Is anything really accomplished by this forum or not?

If this were true, Christ would not have died, and we would need no faith in Him. If nothing is required...and I mean NOTHING...not even faith would be required, nor God sending His Son. It would have all been taken care of. A gift is a gift. I will argue til I'm blue in the face that receiving a gift does not mean I earned it in any way, meaning I worked for it. Faith cannot be a work, or Ephesians 2:8,9 would make no sense and would be untrue.

Rationalyzing a decision in your head can only be a work, if the result is something you earned. Case in point the list of 6 things listed by Dale. Those are careers where thinking results in pay. By definition, this is work. Me sitting in a recliner thinking about what movie I want to watch is not a work. If I'm a movie critic, it would be.

 

I thinks you are intentionally missing the point. Choosing and accepting is an act just as rejecting and ignoring is an act. We are not saved by an act or work on our part. If you were watching television and an very indecent show came on, you would either turn the channel or leave the room. Why? Because trying to ignore the indecency would be very difficult work and Paul advises to flee anyway (2Tim 2:22).

My point in the previous post is that the works listed is no less difficult than choosing. You are sticking with "accepting" but the work is actually "deciding to accept or reject" and people DO get paid a considerable amount of money doing that therefore it is you who are suggesting we earn salvation.

 

Webdog says:

Yes it is work. I often am asked where I want to go out to eat by my wife. I tell her, "Honey, whatever you want". She then asks me what I want and it goes back and forth. Why don't either of us want to decide? Because it is exhausing work. A child standing before 100 flavors of ice cream will spend forever contemplating which she wants (I am a vanilla guy myself).

 

Dale, are you saying then that all "acts" are works? Sneezing? Blinking? Laughing? According to you, believing (something Christ commands us to do) is an "act", therefore classified as a "work". The acot of choosing to accept or reject something is not a work. We accept and reject things we buy, also. Where does this line of thinking end?

 

Yes it is work. I often am asked where I want to go out to eat by my wife. I tell her, "Honey, whatever you want". She then asks me what I want and it goes back and forth. Why don't either of us want to decide? Because it is exhausing work. A child standing before 100 flavors of ice cream will spend forever contemplating which she wants (I am a vanilla guy myself). </font>[/QUOTE]...so what did you guys "earn" from your "works"? Was dinner going to be payment for your deciding, or were you still going to go somewhere and eat regarless of where you decided?

...did the child "earn" the ice cream, or did he BUY it? This line of thinking doesn't make much sense. EVERYTHING can be a work, including faith and believing, which contradicts scripture.

 

Webdog, Eph 2:8-10 states:

You see, it says salvation is what is not by our works, not faith. Faith has different levels and can be exercised. Paul is emphasizing that no one can boast (or claim to have had any participation in) their salvation. He is being specific about this and adds:

We are created in Christ and the creature has no participation in the creation (to be more specific, being born again) anymore than the child has in being impregnated in his mother's womb. I person that says, "hey, guess what, I decided to follow Jesus" is boasting of his participation in his salvation. What would a Calvinist do if someone told him that? Definitely work with him in seeking His face.

 

You see, it says salvation is what is not by our works, not faith. Faith has different levels and can be exercised. Paul is emphasizing that no one can boast (or claim to have had any participation in) their salvation. He is being specific about this and adds:

We are created in Christ and the creature has no participation in the creation (to be more specific, being born again) anymore than the child has in being impregnated in his mother's womb. I person that says, "hey, guess what, I decided to follow Jesus" is boasting of his participation in his salvation. What would a Calvinist do if someone told him that? Definitely work with him in seeking His face. </font>[/QUOTE]It is the calvinist that claims faith is a gift. I agree it is not. How do we receive salvation? By BELIEVING in Jesus Christ. This is my point. Believing is not a work. We cannot take credit for salvation by believing, because we are commanded to believe in order to receive salvation. Believing also means man is not the cause of salvation, because, again, we are told to believe.


I have NEVER heard one christian "boast" that they decided to follow Jesus. This is just not true. Every true christian is humbled that Jesus gave him the opportunity to spend eternity with Him. Following Jesus is COMMANDED to receive eternal life.

You also take Eph. 2 out of context. The "works" mentioned is referring to the law, that man cannot follow the law, not that by believing you would be working for salvation.

 

If this were true, Christ would not have died, and we would need no faith in Him. If nothing is required...and I mean NOTHING...not even faith would be required, nor God sending His Son. It would have all been taken care of. A gift is a gift. I will argue til I'm blue in the face that receiving a gift does not mean I earned it in any way, meaning I worked for it. Faith cannot be a work, or Ephesians 2:8,9 would make no sense and would be untrue.</font>[/QUOTE]Fair enough.

Allow me to reword: "It appears to be unworkable to argue for both libertarian free will and salvation by grace (with no meritorious contribution or work at all on the part of the recipient)".

I have never claimed to hold to a "salvation by grace with absolutely zero human contribution" position. I have been (in my last 2 or 3 posts) simply arguing that acceptance of a gift is meritorious and reasonably construed as a work. To deny this seems to me to be untrue to the meaining of concept of "work" or "merit" and I am not willing to do that.

Consider the following statements:

A. Man can resist the sinful nature - he can, in theory, live a sinless life.

B. Man cannot resist the sinful nature he is born with - he will sin despite the best efforts he can possibly put forth.

C. Man is rendered "dead" when he sins and God's salvation of us is totally his work - even our acceptance is a work of God (mysterious as that may sound).

D. Man is "not quite totally dead" and engages in a freewill "work" of acceptance in response to God's gift of salvation - God does 99.999% of the "work" but we still to a tiny bit in making a decision to accept.

I am open to the following combinations being true:

A,C
A,D
B,D

What I do not accept is the combination of B and C because (unless all are eventually saved, which seems clearly unbiblical) to me this works out to a "some are fore-ordained (in the "caused by God" sense, not the "foreknown by God" sense) to go to Hell". I cannot make sense of this for a number of reasons (one being that it violates any understandable concept of "just punishment").

Of course, I am vulnerable to a "you are not true to the scriptures" from almost all quarters for being open to all these possibilities. I would direct any such objectors to my question about Biblical interpretation posted in this thread (Wed Aug 3, at 1:19 PM). No one has addressed that post so far (although I directed the question to Andy T).

So you can infer that I am open to a number of possibilities. I just cannot buy that "gift acceptance" is not a meritorous work and I think I have made my case about that and have nothing to add.

BTW, I think that A could only be Biblical through some pretty wild contortions. I lean towards B,D for this reason, even though it causes me some problems.

 

Hi webdog,

I, too, would have said you had a valid point except that 2:8 says "not of yourself" so we can safely say it will include both moral (conscience) or ceremonial (law).

When you say, "I decided to follow Jesus" you are claiming "I" the subject made a conscious act to submit to the object, Jesus (Indeed, a very strange position for Jesus to be in in His glory). what I mean by boasting is the claiming of his active paricipation. Anytime you make an announcement whether intended to be prideful or joyful, it is boasting. Boasting is not necessarily seen as evil, but it is sinful to take a drop of glory from the Lord's work as your own.

I am done for tonight for it is now time for my family but here's Gills say on the matter. I do not always agree with him, but he does often have good insight.

Gill's Commentary on Eph 2:9

 

This is totally taken out of context. Not of yourself is referring to God's grace, "By grace you are saved....this not of yourself", nothing more. It is not referring to man's ability to have faith, or in believing in God's grace.

 

Andre,

I saw your question about biblical interpretation - sorry I did not respond. Since you can't post under the Baptist Theology section (I see you are not Baptist), I suggest that you start a new thread under this forum regarding interpretation. It is a very important question - one that you need to nail down. I'm sure there are many who could help you out in this area.

 

Webdog, I guess you can use the old "out of context" defense when all else fails, but I believe that if you could at least give some effort to see the other side and come to terms with the truth, you would feel comfortable in giving glory where it is due. Andre has set a good example.

Well, grace to you.

dale

 

I use the "out of context" statement, not to defend anything, but because it is out of context.

Believe me, I have given plenty of thought to calvinism and what "the truth" is. With so many great pastors and teachers that believe it, I had to. In the end, it doesn't sit right in my spirit, and from talking to those who used to be calvinists and are no longer, I can see why I feel this way. I think it's sad there are so many great pastors and teachers that believe in a false doctrine based on their human intellect. It also throws up red flags that NOONE is saved as a calvinist, and only becomes one from studying the work of reformers.

 

Okay, I guess I will have to leave you unconvienced. As for me, it was regeneration that taught me Calvinism though I didn't know the word for it at the time. I once thought I believed as much as one could possibly believe something they cannot see or understand except from the Bible and hoped it was sufficient to get me into heaven. In reality, it was a blind faith. One day, as I said, I suddenly believed with all my heart, soul, and mind Jesus Christ and Him crucified. I laid everything I had ever learned down to be tested by the Bible. No one can ever convience me I was saved based on a decision I made. I guess you have your reasons as well.

Webdog, thanks for the chat. It has been a pleasure.

dale

 

Webdog says:

It also throws up red flags that NOONE is saved as a calvinist, and only becomes one from studying the work of reformers.
***********************************************

Here Now asks:

What are you saying?

Are you suggesting Calvinists aren't saved?

I had never even heard of Calvinist until several years after I was born again.