Jesus Christ: Did He Ever Save Anyone, Really ?

[Winman]

Okay.
First, bear in mind that God created Israel from the loins of Abraham. They were to be His people, a people from among the nations who knew God and to whom the oracles of God (His word) is to be given and kept.
They were to be sanctified to Him, separated for His glory, different from other nations and tribes around them.
He was their Head, their Husband, their Provider, their Sanctifier, and He was their lawmaker and lawgiver.
He gave them moral commands (your ten commandments), civil laws, military laws, societal laws.
The Scripture you like to quote which you use for your doctrine that God does not impute sin on anyone is a command God gave to His chosen people, pertaining to how they are to administer justice amongst themselves, just like commands against incest, homosexuality and all other regulations which are intended to separate them and identify them as His people.
Check out Leviticus 18, particularly verse 24.


There you go.
Rightly divide the word, take a look at the context, and then come back and start over.

So, you are saying that only for Jews under the law were the sins of the father not imputed to the sons and vice versa and this has no bearing today?

Nonsense. There are NT scriptures that clearly say every man is responsible for his own sin.

Rom 2:6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds:
7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:
8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,
9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;
10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:
11 For there is no respect of persons with God.

Every man shall be judged according to his deeds whether Jew or Gentile.

Rom 14:12 So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.

When we stand before God we cannot use the lame excuse that we inherited a sin nature from Adam and could not prevent ourselves from sinning. You know, I have sinned plenty in my life, but in every instance I could have done the right thing and I know it. And if you are honest you will admit the same thing. We are never forced to sin. Yes, we are tempted, and temptation can be strong, but we have no excuse when we sin.

 

[pinoybaptist]

So, you are saying that only for Jews under the law were the sins of the father not imputed to the sons and vice versa and this has no bearing today?

Nonsense. There are NT scriptures that clearly say every man is responsible for his own sin.

Rom 2:6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds:
7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:
8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,
9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;
10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:
11 For there is no respect of persons with God.

Every man shall be judged according to his deeds whether Jew or Gentile.

Rom 14:12 So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.

When we stand before God we cannot use the lame excuse that we inherited a sin nature from Adam and could not prevent ourselves from sinning. You know, I have sinned plenty in my life, but in every instance I could have done the right thing and I know it. And if you are honest you will admit the same thing. We are never forced to sin. Yes, we are tempted, and temptation can be strong, but we have no excuse when we sin.

okay, if you insist on being an ape with a machine gun, suit yourself.

 

[pinoybaptist]

now, shall we go back to the op ?

did Jesus Christ INDEED finish His work, no thanks to anyone, and therefore deserves all glory and honor ?
Or did He finish His work, BUT......

nice try in derailing the thread, winman.

 

[Winman]

now, shall we go back to the op ?

did Jesus Christ INDEED finish His work, no thanks to anyone, and therefore deserves all glory and honor ?
Or did He finish His work, BUT......

nice try in derailing the thread, winman.

I answered the OP back in post #5.

Everyone agrees that Jesus completed his work. The question is, is man required to participate in his salvation? The answer is yes.

Look what Jesus said to the Samaritan woman at the well.

John 4:10 Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water.

Jesus said that if this woman knew who he was, and the gift of God, then she would have ASKED of him, and he would have given her the living water.

How can you ignore all the commands which Jesus gave men?

Luke 11:9 And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.
10 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.
11 If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he for a fish give him a serpent?
12 Or if he shall ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion?
13 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?

Jesus never told us to sit around doing nothing and wait for God to zap us with the Holy Spirit. No, over and over he told men to ask of God, to seek, to knock, and to those who do he promised to save them.

Matt 11:28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.

When Jesus said "come unto me" he really meant it. We must come unto him in submission, acknowledging we are unable to save ourselves. And if we do not come he cannot save us.

John 5:40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.

Do you believe that God is not able to express himself? Do you believe Jesus gave us these commands to ask of him, seek him, knock, come unto him when he really meant we should do nothing at all?

Maybe you choose to ignore these commands, not me.

 

[pinoybaptist]

I answered the OP back in post #5.

Everyone agrees that Jesus completed his work. The question is, is man required to participate in his salvation? The answer is yes.

Look what Jesus said to the Samaritan woman at the well.

John 4:10 Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water.

Jesus said that if this woman knew who he was, and the gift of God, then she would have ASKED of him, and he would have given her the living water.

How can you ignore all the commands which Jesus gave men?

Luke 11:9 And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.
10 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.
11 If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he for a fish give him a serpent?
12 Or if he shall ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion?
13 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?

Jesus never told us to sit around doing nothing and wait for God to zap us with the Holy Spirit. No, over and over he told men to ask of God, to seek, to knock, and to those who do he promised to save them.

Matt 11:28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.

When Jesus said "come unto me" he really meant it. We must come unto him in submission, acknowledging we are unable to save ourselves. And if we do not come he cannot save us.

John 5:40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.

Do you believe that God is not able to express himself? Do you believe Jesus gave us these commands to ask of him, seek him, knock, come unto him when he really meant we should do nothing at all?

Maybe you choose to ignore these commands, not me.

Good.
At least we know where we stand.
Yours is that Christ completed everything He had to do BUT....

Mine is NO IFS AND BUTS ABOUT IT.

 

[Winman]

Good.
At least we know where we stand.
Yours is that Christ completed everything He had to do BUT....

Mine is NO IFS AND BUTS ABOUT IT.

So, are you saying you have never come to Christ?

 

[pinoybaptist]

So, are you saying you have never come to Christ?

No.
Not for my eternal salvation.
He is the One who came to me with that, sent by His Father, even if He didn't have to.

For my deliverance from willful known sin ?
Yes, I've come to Him.
for my delvierance from persistent habits ?
Yes. I've come to Him.
For my deliverance from fear ?
Yes, definitely.

Winman, I apologize for my meanness and I offer no excuses for it.
I am, like you, a child of God, and cannot let the sun go down on any mean spirit I may have shown to others who call on the same Name I call on.

 

[Winman]

Pinoybaptist

That was very kind of you. I confess I am given to sarcasm myself, always have. Believe it or not, I like everyone here, although I know we disagree.

Where I believe you misunderstand me is that I do not consider coming to Christ and believing on him a work. I believe it an act of submission, of bowing down to the Creator of all the universe.

To me, you are either trusting on Christ or trusting on something else. To come to Christ is to acknowledge that He and only He can save you.

And I do not believe I or anyone else comes to this on his own, I know for a fact I didn't. I have told several times how I was invited to church as a boy by my neighbor. The pastor that day preached a fire and brimestone sermon on hell and honestly it frightened me to death. I knew I was a sinner, although I laugh now. I was just a boy and relatively innocent, but even then I knew I had lied before, at times I had been disobedient to my parents, so I knew I was a sinner, and I understood clearly the payment or wages of sin is death. So, I was terrified.

But this was the grace of God, this was God using the power of his Word to convict my heart. If I had not heard that powerful sermon that day I might still be lost.

And I remember clearly the pastor inviting whosoever would to come down and learn from the scriptures how they could have all their sins forgiven.

Well, I was a very shy boy, and in a large congregation of strangers, but I didn't care. I didn't want to go another second in peril of going to hell. I jumped up out of that pew and nearly ran down, I wanted to get this settled NOW.

And then they showed me from the scriptures again that I was a sinner and the wages of sin is death, but how Jesus died for my sins and would save me if I called upon him. Then they asked if I wanted to ask Jesus to forgive my sins. I said yes, and I meant it with all my heart. Then they led me through a prayer and I asked Jesus to forgive all my sins and come into my heart. And I have never been the same since. Last year my father passed away and I was speaking to my older brother. My older brother said that my father had often told him "your brother had a religious experience when he was young". That was surprising and a little shocking to me, I never knew my father said such a thing. But my brother said he had spoken of it when I wasn't around. So even my father noticed a change in me.

So, I did not accept Jesus without God's grace. If I had not heard that sermon I would have continued to just be a normal boy doing what normal boys do. I mostly thought about baseball and airplanes back in that day, I rarely thought on spiritual matters. It was God's Word that convicted me and brought me to Jesus.

 

[pinoybaptist]

thanks for sharing that, winman.
peace, my brother.
in some ways we have a similar experience, in some different.
I come from a Roman Catholic background, then became a cultist, then beame an atheist.
Somebody took me to a backroom to show me the Roman way, but I was not really interested in what he was saying because my interest was in getting the New Testament so I can read for myself about this man Jesus.
And then, as the song goes, Jesus led me all the way.
Wasn't all rosy, though, and that's because of me, not Him.
We'll still argue, but hopefully with better spirits.
God bless.
I hope one day we all can eyeball each other.
You, skan, Rippon, ORB, kyredneck, and others, with the likes of Amy.G and Marcia or LE to buffer. lol.
God bless.

 

[AresMan]

Well, I see you and Pinoybaptist do not agree. That is one of the problems when debating with Calvinists and Doctrines of Gracers, (or whatever you call yourself), none of you are quite the same, and so can always say that we misrepresent you.

And I am sure that you and everyone else in the pool of synergists agree on everything regarding soteriology. I have seen here where even you and Skandelon disagree in some way about "the Fall." Just as monergism is a wide tent that includes Reformed Baptists, Primitive Baptists, Missionary Baptists, Presbyterians, Lutherans, and others, so synergism is an equally wide tent that includes many Independent Baptists, Free Will Baptists, Wesleyan Methodists, Seventh-Day Adventists, Church of Christ, Roman Catholics, Jesuits, The Watchtower Society, and many others. In fact, the tent of synergism is much wider than that of monergism, so you have no standing to make this an issue.

What monergists have in common is whatever boils individual salvation down to an effectual work of God according to His sovereign grace. The commonality is that God has a special grace that saves His elect people and that this does not require them to cooperate in such a way that their part is an autonomous contribution upon which God must rely to accomplish His purpose.

Synergists as a whole have much less in common, including disputes about eternal security and whether salvation is by faith alone or whether works are required for God to grant salvation as a response to this qualification.

Methinks you are defining the argument much more narrowly than you realize is necessary.

OK, let's discuss this. Let me ask you a question. Were Adam and Eve "able" to sin before they actually sinned?

Of course. That is why they sinned.

If so, then how did their nature change after they sinned? And please, if you have scripture I would sincerely be interested in reading it.

We can observe the effects of Adam's and Eve's sin on their nature:

Gen 3:7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.

First, they observed that they were naked. They did not realize this at first because it was not an issue. After they ate the fruit they became embarrassed about their physical appearance because they could perceive that nakedness would now be a problem.

Why should it be a problem? They were the only humans at the time. They were husband and wife. The problem is that they felt inappropriately exposed to God. They tried to clothe themselves from their perceived exposure and helplessness to God.

Gen 3:8 And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.

Whereas before, Adam and Eve had a joyous relationship with God before, they now no longer did. They desired to hide from God. They could have sought God out in remission and repentance. Instead, they tried to get away from God. Sounds like what sinners do today.

Gen 3:9 And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?
Gen 3:10 And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself.
Gen 3:11 And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat?
Gen 3:12 And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.
Gen 3:13 And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.

The first sin had a definite impact on the natures of Adam and Eve. Instead of admitting direct disobedience to a command that they knew God gave them, they attempted to shift the blame. Adam placed the blame on God for his own sin (seems what some try to do today). Even placed the blame on the serpent.

One sin leads to another. Adam and Eve changed significantly when they committed their first sin. They lost their relationship with God. They fled from God. They tried to blame others for their own disobedience.

If you cannot see the change that occurred in Adam and Eve affecting their own natures for the worse, you are trying too hard.

Now, I will agree that legally speaking Adam and Eve were innocent and sinless, and afterward they were sinners.

It was a legal, natural, and spiritual condition. The effects of the first sin on Adam and Eve were apparent and immediate. They became sinners and they continued to sin.

But how did their actual nature or ability to sin or not sin change?

Obviously the account of the lives and Adam and Eve in Genesis is very brief and lacking of detail. We have no record of other sins throughout the lives of Adam and Eve. God did not purpose to do this. He did give us an account of history demonstrating what happened to Adam and Eve and how their sin introduced sin and death upon all humanity.

Apparently they performed regular burnt offerings that many scholars believe are "atonement" offerings. Why would they need to do this if they were not sinning continually? Their first son Cain became the first murderer. Abel and Cain were both bound to offer atonement sacrifices.

Again, Genesis chapter 3 shows visible effects upon the nature and character of Adam and Eve with their first sin.

 

[Robert Snow]

How do they say estupido in English again ?

Calvinist.

 

[pinoybaptist]

Calvinist.

uh, oh, you're shooting the wrong guys, Mr. Snow.
lol.

 

[Robert Snow]

uh, oh, you're shooting the wrong guys, Mr. Snow.
lol.

I know. You say, as a Primitive Baptist, you aren't a Calvinist, but if it walks like a duck and quacks...

 

[Jerome]

A tulip by any other name would smell...

 

[pinoybaptist]

I know. You say, as a Primitive Baptist, you aren't a Calvinist, but if it walks like a duck and quacks...

Well, for one, I don't say like most Calvinists do that the gospel is a necessary component of one's eternal salvation.
The Calvinists, on the other hand, do not seem to conform to the concept of a time salvation.
Primitive Baptists have always baptized by immersion, while there are some Calvinists who baptize by sprinkling or whatever method best satisfies the candidate.
Then Calvinists say that the blood of Christ is sufficient for all mankind but efficacious only for the elect.
Primitive Baptists believe the blood of Christ is efficacious only for the elect, and if there had been no elect, then there would have been no need for a sacrifice and no need for blood.

so, you're shooting at the wrong target, mr. snow.
now, in Filipino, we have a word for "clueless".
It is tanga, or bugok.

 

[Robert Snow]

Well, for one, I don't say like most Calvinists do that the gospel is a necessary component of one's eternal salvation.
The Calvinists, on the other hand, do not seem to conform to the concept of a time salvation.
Primitive Baptists have always baptized by immersion, while there are some Calvinists who baptize by sprinkling or whatever method best satisfies the candidate.
Then Calvinists say that the blood of Christ is sufficient for all mankind but efficacious only for the elect.
Primitive Baptists believe the blood of Christ is efficacious only for the elect, and if there had been no elect, then there would have been no need for a sacrifice and no need for blood.

so, you're shooting at the wrong target, mr. snow.
now, in Filipino, we have a word for "clueless".
It is tanga, or bugok.

I'll tell you what is "clueless." Why any thinking person would join the Primitive Baptist Church! I wouldn't step inside of one myself.

 

[olegig]

Calvinists and those of the DoG agree with Calvin in the Sovereignty of God in choosing whom He wants in His kingdom in Heaven and on Earth,.....

First let me say I am back from the ballgames and looks like I missed quiet a bit so I went through and just picked out a few things to respond.
If this has already been covered, please just ignore my comments for I admit to not reading everything.

Pinoybaptist, if you would, could you explain the above quote just a bit further?
IMO the basis for the disagreement that might arise is not whether or not at some point God chooses, elects, or decrees; but when He does so and on what grounds does He do it.
I believe God chooses, elects, decrees, etc in real time on the basis of His foreknowledge of the heart of each individual; however some feel God did these things in eternity past based only on His sovereign decree.
In the above statement, did you mean one of the above I mentioned, or perhaps something else?

However, they are guilty of only their own sin, not Adam's. However, Adam gave them their sin nature whereby they sin.

IMO man's sin nature is passed from man to man or woman through the blood. This is why Jesus had to be born with the perfect blood of God.

Let me ask you a question. Were Adam and Eve "able" to sin before they actually sinned?

I know this was not addressed to me; but if you will let me say Adam was created "good" not perfect and Jesus became perfect through obedience.
Adam was created sinless; but untested.
So yes, they were able to sin as is proven by the text.

...did Jesus Christ INDEED finish His work, no thanks to anyone, and therefore deserves all glory and honor ?

Let me attempt an answer in the broad sense and say Yes, He did finish His work.

God created everything and some would say: "Did God also create evil?"
When God created "good" then "evil", being the opposite of good naturally was made present just like the darkness is known only by the light.

God looked on creation and said "it is good"....Why did God not say "it is perfect"???
IMO it was not perfect until all evil is removed.
Sin is evil; therefore Christ's shed blood must cover all sin to remove all evil.

IMO Christ's finished work on the cross involved much more than just making salvation available to (all or some) men.
Christ's finished work on the cross was the reclaiming of all creation from evil.

 

[Winman]

First, they observed that they were naked. They did not realize this at first because it was not an issue. After they ate the fruit they became embarrassed about their physical appearance because they could perceive that nakedness would now be a problem.

Why should it be a problem? They were the only humans at the time. They were husband and wife. The problem is that they felt inappropriately exposed to God. They tried to clothe themselves from their perceived exposure and helplessness to God.

They became self-conscious, where we get the word "conscience". We can observe this with children, children can run around in the house or even in public and be absolutely unaware that they are naked. Is realizing you are naked a sin?

The only change shown is that they now knew both good and evil, an ability God himself possesses. How can this be evil?

Gen 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

If knowing good and evil is sin, then God is a sinner.

Whereas before, Adam and Eve had a joyous relationship with God before, they now no longer did. They desired to hide from God. They could have sought God out in remission and repentance. Instead, they tried to get away from God. Sounds like what sinners do today.

Being ashamed when you have done wrong is a good thing. The scriptures condemn a person who refuses to be ashamed.

Jer 3:3 Therefore the showers have been withholden, and there hath been no latter rain; and thou hadst a whore's forehead, thou refusedst to be ashamed.

If you can sin and not feel ashamed, then you have a serious sin problem. Shame is good, shame will often turn a person away from sin.

The first sin had a definite impact on the natures of Adam and Eve. Instead of admitting direct disobedience to a command that they knew God gave them, they attempted to shift the blame. Adam placed the blame on God for his own sin (seems what some try to do today). Even placed the blame on the serpent.

This is exactly what Calvinism teaches. Calvinism teaches that a man is totally depraved from conception and cannot help but sin. Calvinism blames God for sin because according to your doctrine God caused Adam to have a fallen nature that is passed down to you.

One sin leads to another. Adam and Eve changed significantly when they committed their first sin.

I agree with you here. Once you sin, it does become easier to sin again. Each time a person sins their conscience is deadened a degree and it becomes easier and easier to repeat the sin or go onto greater sins.

Apparently they performed regular burnt offerings that many scholars believe are "atonement" offerings. Why would they need to do this if they were not sinning continually? Their first son Cain became the first murderer. Abel and Cain were both bound to offer atonement sacrifices.

Some disagree that these were "atonement" offerings. I do believe that an animal had to be sacrificed and the blood spilled represented Jesus pouring out his blood for us.

But notice that Cain was not utterly enslaved to his sin. God said he could give an acceptable sacrifice. God also said sin would desire him, but that Cain would rule over sin. This absolutely contradicts Total Depravity as understood by Calvinists.

Gen 4:6 And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?
7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

Adam and Eve had the ability to sin before they actually sinned, so I do not see a change in "ability". And God himself said Cain could do well, so to say man cannot do good (as God perceives good) is absolutely unscriptural.

I will agree that it did become easier to sin again and I am sure they did sin again.

 

[pinoybaptist]

I'll tell you what is "clueless." Why any thinking person would join the Primitive Baptist Church! I wouldn't step inside of one myself.

Oh, really, mr. snow, my church has got nothing to do with my stupidity and your church has nothing to do with your cluelessness, so why don't we keep this problem to ourselves and not involve others ?
you think you can do that ?
or are you the type who would punish Johnny for Andy's sin ?

 

[kyredneck]

...... I wouldn't step inside of one myself.

I doubt any PBs will lose any sleep over that.