on the offensive when someone will say the following:

"I received Christ as my Savior", or; "I trusted Christ as my Savior", or; "I accepted Christ as my Savior" and for other salvation statements of this sort and along these same lines.

Generally, those who hold reformed views attack those who make statements such as these.

Also, in John 1:12, it does speak of those "who received Him."

Why then, when persons make a salvation statement similar to those I have mentioned, are they attacked or at the very least maligned for doing so?

What is at stake for saying this? Why is it wrong? Are those who do these things just being overly critical, or are they defending the faith?

Oh, I don't see any attacks and honestly, while it's not in full reality true, it is from our perspective so I don't think it's terrible to say.

 

[preacher4truth]

At the end of the day, I really don't care if someone says, "I recieved Christ" when they may or may not know what they are saying. I am excited that God has saved another soul!

Yeah. What others would say of us though, is that we believe that one must understand all things in theology, just as we understand now, to be saved.

This is not the case.

(I am not implying we, nor reformed theologians understand all theology)

 

[webdog]

I've shown him this many times. He believes our faith earns grace. He hsan't said it in word for word, but has in expressing his beliefs. I'm waiting for the light to go on with him.

:thumbsup:

P4T, is God obligated to Himself to save those who put their faith in Christ (regardless the origin of faith)? Does this mean we somehow "earn" grace as you claim?

Also, if you need to cut down a tree, whether you already have a saw or I give you one...who cuts down the tree?

Lastly, how is what you accuse Winman of any different than what you state in the OP? Let's be a little consistent.