Is Lordship Salvation a misnomer?

[EdSutton]

[Q]Again, to my knowledge I haven't used the term cheap grace (sic). If you can find where I have I'm mistaken.[/Q]

In fact, I have twice cited 'chapter and verse' where the term "cheap grace" was used by you in this thread. For the third time:

[Q] The Church has definitely slipped into easy-believerism and cheap grace. (My emphasis- Ed). It's definitely sad to see but it's up to every true Christian to fight this false gospel at every opportunity. Contrary to what most want to believe, being a Christian is not easy and requires perseverence. No I'm not perfect but I'm getting better every day because my role model is perfect. [/Q] I cite the location for the second time, as well as with the words immediately following in my own post:

"This is the last paragraph of your post of March 03, 2006 - 10:19 PM.

I have responded to this once, including quoting your quote, but I guess you were just too busy to read it, what with helping God and all, so I'll repeat it hoping you can actually find the time to read what I write, as opposed to what you have already decided I'm saying. Here we go again, with my own quote:..."

I don't think I deserve to be charged with blasphemy for something I didn't say. [/QB][/QUOTE]

I agree. I, in fact, would add I don't think ANYONE deserves to be so charged! I have not 'had anyone' "charged with blasphemy" "for something (he or she) didn't say", or even did say. You may or may not well be a modern day Martin Luther or Michael Servitus. Regardless, I am neither a modern day Johann Eck nor John Calvin.
I did make (and stand by) the statement of:

If that is "easy-believism", whatever that means, then I guess I qualify as one of those. However I detest the straw man of "cheap grace". How dare ANYONE to speak of the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, that was purchased with His own precious blood as 'cheap'!!

That is about as close to being blasphemy, as one can come, IMO, and certainly falls under the condemnation of Hebrews 10:29-30 .

I made the statement exactly as found above. I guess if one chooses to persist in using and identifying with what I described as "the straw man of "cheap grace".", and assumes that my indignation at the use of that term, as I have described, is tantamount to being "charged with blasphemy", that is a choice they make for themselves.

But I have not leveled the charge of blasphemy against anyone, even though I have been sorely tempted multiple times, I admit, and having nothing to do with this particular thread.

Hebrews 10:28-31 states:
" 28 Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses. 29 How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has spurned the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace? 30 For we know him who said, "Vengeance is mine; I will repay." And again, "The Lord will judge his people." 31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God." (ESV)
Matthew 12:31-32 states:
" 31 Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven people, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. 32 And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come. " (ESV)

God, the Holy Spirit, is called the "Spirit of Grace" here in Heb. 10:29, and in Zech.12:9. I assume He is the one spoken of in both passages I cited. 'Sanctified' is in the passive voice, here, and aorist tense, here referring to a past point of time. These were already sanctified; it was a 'done deal'. And we have these admonitions. I take them seriously; i suggest others do as well.

That said, if one therefore chooses to consider this as a charge of blasphemy, which I have never made, don't blame me. Blame the one who is the author of Scripture, or blame another, whoever that may be.

(FTR, the ESV is not the version I normally use, but chose it here, for it will "copy and paste" faithfully, unlike some others, including my usual NKJV, or the KJV, among others, which will not allow the italicized words to 'italicize'.)

 

[EdSutton]

[Q] FTR, Actually, you have quoted this verse, not three times, but seven, by count, [Roll Eyes] assuming I did not miss any, and referenced it at least twice more. [/Q]

Actually I quoted it four times. That's really a measure of your refusal to discuss the scripture.
You have not agreed that "we are to serve the Lord Jesus Christ". MA 6:24 says that if someone
doesn't serve Christ as Lord they serve the world (flesh). Do you believe that those who make the flesh their lord are saved?

"The last shall be first."

" Do you believe that those who make the flesh their lord are saved? "

As I have previously stated in this very post, "I have never questioned anyone's 'salvation' "on this board"." I will go further than that. To my recollection, I have not questioned anyone's salvation, per se, ever, as to decide whether or not one is saved. That is not my department.

I do not hold the Book of Life; I can neither enter anyone, nor blot out their name; That is not part of my job description, nor calling, (although I have met many over the years who apparently had access to the book or some extra insight I did not posess, for they seemed to think it was theirs) and I do not consider it a goal of mine as "I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus." (Phil'p. 3:14- KJV) My 'job' is to present the truth; be instant in season; etc. I shall attempt to do my job; I am content to let The Holy Spirit do His, and I'll try not to confuse the two.

For example, were I had to have made the evaluation, I'm pretty sure I would not rate Lot among the saved, and I'm certain that he would not have been the individual I named as righteous three times, and beyond certain that he would have been the only individual in the Bible I would have specifically identified as "Godly." God, however, saw this differently. I think I'll go along with his judgement.

 

[EdSutton]

"You have not agreed that "we are to serve the Lord Jesus Christ"."

This is a false statement.

I previously wrote,
" I have responded to this once,... but I guess you were just too busy to read it, what with helping God and all, so I'll repeat it hoping you can actually find the time to read what I write, as opposed to what you have already decided I'm saying. (It would appear that your workload has not been greatly diminished. My addition- Ed) Here we go again, with my own quote:" (Actually multiple quotes, with pages and times.- Ed)
"Every single one of us, as far as I can tell, has agreed that we are to serve the Lord Jesus Christ. That we should be followers of Him, in our lives. or that we are to serve Him. But what JackRUS, FA, me, and some others are saying is that salvation and service are not the same thing. And we say this, because Scripture says it. Mike and John, inside the last two hours have said in short form, what I've taken much space to expand on. Jesus is, was, and always will be Lord." (March 14, 2006; 6:07 am; page 17, top post)

""Do you believe in serving the Lord or not?" The answer to you (sic) question is "Yes!" What does what I "believe " have to do with anything?, might be a more accurate response." (March 14, 2006; 6:01 AM, page 16)

"That is the Jesus I'm talking about; He is the one who saved me; He is the one to whom all authority is given; He is the one that I serve. "
(March 14, 2006; 5:59 AM, page 16)

In so many words, (In fact, the first response to the OP of Bro. Reuben is mine.)
" There is all the difference in the world in "coming TO Christ" by faith FOR the "'Absolutely Free!(c)'" gift of salvation or eternal life vis`-a-vis` "following AFTER Christ" in faith for service. ... Another way this misnomer is said is "You have to "make Jesus Lord!" Got news for you- it can't be done! God done beat you to the punch, by 2000 years. As one individual I once heard say, "The Bible doesn't talk like that! It NEVER says, 'Make Him Lord!'; It says, 'He IS!'"" (Feb. 27, 2006; 5:25 AM, page 1) Maybe sound like I accepted Him as Lord already, from the get-go?

I spoke elsewhere about differentiating salvation and service, as well, and gave a fairly detailed account of Jesus IS Lord, as well. Granted, these last two did not use the terms "serve the Lord", per se.

 

[rsr]

Originally posted by EdSutton:
As to Dr. Moeller, the statement is even more outrageous, to the point of being unfathomable, and approaching unconscionable, for this individual is with us today. Dr. Carl Moeller is, in fact, the President and CEO of Open Doors USA, the American arm of Open Doors, International.

I suspect that the "Moeller" in question is not Carl Moeller but Albert Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and outspoken Calvinist.

 

[EdSutton]

This following quote including the quote of me, is in reference to Matt. 6:24, I believe.

" FTR, Actually, you have quoted this verse, not three times, but seven, by count,
assuming I did not miss any, and referenced it at least twice more. [/Q]

Actually I quoted it four times. That's really a measure of your refusal to discuss the scripture."

You are closer here correct, than I, I believe, as to count of cites, and I was mistaken. Although I offer that my exegesis of the verse in question is at least an attempt, poor though it may be, to discuss what this verse is actually teaching, in context. I apologize for an incorrect statement. I now assume that because I was tired when I counted, I actually counted two or three citings of Matt. 16:24 along with the four or five citings of Matt. 6:24 as the same verse, since I merely looked at the reference, and did not bother to read the verse. Hopefully, that does not happen to you.

Matt. 6:24:
1.) March 2, 2006; 1:36 AM, page 6; verse quoted.
2.) March 3, 2006; 2:37 AM, page 8; verse quoted, and you incidentally noted you were repeating the quote.
3.) March 4, 2006; 10:39 PM, page 11; your quote of verse quoted.
4.) March 5, 2006; 8:25 PM, page 11 ; verse quoted, and referenced.
5.) March 12, 2006; 1:32 AM, page 15; verse referenced, then quoted.

Matt. 16:24 was also quoted, on March 8; 1:45 AM, 2:59 PM; March 9; 10:24 PM, so undoubtedly that is where I goofed up.

Language Cop (not to mention my wife) keeps telling me that I'm the one who needs to get more sleep, not him. However, I'm a bit hard-headed, I guess, and stay up too late, most nights reading and posting on the BB, as well as doing some other things, as well. He says if I were more alert, I would not make so many 'misteaks'. He may have a point, it appears. At least he seems to here, in this case. So once again, I apologize for a mis-statement.
Well, stick a fork in me! I'm done. Supper awaits.
With malice toward none, I remain
In His grace,
Ed

 

[StraightAndNarrow]

Originally posted by EdSutton:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by StraightAndNarrow:

Originally posted by EdSutton:

[Q] Questioning someone's salvation because they disagree with you isn't allowed on this board.

I have never questioned anyone's 'salvation' "on this board". I did ask a two-part question as to what YOU were claiming? In fact, one could make the case that I have gone out of my way not to question anyone's salvation. I have decried that implication that "good works automatically, or necessarily, are ALWAYS evident in the life of a believer. I have offered that they SHOULD certainly be in the believer's life, and that we are commanded to do them, citing Scriptural basis for this over the years. I have just as consistently said that Scripture does not guarantee this, and that if it were "automatic", the admonitions like the ones where where Paul, hence Scripture says:

"This is a faithful saying, and these things I want you to affirm constantly, that those who have believed in God should be careful to maintain good works. These things are good and profitable to men." (Tit. 3:8, c.f. 14, NKJV)

and again in the passage immediately preceeding the "Christian's armor" passage:

" 10 Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord and in the power of His might. 11 Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. 12 For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places. 13 Therefore take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand." (Eph. 6:10-13, text only, NKJV)

The last verse, here, is especially poignant, IMO. What this says in essence, is that we are to do all we can (Does this really sound to you like I am not suggesting total submission to the Lord? Or that it may not cost one everything, up to, and including prison, a la Paul, and Corrie ten Boom or Richard Wurmbrand, or even one's life, a la, Stephen, James, or the five missionaries in Ecuador in the 50's?, not to mention the millions over time that have suffered or even been martyred) and when we have stood with every ounce of our being, and that as long as possible, literally to keep on standing! That is the force of that particular verse; I'd say that is a very high standard! </font>

This is what you said. Maybe in all this discussion you're saying something about your own salvation? (No statement. Just a question as was yours.) By the way, I'd prefer that you not address me as something which sounds like a sexual perversion.

OK, eddie?

OK, S&N, which one of these two things are you claiming-

That you are perfect, and you have given all (you did make the claim for 100%, you remember) and are beyond sin? Since, obviously, if and when one does sin, he or she ain't hit that 100% thing, yet.

Or are you claiming to be usaved at worst, and unsure at best? I don't get it, so I can use a little help, here! YOu know, inquiring minds, and all that.

 

[StraightAndNarrow]

Originally posted by EdSutton:
I can not and do not speak for anyone else, nor do I try to. However you stated in another post these words:

"This very question still faces us. Are we willing to pay the price to be a Christian? There is a price to be paid to be one of His followers. John Calvin,Dr. Moeller, and all the FG's on this board haven't recognized that but that doesn't mean it's not true."
With all due respect, this statement is one of the most judgmental and outrageous, not to mention outlandish, at least as speaks to John Calvin, and Dr. Moeller, that I've ever heard. I have acknowledged there may well be an extreme price to pay. Whether or not "...all the FG's on this board haven't recognized that but that doesn't mean it's not true." is something only they can answer, and they "are of age, ask them!" But I will say something about the first two.

Touchy, touchy. I'm not claiming that the people I mentioned are wrong. I'm claiming that they hold to a different perspective than my own. That doesn't mean they're right. Or does it in your eyes? I could just as well as said that doesn't mean I'm right. The statement is the same. All I said is I disagree with them.

 

[StraightAndNarrow]

Originally posted by EdSutton:
[Q]Again, to my knowledge I haven't used the term cheap grace (sic). If you can find where I have I'm mistaken.[/Q]

In fact, I have twice cited 'chapter and verse' where the term "cheap grace" was used by you in this thread. For the third time:

[Q] The Church has definitely slipped into easy-believerism and cheap grace. (My emphasis- Ed). It's definitely sad to see but it's up to every true Christian to fight this false gospel at every opportunity. Contrary to what most want to believe, being a Christian is not easy and requires perseverence. No I'm not perfect but I'm getting better every day because my role model is perfect. [/Q] I cite the location for the second time, as well as with the words immediately following in my own post:

"This is the last paragraph of your post of March 03, 2006 - 10:19 PM.

I have responded to this once, including quoting your quote, but I guess you were just too busy to read it, what with helping God and all, so I'll repeat it hoping you can actually find the time to read what I write, as opposed to what you have already decided I'm saying. Here we go again, with my own quote:..."

I don't think I deserve to be charged with blasphemy for something I didn't say.

I agree. I, in fact, would add I don't think ANYONE deserves to be so charged! I have not 'had anyone' "charged with blasphemy" "for something (he or she) didn't say", or even did say. You may or may not well be a modern day Martin Luther or Michael Servitus. Regardless, I am neither a modern day Johann Eck nor John Calvin.
I did make (and stand by) the statement of:

If that is "easy-believism", whatever that means, then I guess I qualify as one of those. However I detest the straw man of "cheap grace". How dare ANYONE to speak of the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, that was purchased with His own precious blood as 'cheap'!!

That is about as close to being blasphemy, as one can come, IMO, and certainly falls under the condemnation of Hebrews 10:29-30 .

I made the statement exactly as found above. I guess if one chooses to persist in using and identifying with what I described as "the straw man of "cheap grace".", and assumes that my indignation at the use of that term, as I have described, is tantamount to being "charged with blasphemy", that is a choice they make for themselves.

But I have not leveled the charge of blasphemy against anyone, even though I have been sorely tempted multiple times, I admit, and having nothing to do with this particular thread.

Hebrews 10:28-31 states:
" 28 Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses. 29 How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has spurned the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace? 30 For we know him who said, "Vengeance is mine; I will repay." And again, "The Lord will judge his people." 31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God." (ESV)
Matthew 12:31-32 states:
" 31 Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven people, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. 32 And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come. " (ESV)

God, the Holy Spirit, is called the "Spirit of Grace" here in Heb. 10:29, and in Zech.12:9. I assume He is the one spoken of in both passages I cited. 'Sanctified' is in the passive voice, here, and aorist tense, here referring to a past point of time. These were already sanctified; it was a 'done deal'. And we have these admonitions. I take them seriously; i suggest others do as well.

That said, if one therefore chooses to consider this as a charge of blasphemy, which I have never made, don't blame me. Blame the one who is the author of Scripture, or blame another, whoever that may be.

(FTR, the ESV is not the version I normally use, but chose it here, for it will "copy and paste" faithfully, unlike some others, including my usual NKJV, or the KJV, among others, which will not allow the italicized words to 'italicize'.) [/QB][/QUOTE]


It's a long thread and I had forgotten I had used that term. But, by cheap grace I refer to those who believe that salvation is something to be taken lightly and who believe that "carnal christians" will slip in the back door of heaven or won't receive as many crowns. It does not infer that I minimize the sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ on the cross to provide salvation for everyone who only believes on Him and (to use His words) follows Him.

 

[StraightAndNarrow]

Originally posted by StraightAndNarrow:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by EdSutton:
[Q]Again, to my knowledge I haven't used the term cheap grace (sic). If you can find where I have I'm mistaken.[/Q]

In fact, I have twice cited 'chapter and verse' where the term "cheap grace" was used by you in this thread. For the third time:

[Q] The Church has definitely slipped into easy-believerism and cheap grace. (My emphasis- Ed). It's definitely sad to see but it's up to every true Christian to fight this false gospel at every opportunity. Contrary to what most want to believe, being a Christian is not easy and requires perseverence. No I'm not perfect but I'm getting better every day because my role model is perfect. [/Q] I cite the location for the second time, as well as with the words immediately following in my own post:

"This is the last paragraph of your post of March 03, 2006 - 10:19 PM.

I have responded to this once, including quoting your quote, but I guess you were just too busy to read it, what with helping God and all, so I'll repeat it hoping you can actually find the time to read what I write, as opposed to what you have already decided I'm saying. Here we go again, with my own quote:..."

I don't think I deserve to be charged with blasphemy for something I didn't say.

I agree. I, in fact, would add I don't think ANYONE deserves to be so charged! I have not 'had anyone' "charged with blasphemy" "for something (he or she) didn't say", or even did say. You may or may not well be a modern day Martin Luther or Michael Servitus. Regardless, I am neither a modern day Johann Eck nor John Calvin.
I did make (and stand by) the statement of:

If that is "easy-believism", whatever that means, then I guess I qualify as one of those. However I detest the straw man of "cheap grace". How dare ANYONE to speak of the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, that was purchased with His own precious blood as 'cheap'!!

That is about as close to being blasphemy, as one can come, IMO, and certainly falls under the condemnation of Hebrews 10:29-30 .

I made the statement exactly as found above. I guess if one chooses to persist in using and identifying with what I described as "the straw man of "cheap grace".", and assumes that my indignation at the use of that term, as I have described, is tantamount to being "charged with blasphemy", that is a choice they make for themselves.

But I have not leveled the charge of blasphemy against anyone, even though I have been sorely tempted multiple times, I admit, and having nothing to do with this particular thread.

Hebrews 10:28-31 states:
" 28 Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses. 29 How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has spurned the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace? 30 For we know him who said, "Vengeance is mine; I will repay." And again, "The Lord will judge his people." 31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God." (ESV)
Matthew 12:31-32 states:
" 31 Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven people, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. 32 And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come. " (ESV)

God, the Holy Spirit, is called the "Spirit of Grace" here in Heb. 10:29, and in Zech.12:9. I assume He is the one spoken of in both passages I cited. 'Sanctified' is in the passive voice, here, and aorist tense, here referring to a past point of time. These were already sanctified; it was a 'done deal'. And we have these admonitions. I take them seriously; i suggest others do as well.

That said, if one therefore chooses to consider this as a charge of blasphemy, which I have never made, don't blame me. Blame the one who is the author of Scripture, or blame another, whoever that may be.

(FTR, the ESV is not the version I normally use, but chose it here, for it will "copy and paste" faithfully, unlike some others, including my usual NKJV, or the KJV, among others, which will not allow the italicized words to 'italicize'.) </font>[/QUOTE]It's a long thread and I had forgotten I had used that term. But, by cheap grace I refer to those who believe that salvation is something to be taken lightly and who believe that "carnal christians" will slip in the back door of heaven or won't receive as many crowns. It does not infer that I minimize the sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ on the cross to provide salvation for everyone who only believes on Him and (to use His words) follows Him.

On the other hand, when you say this:

That is about as close to being blasphemy, as one can come, IMO, and certainly falls under the condemnation of Hebrews 10:29-30 .

you might claim you're not charging me with blasphemy but you're wrong. In fact, I's say that comes as close to being a lie as anything I can think of. Now does it feel like I just called you a liar? Look at the parallelism between your statement and mine.

yaknowwhatimean Barn?

 

[StraightAndNarrow]

Originally posted by EdSutton:
"You have not agreed that "we are to serve the Lord Jesus Christ"."

This is a false statement.

I previously wrote,
" I have responded to this once,... but I guess you were just too busy to read it, what with helping God and all, so I'll repeat it hoping you can actually find the time to read what I write, as opposed to what you have already decided I'm saying. (It would appear that your workload has not been greatly diminished. My addition- Ed)

I think you'd be a little more effective if you use a little more logic and less sarcasm. Oh well, I suppose if you're groping for an answer it's always eay to resort to an ad hominem attack.

 

[Faith alone]

Originally posted by StraightAndNarrow:

This wasn't addressed to you, all FGers, or anybody else other than EdSutton. Understand?

Originally posted by Faith Alone:
Uh, well, I simply responded to a post I made in which you asked me what FG means...

Now are you also saying that if I say something in response to someone that no one else should respond?

I felt that your statement in response to my post was somewhat rudely expressed, so I responded back a bit harshly myself, and I apologize for that.

But we FGers get a bit tired of the "cheap grace" and other slanders tossed around.

FA

Originally posted by StraightAndNarrow:
I really wasn't trying to be harsh. The point I was trying to make to Ed was that he was inconsistent in his reply that I had copied. I wasn't making a general statement at all. In other words, if someone said that "white is white" in a post and later claimed "white is black" that would be inconsistent. The inconsistency would be internal to the post and I would be pointing it out to the person who had written it. It wouldn't pertain to anyone else unless they made the same inconsistent statement. That's all.

But you and others keep asking me if I believe in salvation by grace. Yes I do. Is Christ your Lord?

S&N,

What I didn't understand was that you objected to me answering what FG stood for, when you asked me that in a previous post. I guess this was just a misunderstanding.

I understand about the question regarding if salvation is by grace. FYI, I realize, and I'm sure the others do as well, that you believe that salvation is by grace. So I did not outright state that you believed that we are not saved by grace, and accuse you of not believing that, but I asked... well, here's what was posted:

Originally posted by StraightAndNarrow:
You don't believe in making Jesus lord of your life but you call him the Lord Jesus Christ ? Do you believe in serving the Lord or not?

Now that's pretty strong language. I responded:

Originally posted by Faith Alone:
Not true. You need to understand what free grace teaches. And we most certainly do serve Him!

We believe that Christ is Lord and we should respond to Him with such an understanding. We also believe that we cannot earn our way into heaven/eternal life. We believe that we are saved by grace - a gift - not by works.

then I asked:

Originally posted by Faith Alone:
Do you believe we are saved by grace, as a gift, or not?

I know, sounds like quibbeling, but I didn't say that you do not believe we are saved by grace - I was careful not to say that. I asked if you did believe that we are saved by grace, as a gift, or not. IOW, I was trying to make the point that you can't have your cake and eat it too.

You see, if someone feels that he must "make Christ Lord of his life IOT be saved," then he is essentially not relying in the grace of Christ to save him, but upon his own works - at leats t oa degree. Romans 11:5, 6 says...

In the same way, then, there is also at the present time a remnant chosen by grace. Now if by grace, then it is not by works; otherwise grace ceases to be grace.

IOW, even a little works and grace is no longer grace. You see, that is our contention - that if we must do more than simply believe in Jesus Christ to get saved, we believe that means salvation is no longer by grace in such a system.

I think what we would like to see is why that logic doesn't work. How can that be salvation not by grace?

We understand that you hjold strongly to salvation by grace, but our contention is that the other things you insist upon do not allow it to be so.

So then, I guess the question to ask is if you could clarify if...

Do you believe that we are saved by grace alone?

Do you believe that we are saved by faith alone?

I just want to understand your position clearly.

Thx,

FA

 

[StraightAndNarrow]

Originally posted by Faith alone:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by StraightAndNarrow:

This wasn't addressed to you, all FGers, or anybody else other than EdSutton. Understand?

Originally posted by Faith Alone:
Uh, well, I simply responded to a post I made in which you asked me what FG means...

Now are you also saying that if I say something in response to someone that no one else should respond?

I felt that your statement in response to my post was somewhat rudely expressed, so I responded back a bit harshly myself, and I apologize for that.

But we FGers get a bit tired of the "cheap grace" and other slanders tossed around.

FA

Originally posted by StraightAndNarrow:


But you and others keep asking me if I believe in salvation by grace. Yes I do. Is Christ your Lord?

S&N,

What I didn't understand was that you objected to me answering what FG stood for, when you asked me that in a previous post. I guess this was just a misunderstanding.

I understand about the question regarding if salvation is by grace. FYI, I realize, and I'm sure the others do as well, that you believe that salvation is by grace. So I did not outright state that you believed that we are not saved by grace, and accuse you of not believing that, but I asked... well, here's what was posted:

Originally posted by StraightAndNarrow:
You don't believe in making Jesus lord of your life but you call him the Lord Jesus Christ ? Do you believe in serving the Lord or not?

Now that's pretty strong language. I responded:

Originally posted by Faith Alone:
Not true. You need to understand what free grace teaches. And we most certainly do serve Him!

We believe that Christ is Lord and we should respond to Him with such an understanding. We also believe that we cannot earn our way into heaven/eternal life. We believe that we are saved by grace - a gift - not by works.

then I asked:

Originally posted by Faith Alone:
Do you believe we are saved by grace, as a gift, or not?

I know, sounds like quibbeling, but I didn't say that you do not believe we are saved by grace - I was careful not to say that. I asked if you did believe that we are saved by grace, as a gift, or not. IOW, I was trying to make the point that you can't have your cake and eat it too.

You see, if someone feels that he must "make Christ Lord of his life IOT be saved," then he is essentially not relying in the grace of Christ to save him, but upon his own works - at leats t oa degree. Romans 11:5, 6 says...

In the same way, then, there is also at the present time a remnant chosen by grace. Now if by grace, then it is not by works; otherwise grace ceases to be grace.

IOW, even a little works and grace is no longer grace. You see, that is our contention - that if we must do more than simply believe in Jesus Christ to get saved, we believe that means salvation is no longer by grace in such a system.

I think what we would like to see is why that logic doesn't work. How can that be salvation not by grace?

We understand that you hjold strongly to salvation by grace, but our contention is that the other things you insist upon do not allow it to be so.

So then, I guess the question to ask is if you could clarify if...

Do you believe that we are saved by grace alone?

Do you believe that we are saved by faith alone?

I just want to understand your position clearly.

Thx,

FA </font>[/QUOTE]I really don't understand your concern. As I said before,

I really wasn't trying to be harsh. The point I was trying to make to Ed was that he was inconsistent in his reply that I had copied. I wasn't making a general statement at all. In other words, if someone said that "white is white" in a post and later claimed "white is black" that would be inconsistent. The inconsistency would be internal to the post and I would be pointing it out to the person who had written it. It wouldn't pertain to anyone else unless they made the same inconsistent statement. That's all.

My remard was directed to an inconsistency in Ed's post.

You ask me whether we are saved by grace alone and then you ask me whether we are saved by faith alone. Confusing question but I infer you are asking whether we are saved by grace through faith. Correct. Yes, I believe that but I believe that salvation requires an ongoing relationship with Christ. Jesus said come anf follow me. Do you think He meant follow me for the first step only? I believe salvation requires that we endure until the end.

Mat 24:13 But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.

I think it requires that we fight the good fight.

2Ti 4:7 I have fought a good fight, I have finished [my] course, I have kept the faith:
2Ti 4:8 Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.

How is your belief of "grace only" consistent with this scripture. Also with Christ's request to "Come and follow me" which He said about 20 times in the New Testament. He never used the word "grace" and expected that His followers be "born again" as He said to Nicodemus:

Jhn 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and [of] the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

Is born again the same as "grace only?"

 

[Faith alone]

S&N,

I'm just asking a couple of questions that were asked during the reformation...

Are we saved by grace alone?

Are we saved by faith alone?

Just curious where you stand there. Now I consider Joseph Arminius to be part of the reformation movement, though a bit later, so I'm not trying to focus on Calvinism by asking those questions, BTW, and I am not Reformed, strictly speaking.

Is born again the same as "grace only?"

Uh, no. Born again is regeneration.

CYL,

FA

 

[StraightAndNarrow]

Originally posted by Faith alone:
S&N,

I'm just asking a couple of questions that were asked during the reformation...

Are we saved by grace alone?

Are we saved by faith alone?

Just curious where you stand there. Now I consider Joseph Arminius to be part of the reformation movement, though a bit later, so I'm not trying to focus on Calvinism by asking those questions, BTW, and I am not Reformed, strictly speaking.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Is born again the same as "grace only?"

Uh, no. Born again is regeneration.

CYL,

FA </font>[/QUOTE]So you're saying that being born again is not required for salvation? That contradicts Christ's statement to Nicodemus. Or are you saying that salvation is grace PLUS regeneration? That would put you in agreement with (Gulp) me.

 

[Faith alone]

Originally posted by StraightAndNarrow:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Faith alone:
S&N,

I'm just asking a couple of questions that were asked during the reformation...

Are we saved by grace alone?

Are we saved by faith alone?

Just curious where you stand there. Now I consider Joseph Arminius to be part of the reformation movement, though a bit later, so I'm not trying to focus on Calvinism by asking those questions, BTW, and I am not Reformed, strictly speaking.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Is born again the same as "grace only?"

Uh, no. Born again is regeneration.

CYL,

FA </font>[/QUOTE]So you're saying that being born again is not required for salvation? That contradicts Christ's statement to Nicodemus. Or are you saying that salvation is grace PLUS regeneration? That would put you in agreement with (Gulp) me. </font>[/QUOTE]No, that's not what I said. Gaining eternal life happens immediately upon our conversion. One who has placed his faith in Christ alone ---&gt; has become a child of God ----&gt; has gained eternal life as a promise.

Now if he relies only upon the work of Christ, that is, by definition, salvation by grace alone.

Now, I would really like to know where you stand on the following 2 questions - asked this twice now without a response:


Are we saved by grace alone?

Are we saved by faith alone?


I am not asking as a place to attack your position - I just want to know where you stand here. If I do not know where you stand, and then I say something, you might become offended because I have misunderstood what you believe. That's already happened once. This will help prevent that.

You can comment on other things if you like. But the ONE THING I'd like to know is the answer to those two questions.

Thx, and have a great weekend.

FA

 

[StraightAndNarrow]

I believe that we are initially save by God's grace through faith. But, I also believe that we must meet the requirement stated by Christ about 20 times in the New testament. Come and follow me. This is so obvious to me. If Jesus said it doesn't that make it a clear requirement?

Most people today would like to ignore Christ's command because it's more difficult than simply saying I have been saved by "Grace Alone." Christ also said:

Mat 7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide [is] the gate, and broad [is] the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
Mat 7:14 Because strait [is] the gate, and narrow [is] the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

This scripture makes me feel good that I am in the minority when I talk about the need for decipleship. The majority are headed for destruction.

To answer your question in a straight forward way, No, I do not believe that we are saved by grace alone.

 

[J.D.]

S&N, I just took a look at your profile. If you really mean what you said in your last post, you should resign from your church. It might be liberal, but I can assure you that salvation by grace alone is one of the main keystones to Baptist beliefs and practice.

You speak more like a Campbellite than a Baptist. If you are truly convinced that works must be added to grace, you'll find a home with them. (Church of Christ)

You and they use a method of bible interpretation that leads you astray. You see the bible as an accumulative list of commands. You take all the verses you can find relating the word "saved" with anything else, and you make up your list. So then we are "saved" by: grace, faith, works, water, hope, etc. etc.

When you understand that one can not be saved by BOTH grace and water, you will find that by rightly dividing the word of truth that a single word such as "saved" can only be understood in a wider context. This is true in any literature. "Thou shalt not kill" does not mean you can't swat flies! You must STUDY to find context.

 

[StraightAndNarrow]

Originally posted by J.D.:
S&N, I just took a look at your profile. If you really mean what you said in your last post, you should resign from your church. It might be liberal, but I can assure you that salvation by grace alone is one of the main keystones to Baptist beliefs and practice.

You speak more like a Campbellite than a Baptist. If you are truly convinced that works must be added to grace, you'll find a home with them. (Church of Christ)

You and they use a method of bible interpretation that leads you astray. You see the bible as an accumulative list of commands. You take all the verses you can find relating the word "saved" with anything else, and you make up your list. So then we are "saved" by: grace, faith, works, water, hope, etc. etc.

When you understand that one can not be saved by BOTH grace and water, you will find that by rightly dividing the word of truth that a single word such as "saved" can only be understood in a wider context. This is true in any literature. "Thou shalt not kill" does not mean you can't swat flies! You must STUDY to find context.

What does your study say about what Christ said about salvation?

Jesus Said Follow Me
________________________________________
Mat 4:19 And he saith unto them, Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men.
________________________________________
Mat 8:19 And a certain scribe came, and said unto him, Master, I will follow thee whithersoever thou goest.
________________________________________

Mat 8:22 But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead.
________________________________________
Mat 9:9 And as Jesus passed forth from thence, he saw a man, named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and he saith unto him, Follow me. And he arose, and followed him.
________________________________________
Mat 16:24 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any [man] will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
________________________________________
Mat 19:21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go [and] sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come [and] follow me.
________________________________________
Mar 2:14 And as he passed by, he saw Levi the [son] of Alphaeus sitting at the receipt of custom, and said unto him, Follow me. And he arose and followed him.
________________________________________
Mar 8:34 And when he had called the people [unto him] with his disciples also, he said unto them, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
________________________________________
Mar 10:21 Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.
________________________________________
Luk 5:27 And after these things he went forth, and saw a publican, named Levi, sitting at the receipt of custom: and he said unto him, Follow me.
________________________________________
Luk 9:23 And he said to [them] all, If any [man] will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me.
________________________________________
Luk 9:57 And it came to pass, that, as they went in the way, a certain [man] said unto him, Lord, I will follow thee whithersoever thou goest.
________________________________________
Luk 9:59 And he said unto another, Follow me. But he said, Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father.
________________________________________
Luk 18:22 Now when Jesus heard these things, he said unto him, Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.
________________________________________
Jhn 1:43 The day following Jesus would go forth into Galilee, and findeth Philip, and saith unto him, Follow me.
________________________________________
Jhn 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
________________________________________
Jhn 12:26 If any man serve me, let him follow me; and where I am, there shall also my servant be: if any man serve me, him will [my] Father honour.
________________________________________
Jhn 13:36 Simon Peter said unto him, Lord, whither goest thou? Jesus answered him, Whither I go, thou canst not follow me now; but thou shalt follow me afterwards.
________________________________________
Jhn 21:19 This spake he, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me.
________________________________________
Act 12:8 And the angel said unto him, Gird thyself, and bind on thy sandals. And so he did. And he saith unto him, Cast thy garment about thee, and follow me.
________________________________________
Luk 9:61 And another also said, Lord, I will follow thee; but let me first go bid them farewell, which are at home at my house.
________________________________________
Jhn 21:22 Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what [is that] to thee? follow thou me.

Christ never said anything about grace. He commanded those who would be saved to "Follow Me." This involves an ongoing process and maintaining a close relationship with Him.
________________________________________

[ March 19, 2006, 12:00 AM: Message edited by: StraightAndNarrow ]

 

[StraightAndNarrow]

Why does Jesus' description of the judgement in MA 25 only say that we'll be judged by we've done for Him?
*************************************************************************************************
Mat 25:31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
Mat 25:32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth [his] sheep from the goats:
Mat 25:33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.
Mat 25:34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
Mat 25:35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
Mat 25:36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.
Mat 25:37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed [thee]? or thirsty, and gave [thee] drink?
Mat 25:38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took [thee] in? or naked, and clothed [thee]?
Mat 25:39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?
Mat 25:40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done [it] unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done [it] unto me.
Mat 25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
Mat 25:42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
Mat 25:43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
Mat 25:44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
Mat 25:45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did [it] not to one of the least of these, ye did [it] not to me.
Mat 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

**************************************************************************
The description of the judgement in Rev. 20 is consistent with this interpretation.
**************************************************************************

Rev 20:11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.
Rev 20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is [the book] of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
Rev 20:13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
Rev 20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
Rev 20:15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

 

[John of Japan]

Originally posted by J.D.:
S&N, I just took a look at your profile. If you really mean what you said in your last post, you should resign from your church. It might be liberal, but I can assure you that salvation by grace alone is one of the main keystones to Baptist beliefs and practice.

You speak more like a Campbellite than a Baptist. If you are truly convinced that works must be added to grace, you'll find a home with them. (Church of Christ)

You and they use a method of bible interpretation that leads you astray. You see the bible as an accumulative list of commands. You take all the verses you can find relating the word "saved" with anything else, and you make up your list. So then we are "saved" by: grace, faith, works, water, hope, etc. etc.

When you understand that one can not be saved by BOTH grace and water, you will find that by rightly dividing the word of truth that a single word such as "saved" can only be understood in a wider context. This is true in any literature. "Thou shalt not kill" does not mean you can't swat flies! You must STUDY to find context.

You hit the nail on the head J. D.