Jesus Christ: Did He Ever Save Anyone, Really ?

[olegig]

If God had decreed no one to be saved, if He had not sacrificed the Son on the Cross, would it be God's fault for all mankind going to hell, or would it be their fault because they sinned and were justly condemned?

You seem to asking a rhetorical question based on a few pre-suppositions which are:

-Creation only deals with mankind. IMO we also need to consider all of creation, all of the earth and heavens, for sin had effect not only on the outcome of mankind; but also on the out come of the whole creation.
In other words, for God to regain all creation, He had to defeat all sin, not just the sins of a chosen few of mankind.
Another pre-supposition is:
-That God is happy with only a few being saved. I believe God wants all to be saved.
And yet another pre-supposition is:
-That God did, in fact, do this decreeing in eternity past before the foundation of the world.

Since you asked a rhetorical question, I will answer with one.
Yes, had God created mankind and NOT made possible a way of salvation, then indeed God would have been responsible for mankind going to Hell.
But no one would have know the difference for God would neither have written the scriptures telling of a salvation which was not to be.

Election has nothing to do with the lost.

I agree.
But one should show in the scriptures why God elected whom He elected rather than just relegating to some great lottery in the sky before the foundation of the world.

All are lost by default.

Again, I agree.
Then you do agree God created some specifically for eternal damnation even though God said He wanted all to be saved?

Election is God actually saving people who do not deserve it at all. It is pure grace and mercy.

IMO you are confusing election with salvation.
All of Israel were "elected" out of Egypt; but did not some fall in the golden calf incident of Ex 32?
And many of the "elect" did not enter the promised land.

You do not understand grace and mercy if you think that anyone EVER deserves any of it in any respect for any reason.

I would agree one does not understand if they feel anyone received grace and mercy on the basis of a simple decree.
As yet you have not shown why anyone would deserve grace and mercy before God could know the hearts of men before they were even created.

Any accusation of sovereign election (grace and mercy) making God a "tyrant" or "monster" is flush with a faulty understanding because it either places on God some obligation to remove a just sentence from those who deserve it, or places on man some intrinsic worth or merit whereby God would be unjust to carry out His stated sentence.

You seem to be imphasizing the negative side of your equation while forgetting the other side.
If God did indeed elect some to salvation before the foundation of the world; then tell us what was so special about them.

ALL are justly condemned by default. ALL deserve hell.

Agreed, but that is not the issue. The issue is why were those you feel elected not condemned? What was special about them?

God had NO obligation whatsoever to save anyone, but He did.

Do you think God had an obilgation to regain the whole creation which would require the attointment for all sin?

He elected to save certain people and He died a substitutionary atonement.

Again, I simply ask on what basis did God make this so-called election.

They are recipients of grace and mercy. They deserve NONE of this.

I agree, so further time spent in this regard is only a strawman.
The real question is not whether anyone deserves anything; but how did God decide who would get anything.

Those who face their sentence still do so justly as the elect would have.

Again, those precious elect. But what made them different from the reprobate?

 

[Robert Snow]

You seem to asking a rhetorical question based on a few pre-suppositions which are:

-Creation only deals with mankind. IMO we also need to consider all of creation, all of the earth and heavens, for sin had effect not only on the outcome of mankind; but also on the out come of the whole creation.
In other words, for God to regain all creation, He had to defeat all sin, not just the sins of a chosen few of mankind.
Another pre-supposition is:
-That God is happy with only a few being saved. I believe God wants all to be saved.
And yet another pre-supposition is:
-That God did, in fact, do this decreeing in eternity past before the foundation of the world.

Since you asked a rhetorical question, I will answer with one.
Yes, had God created mankind and NOT made possible a way of salvation, then indeed God would have been responsible for mankind going to Hell.
But no one would have know the difference for God would neither have written the scriptures telling of a salvation which was not to be.


I agree.
But one should show in the scriptures why God elected whom He elected rather than just relegating to some great lottery in the sky before the foundation of the world.


Again, I agree.
Then you do agree God created some specifically for eternal damnation even though God said He wanted all to be saved?


IMO you are confusing election with salvation.
All of Israel were "elected" out of Egypt; but did not some fall in the golden calf incident of Ex 32?
And many of the "elect" did not enter the promised land.


I would agree one does not understand if they feel anyone received grace and mercy on the basis of a simple decree.
As yet you have not shown why anyone would deserve grace and mercy before God could know the hearts of men before they were even created.


You seem to be imphasizing the negative side of your equation while forgetting the other side.
If God did indeed elect some to salvation before the foundation of the world; then tell us what was so special about them.


Agreed, but that is not the issue. The issue is why were those you feel elected not condemned? What was special about them?


Do you think God had an obilgation to regain the whole creation which would require the attointment for all sin?


Again, I simply ask on what basis did God make this so-called election.


I agree, so further time spent in this regard is only a strawman.
The real question is not whether anyone deserves anything; but how did God decide who would get anything.


Again, those precious elect. But what made them different from the reprobate?

Very well put sir!

 

[olegig]

Very well put sir!

thank you...................(the periods are so it would have enough characters to submit properly)

 

[Rippon]

Another pre-supposition is:
-That God is happy with only a few being saved. I believe God wants all to be saved.

Based on your presupposition God must be eternally unhappy because His will has been frustrated. The Lord has been unable to accomplish His purposes according to you.

But one should show in the scriptures why God elected whom He elected rather than just relegating to some great lottery in the sky before the foundation of the world.

The Lord elected some according to the pleasure of His will and to the praise of His glory.There is no lottery nonsense involved.

I would agree one does not understand if they feel anyone received grace and mercy on the basis of a simple decree.

You have the temerity to call it a simple decree?! Has the Lord the right to do whatsoever He desires or not?

As yet you have not shown why anyone would deserve grace and mercy before God could know the hearts of men before they were even created.

No one deserves grace and mercy otherwise it would not be grace and mercy. You are really confused. All humans deserve condemnation. The Lord certainly knows the hearts of all people -- that those hearts are wicked and dwell on evil constantly.

If God did indeed elect some to salvation before the foundation of the world; then tell us what was so special about them.

Absolutely nothing is special about them -- they are no more worthy than anyone else who will spend eternity in perdition.

Again, I simply ask on what basis did God make this so-called election.

I have alrerady answered that earlier.

Again, those precious elect. But what made them different from the reprobate?

You ask the same old question over and over. Why do you rail against the biblical doctrine of election? You don't believe in the elect of God? Some are elect and some are the unchosen. Some are chosen and others are refused. The Lord has the perfect right to do what He wishes with His own. For the Lord to act in grace is to the praise of His glory.

You seem to think that God is unjust because He is gracious to some and not all. You think that is unfair. You seem to think that God should not leave any unsaved -- that each and every person has the right to salvation. You have a high opinion of people and too low of an estimation of God. You think God's love is general and equitable to every human being. How far off from biblical truth you are.

 

[olegig]

Based on your presupposition God must be eternally unhappy because His will has been frustrated. The Lord has been unable to accomplish His purposes according to you.

You might wish to re-read what I said.
I said I believe God wants all to be saved. I did not say God's purpose is to save all.
I believe God's purpose was to wipe-out the evil of sin and reclaim His creation, mankind being only a part of the whole.
Thus the finished work on the cross paid the price for ALL sin because if it did not; then all creation could not be reclaimed.
If you wish to argue with someone about whether or not God fulfilled His purpose, then find one that feels Jesus did not die for all sins.

You have the temerity to call it a simple decree?!

A simple decree by a despot would be one based on the whelms of the despot.
A complex decree would be based on knowledge.

No one deserves grace and mercy otherwise it would not be grace and mercy. You are really confused. All humans deserve condemnation.

Then why do not all humans get what they deserve?
What is it about the elect (as defined by Calvinist) that the Calvinist feels makes them special in avoiding the wrath of God?
And yes, I am confused as you can see by the questions raised by the Calvinist position.

You ask the same old question over and over.

Yes, in the hope the reader will ponder the unknown answer.
But of course if one would stop saying God chose some to Heaven and some to Hell on the basis of a whelm, then I would stop asking why.

Why do you rail against the biblical doctrine of election?

Again, the strawman, I rail not against the Biblical doctrine of election; but in the unBiblical application of said doctrine.

You don't believe in the elect of God?

Yes, I do, and God also tells us why He elected whom He did elect.

Some are elect and some are the unchosen. Some are chosen and others are refused.

So then, your position is that God sends lost man to Hell by default?

You seem to think that God is unjust because He is gracious to some and not all.

Here you are trying to place my thoughts inside your private theology, just can't happen.
God would only be unjust if the theory based in Calvinism is true.

I believe that at one point in time, God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son to be the Saviour of anyone who would only believe.
Therefore God justly offered His Grace to everyone.

You think God's love is general and equitable to every human being.

I believe that at one point in time, God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son to be the Saviour of anyone who would only believe.

How far off from biblical truth you are.

Oh, its pretty close, here is the real thing:

John 3:16 (King James Version)
16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

 

[Rippon]

You might wish to re-read what I said.
I said I believe God wants all to be saved. I did not say God's purpose is to save all.

So you think that God failed. You think that since all are not saved (and he wanted all to be saved, according to you)His plan was rendered ineffective -- His wishes are not fulfilled according to you. His will was thwarted according to you.

A simple decree by a despot would be one based on the whelms [you mean whims]of the despot.

The Lord is the Lord of all the cosmos. Whatever He does is right and perfect. You object. You disagree with the Bible -- you're not on safe ground.

Then why do not all humans get what they deserve?

Because He has mercied some.

What is it about the elect (as defined by Calvinist) that the Calvinist feels makes them special in avoiding the wrath of God?

The elect are not composed only of Calvinists. There are many Arminians in the company. Even those who rail against the biblical doctrine of election -- if they are really children of God -- are elect.

But of course if one would stop saying God chose some to Heaven and some to Hell on the basis of a whelm [there is no such word -- you mean whim], then I would stop asking why.

The Lord has chosen some for glory; those destined for the Lake of Fire will go there by their choice.

God would only be unjust if the theory based in Calvinism is true.

Get specific. What are these theories? Is it a mere theory that everything God does is perfect? Iis it just conjecture that a certain number were chosen before the foundation of the world? Is it just a matter of opinion that God can have mercy on those He wants to extend mercy and harden the rest? Tell us, please, about these Calvinistic theories which you feel go against the Bible.

Therefore God justly offered His Grace to everyone.

He actually bestows His grace on certain ones who were marked-out before the world was formed. Those same individuals were also written in the Lamb's Book of Life. No one else will be saved but them. Christ purchased only them for salvation.The Lord died for the Church alone. He did not die for the Church and everyone else. He died for His sheep -- not the goats.

John 3:16 (King James Version)
16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

It was in this manner that God loved His own from among all nations,tribes and languages -- that He gave His one and only Son so that the believing ones will not experience the second death -- but have eternal life.

 

[olegig]

So you think that God failed. You think that since all are not saved (and he wanted all to be saved, according to you)His plan was rendered ineffective -- His wishes are not fulfilled according to you. His will was thwarted according to you.

Here again you are putting up a strawman to argue against.
It would be nice if you would address what I said, rather than what you wish I had said.
No, I do not think God failed because I have a bit larger view of His purpose than you would like to discuss.
I said:
I believe God's purpose was to wipe-out the evil of sin and reclaim His creation, mankind being only a part of the whole.
Thus the finished work on the cross paid the price for ALL sin because if it did not; then all creation could not be reclaimed.
If you wish to argue with someone about whether or not God fulfilled His purpose, then find one that feels Jesus did not die for all sins.

So far as what God wants, I feel God most likely wants us to discuss His Word cordially; but it seems that does not happen either. But since some exercise their free will and retain ranker, I don't think God has failed.

The Lord is the Lord of all the cosmos.

I'm glad we agree on this. (see above)
But I don't understand why you wish to limit the finished work on the cross to only how it might affect mankind and not all the cosmos.

Whatever He does is right and perfect. You object. You disagree with the Bible -- you're not on safe ground.

No, I object and disagree with your interpretation of what is right and perfect and I disagree with your interpretation of the Bible which seems to be based on one lone scripture rather than the whole body of scripture.

Even those who rail against the biblical doctrine of election -- if they are really children of God -- are elect.

Yet another strawman. We are not "railing" against the doctrine of election, we are questioning your interpretation of when and how it is applied.

You feel election was applied before creation, before any man existed. And you fail to show how the decision was made.
I feel election was made in real time, after creation when God could know the hearts of man. And God elected on the basis of what He saw in those hearts.

The Lord has chosen some for glory; those destined for the Lake of Fire will go there by their choice.

You say "by their choice" so for there to be a "choice" what was their other option, what was the choice?

A simple decree by a despot would be one based on the whelms [you mean whims]of the despot.

whelm - Definition of whelm at YourDictionary.comtransitive verb. to submerge, cover, or engulf; to overpower or crush; overwhelm

 

[pinoybaptist]

I believe God's purpose was to wipe-out the evil of sin and reclaim His creation, mankind being only a part of the whole. Thus the finished work on the cross paid the price for ALL sin because if it did not; then all creation could not be reclaimed.

Sin was brought into creation by one man, created after the image of God. That sin affected all creation. The trees did not sin, the ground did not sin, the sun and the stars did not sin.
The corruption and decay that we see all around us, the death and imbalances, were all brought about by the sin of one man.
These things (death and corruption) were inherited by human beings.
Redemption was for human beings, innumerable as the stars are and uncountable as the sands along the seashore (not a select few as those who accuse the Calvinist and the DoG adherent say to accuse us of elitism), and if you know your Bible, only the redeemed will dwell in a new heaven and new earth unaffected by sin.

 

[kyredneck]

Based on your presupposition God must be eternally unhappy because His will has been frustrated. ......

But we know better, don't we Rip?:

He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by the knowledge of himself shall my righteous servant justify many; and he shall bear their iniquities. Isa 53:11

 

[Winman]

But we know better, don't we Rip?:

He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by the knowledge of himself shall my righteous servant justify many; and he shall bear their iniquities. Isa 53:11

Baloney, Jesus himself said the vast majority of men would perish and that only a few would recognize the truth and be saved.

Matt 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: 14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

Why would Jesus tell people to beware of false prophets and to be careful to enter in at the strait gate? According to your doctrine, a man is absolutely unable to believe unless God regenerates him. Without the Holy Spirit a man could not discern a false prophet, and a false prophet can have no effect on someone born again.

Why does Jesus say men must be the ones to take action (enter ye in, which go in, few there be that find it, beware), if God only is involved in salvation?

 

[Robert Snow]

It was in this manner that God loved His own from among all nations,tribes and languages -- that He gave His one and only Son so that the believing ones will not experience the second death -- but have eternal life.

As usual, the Calvinist must rewrite the Scripture to allow their flawed doctrine to fit.

Thank God Calvinism is not true since God so loved the WORLD...

 

[kyredneck]

Baloney, Jesus himself said the vast majority of men would perish and that only a few would recognize the truth and be saved.

Matt 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: 14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it. ...

Winman, you're right there with hoi polloi when you make this a 'heaven or hell' passage. That IS indeed the prevailing take on it. On what grounds do you make 'destruction' to mean eternity burning in hell? Or the invert, on what grounds do you take 'life' to mean eternity in heaven? I suggest to you that 'The Prophet' here is alluding to the 'Exodus Generation', also known as the 'Wilderness Generation', and is addressing the recipients of the Mosiac Law and partakers of that covenant, reminding them much the same as Paul put it here:

1 For I would not, brethren, have you ignorant, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;
2 and were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;
3 and did all eat the same spiritual food;
4 and did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of a spiritual rock that followed them: and the rock was Christ.
5 Howbeit with most of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness.
6 Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted.
7 Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of them; as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play.
8 Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed, and fell in one day three and twenty thousand.
9 Neither let us make trial of the Lord, as some of them made trial, and perished by the serpents.
10 Neither murmur ye, as some of them murmured, and perished by the destroyer.
11 Now these things happened unto them by way of example; and they were written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the ages are come. 1 Cor 10

Of that generation (I've heard estimates as high as 2.5 million men, women, children) that were brought out of Egypt with a strong arm, only TWO made it into the promised land, i.e. the land of 'milk and honey'; the Sabbath Rest of God,. Joshua and Caleb. Even MOSES entered not in because of unbelief. The passage is prophetic, given by 'The Prophet', and is directed to 'that generation' while HE on was earth. The 'few that find it' (life) are that remnant of Israel that was saved from the severity of God that was to come.

It is my humble opinion that the majority of God's redeemed, born from above, children walk the road to destruction in this life. Few there are that actually 'lay hold on eternal life' in this time world.

 

[Winman]

Winman, you're right there with hoi polloi when you make this a 'heaven or hell' passage. That IS indeed the prevailing take on it. On what grounds do you make 'destruction' to mean eternity burning in hell? Or the invert, on what grounds do you take 'life' to mean eternity in heaven? I suggest to you that 'The Prophet' here is alluding to the 'Exodus Generation', also known as the 'Wilderness Generation', and is addressing the recipients of the Mosiac Law and partakers of that covenant, reminding them much the same as Paul put it here:

Well, if you just keep reading what Jesus was saying you would see he is talking about entering heaven or hell. The following verses;

Matt 7:16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

When Jesus was speaking of the strait gate, he is speaking of himself as being the only way of salvation.

John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

In Matt 7:21-22 you see people who say Jesus is their Lord, but are not saved. Why? Because they are trusting in their works. This whole passage is speaking of salvation.

 

[MB]

You're right this is where we part ways.
If there are no takers, then all agree that (1) Jesus Christ came and accomplished what He was sent by His Father to do.
Here's where we will more than likely part ways: If He did accomplish what He was sent to do, that is, redeem His people,
then there is NO MORE REDEEMING THAT IS GOING ON, and there is NO MORE SAVING SOULS FROM THE WRATH OF
GOD IN ETERNITY going on.

Typically Calvinist thinking, placing the cart before the horse. We still depend on grace through faith. It's as simple as it get's. No faith, No grace. We must believe inorder to receive grace by which we are saved. The Bible tells us that clearly yet you would rather believe your saved with out it. Besides if there is no more redemption then no one is born in sin.

If there is no more redeeming there is no Salvation for anyone.
MB

 

[pinoybaptist]

Typically Calvinist thinking, placing the cart before the horse. We still depend on grace through faith. It's as simple as it get's. No faith, No grace. We must believe inorder to receive grace by which we are saved. The Bible tells us that clearly yet you would rather believe your saved with out it. Besides if there is no more redemption then no one is born in sin.

So, you say: NO. Nothing was accomplished at the cross, IF and But ?

If there is no more redeeming there is no Salvation for anyone.
MB

No more redeeming. Read Hebrews 9:12 and say it doesn't mean what it says.

This is where all the confusion comes in.
Grace required nothing from the fallen child of God.
Not his faith, nor his repentance, nor his knowledge of the Name.
Grace is totally unmerited favor.
If Grace becomes grace because of your faith and repentance then it is no longer unmerited, because you had something to offer back.

Repentance though is needed for the regenerate child of God, it is what confirms his sonship, faith is proof of his regenerate condition.

All these applies to those to whom the preached and written word comes.

Much as you and yours will ridicule or even deny this aspect of salvation, you yourself practice it when you preach Scripture and educate your people about how their faith and conduct justifies them before God and the unbelieving.

 

[olegig]

Of that generation (I've heard estimates as high as 2.5 million men, women, children) that were brought out of Egypt with a strong arm, only TWO made it into the promised land, i.e. the land of 'milk and honey'; the Sabbath Rest of God,. Joshua and Caleb.

But in another post you seemed to indicate all that were under the blood of the mantle post were saved?
Where is the analogy here?
The blood was truly spread over the mantle post and "all" under it survived that night of terror; but what was their outcome?
Did God fail here also?

Even MOSES entered not in because of unbelief.

Moses entered not in because he hit the rock twice.
It was all those who had been elected and chosen that entered not in because of unbelief.

It is my humble opinion that the majority of God's redeemed, born from above, children walk the road to destruction in this life. Few there are that actually 'lay hold on eternal life' in this time world.

Are you saying there are some that are saved and don't know it?

The Bible places the ratio at around 1 percent as being saved; however that passage is one of those vague passages that one can find no support for and I don't build a theology around one vague passage.

 

[Winman]

Grace is totally unmerited favor.

People say grace is unmerited, and I believed this as well for many years, but I think scripture teaches otherwise.

Heb 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

The scriptures clearly teach it is impossible to please God without faith. Well, according to your doctrine, God is giving grace to people who do not please him. In fact, you teach that God is giving faith to people that do not please him in order that they do please him.

But if you read the scriptures, grace always follows faith.

Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

The scriptures do teach we are saved by grace, but it is "through faith". In other words, you must have faith to receive the grace. And this is shown several places in scripture.

Rom 5:2 By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

This verse is very easy to understand, it says we have access into grace by faith. Faith comes first, grace follows.

It is shown again:

Rom 4:16 Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,

This verse teaches we are saved by faith that it might be considered grace. There are only two possible ways to be saved, either through works, or through faith. If it is works then the reward is paid of debt, but it through faith the reward is considered grace. And that is exactly what the scriptures teach.

Rom 4:4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

Calvinism and Doctrines of Grace have it backwards, teaching that a person receives faith through grace, but the scriptures teach we receive grace through faith.

How Ephesians 2:8 would read if Calvinism were true;

For by faith are ye saved through grace; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

If your doctrine were true, then this is how Eph 2:8 should read.

 

[pinoybaptist]

People say grace is unmerited, and I believed this as well for many years, but I think scripture teaches otherwise.

Heb 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

The scriptures clearly teach it is impossible to please God without faith. Well, according to your doctrine, God is giving grace to people who do not please him. In fact, you teach that God is giving faith to people that do not please him in order that they do please him.

But if you read the scriptures, grace always follows faith.

Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

The scriptures do teach we are saved by grace, but it is "through faith". In other words, you must have faith to receive the grace. And this is shown several places in scripture.

Rom 5:2 By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

This verse is very easy to understand, it says we have access into grace by faith. Faith comes first, grace follows.

It is shown again:

Rom 4:16 Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,

This verse teaches we are saved by faith that it might be considered grace. There are only two possible ways to be saved, either through works, or through faith. If it is works then the reward is paid of debt, but it through faith the reward is considered grace. And that is exactly what the scriptures teach.

Rom 4:4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

Calvinism and Doctrines of Grace have it backwards, teaching that a person receives faith through grace, but the scriptures teach we receive grace through faith.

How Ephesians 2:8 would read if Calvinism were true;

For by faith are ye saved through grace; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

If your doctrine were true, then this is how Eph 2:8 should read.

winman, I have repeatedly stressed the fact that the act of redemption is over. (bold is for emphasis, not to yell).

If grace and faith are to be necessary requirements in order for Christ to redeem anyone, then the cross should have happened right after Adam and Eve plunged the entire creation into the curse of sin because since then to the cross billions of souls (considering that a baby is born every so often in an hour all over the world) have come and gone, and after the cross, billions more have come and gone.

But, no.

Christ came in his own time, and, the cross itself had a pre-determined moment in time.

Your doctrine plunges billions of souls into hell (which of course did not happen, really, thanks to the love of God) because what are you going to do with "faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God" ?
You need, like Paul said, preachers for that.

 

[pinoybaptist]

In addition, the Book of Life was written BEFORE the foundation of the world, not AFTER, and this book, which many agree to be the mind of God, had the names of His people in it even before they can exercise faith in anything or anyone, and many of these were born in circumstances which are idolatrous, pagan, and downright ungodly.
If we limit them to only those who will exercise faith on account of hearing the word of God, then redemption is totally dependent on the individual's ability to exercise that faith, which is no longer grace.
Faith is not grace.
Neither is grace faith.
Both stand alone and if we look for dependence it will be faith depending on grace.
Even the mere fact that we are right now believers is an act of grace because as believers we are recipients of blessings as a natural result of belief and obedience to the gospel.

 

[kyredneck]

Well, if you just keep reading what Jesus was saying you would see he is talking about entering heaven or hell. The following verses;

Matt 7:16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

When Jesus was speaking of the strait gate, he is speaking of himself as being the only way of salvation.


John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

In Matt 7:21-22 you see people who say Jesus is their Lord, but are not saved. Why? Because they are trusting in their works. This whole passage is speaking of salvation.

You conveniently leave out the lead in passage to the above:

v. 15: Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep`s clothing, but inwardly are ravening wolves.

'The Prophet' is now warning them of false prophets.

YOU must insert eternal punishment in the previous verses to make it mean hell for all eternity. It's not there without your insertion of it.

Sometimes Winman I can't help but think that you and multitudes like you deep down inside really, really want passages such as these to mean very, very few are gonna make it to glory and by far and away the masses of mankind are gonna burn in hell by the droves. It's almost like you wanna be vindicated by it.