Ordo Salutis

[Rippon]

The same one where you said "Name just one.This view is not mainstream Calvinism." .

My post back to you was:

You also seemed to be under the assumption I was refering to Calvinism as whole or that it was a mainline view which in fact I did not but clearly stated that I have talked with many who do/did hold to such a view.

Gene is quite able to tell you all about those who hold such a view and will give you more than enough to satify your curiousity.

You're right.You did mention Gene as holding that unique position before.I had forgotten.

I know you just acknowledged that that it's not a mainstream view of Calvinists.But for you to say that you have spoken to many who hold that stance I find incredible.I'm considerably older than you and have not once encountered anyone who personally took that position.I have never even seen it mentioned in any Systematic Theology.It doesn't even qualify as a minority report.

 

[Rippon]

...and like Allan, I did answer you. You didn't like who I referenced, if my memory is correct (Gill?) because he was not "modern" enough for you.

Gill is not "mainstream";neither is Calvin for that matter.

The subject was my belief that no mainstream Calvinist denies that faith is a gift in Ephesians 2:8.The word Mainstream means (according to the 4th Edition of The American Heritage Dictionary):"The prevailing current or direction of a movement,influence,or activity."

Here are two quotes from you:It seems to me from my own reading that many "mainstream" conservative commentaries are reformed leaning.

The ESV seems a little too "Calvinistic" for me in places,and is the main version used by mainstream Calvinists.

Quotes from three other BB'ers who have used the word will follow.

This creed which runs counter to mainstream evangelism...

This is MAINSTREAM Hyles theology folks.

You and he are arguing against positions that exist only in the fringe elements.You are not discussing mainstream Calvinism.

 

[Rippon]

The rest of what " t'other Ed" says, I fully agree with, here. And I will still generally say that one will not be led far afield by reading what either Dr. Ed Hamilton or Bob Hamilton writes, and one will be blessed and learn from either of which that one has the opportunity to hear and/or 'sit under' the teaching, which I highly recommend. :thumbsup:

Ed

I couldn't find anything on Ed.But there is a Bob Hamilton on sermonaudio.com who has just one message called:"The Mighty Winds Of God's Providence".Is that the right guy?Even if he's not your friend he's worth a listen I'd say.

Not too long ago you mentioned S.Lewis Johnson favorably.I love listening to his sermons/lectures.He was a fine servant of the Most High.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

I couldn't figure the translation out. The onlne translator gave me "When is Order Advantageous upon to write Sacra"

:laugh:

I was being silly. The thread seemed to have dropped and I wanted to see more discussion about it. There is a joke for latin students that goes "Semper ubi sububi" the direct translation is "always where under where" but you can figure out the joke from there. Anyway I'm not savvy enough to find it after it passes out of view. So since you started the subject and it's in latin I was asking where is the order of salvation in holy scripture?

 

[skypair]

I do believe it is faith-regeneration-justification all pretty much at the same time, then sanctification, glorification. But God opens our eyes to the need for Jesus.

OK, that's progress. I would put regeneration into the sanctification category since it is the Holy Spirit that teaches and guides us in our spiritual lives following our justification.

To me, the only time we respond to God on our own behalf is when we, not having the Holy Spirit in us, respond to His convicting through believing the gospel and receive Christ as Savior. To me, it's like applying the blood to our doorposts -- we believe and, still under our own power/sovereignty, obey the gospel unto salvation.

skypair

 

[Rippon]

All Scripture Cited Is From The HCSB

... we believe and, still under our own power/sovereignty, obey the gospel unto salvation.

skypair

Bunk!You're still peddling this stuff?"Our own power/sovereignty"!! Before regeneration the mind is hostile toward God and can't understand spiritual things.We're dead in our sins."So then it does not depend on human will or effort,but on God who shows mercy." (Romans 9:16)"Who were born,not of blood,or the will of the flesh,or of the will of man,but of God."(John 1:13)"By His own choice,He gave us a new birth by the message of truth..."(James 1:16)

Man is not a little god with power and sovereignty.That smacks of Kenneth Copeland's stuff.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

still under our own power/sovereignty, obey the gospel unto salvation.

This is false and unbiblical teaching.

Romans 6

17But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. 18Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.

ye have obeyed "active voice"

made free some sin "passive voice"

What does this mean? God does not obey for us, it is our obeying, but upon the condition that we were made free from sin by the operation of God. We had no power to obey from the heart without first being made free from sin.

In Paul's argument and heart's cry for his people, the Jews, he writes:

But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report? ROmans 10:16

So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. v.17

But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world. v.18

But Esaias is very bold, and saith, I was found of them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me. v.20

But to Israel he saith, All day long I have stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people. v.21

But are their any Israelites that are saved? That have heard and obeyed? Yes.

Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. Romans 11:5 of which in verse 1 Paul names himself "For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin."

Have all obey from the heart? No. Who has obeyed? The elect. Why did they obey? Because their faith and obedience to the Gospel is the fruit of their election.

RB

 

[skypair]

Man is not a little god with power and sovereignty.That smacks of Kenneth Copeland's stuff.

What it "smacks of" is David and Jesus, rip. Hath David not said, 'Ye are gods?" (John 10:34-36)?

We are in the image of God, rip. God has 2 wills even among Calvies: 1) Sovereign will and 2) permissive will. What God permits, men are given their own sovereignty in (In reading RC Sproul last night, he said it took him years to overcome the burden that what he believed regarding predestination was in "fate" and that he was a "puppet."). This is all easily resolved if we begin by establishing that man is permitted a totally free will, that he has a spirit/mind that is not blinded or dead like his soul, and that God expects man to respond to the gospel unto salvation.

skypair

 

[skypair]

Have all obey from the heart? No. Who has obeyed? The elect. Why did they obey? Because their faith and obedience to the Gospel is the fruit of their election.

Basically, you are saying that one passes from "lost" to "saved," not on account of the cross, but on account of being "chosen"/"elect." Is that right?

Are you saying that God applies the work of the cross to you "for no apparent reason" other than that He chose you?

How many people you reckon He has applied the cross to that never heard of Christ? I'm thinking you just took what God said was "cause and effect" out of the consideration. God said preaching the gospel was the cause and salvation was the effect. But now you seem to be saying that they are saved because they are saved -- "unconditional election."

I won't, BTW, deny that faith and obedience are the fruit of election -- they are. We call it "sanctification." That would be speaking of a lifelong work God does in you.

What concerns me is that your "justification" before God has a false foundation -- the "hypothetical" of an "exchanged life" (that you are elect/saved) vs. the personal commitment of an "exchanged death."

Recall Rom 5:10 again -- "For if ... we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life." What concerns me is that your theology teaches us to exchange lives with Christ but not to die with Him first. It's like going to the cross and seeing Jesus crucified and then saying you will live for Him. Well, what about dying for Him? Do you think you live for Him in obedience and faith without choosing to surrender your own life? Isn't that also a decision you must make? Isn't that what baptism and Baptists preach?

IOW, no -- you are not saved because you are elected. And faith and obedience (sanctification) neither proves you are saved not does it save you. It is belief that is not in vain -- belief that has chosen death to self in Christ -- that saves.

skypair

 

[ReformedBaptist]

Basically, you are saying that one passes from "lost" to "saved," not on account of the cross, but on account of being "chosen"/"elect." Is that right?

Wrong. God the Father elects, God the Son Redeems, and God the Holy Spirit convicts, draws, et.

Are you saying that God applies the work of the cross to you "for no apparent reason" other than that He chose you?

Wrong again. God the Father chose me before the world began because it seemed GOOD to Him to do so. He sometimes hides things from folks, and reveals things to others, because it seems good in His eyes.

How many people you reckon He has applied the cross to that never heard of Christ?

None. If the Lord shed His blood for people and it is required that they believe (and it is) then they will hear. It is not the calvinist that has this problem, but the arminian.

RB

 

[ReformedBaptist]

What concerns me is that your "justification" before God has a false foundation -- the "hypothetical" of an "exchanged life" (that you are elect/saved) vs. the personal commitment of an "exchanged death."

Here you go again. Are you suggesting I am not justified? Stop this nonsense skypair.

The foundation of my justification before God is not my own personal faith. It is the righteousness of God which is mine by my faith.

RB

 

[ReformedBaptist]

Recall Rom 5:10 again -- "For if ... we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life." What concerns me is that your theology teaches us to exchange lives with Christ but not to die with Him first. It's like going to the cross and seeing Jesus crucified and then saying you will live for Him. Well, what about dying for Him? Do you think you live for Him in obedience and faith without choosing to surrender your own life? Isn't that also a decision you must make? Isn't that what baptism and Baptists preach?

Where do you get this stuff about what I believe. I have known from a baby Christian that the Gospel is Christ and Him cruciifed and risen from the dead. Our interest in the GOspel is being crucified, buried, and risen with Him. Which I am.

IOW, no -- you are not saved because you are elected. And faith and obedience (sanctification) neither proves you are saved not does it save you. It is belief that is not in vain -- belief that has chosen death to self in Christ -- that saves.

You are either blatantly teaching heresy here or have a really bad way of wording things. Faith and obedience doesn't save me but belief does? Belief that has chosen death to self in Christ is what saves me?

This Gospel preaching is damning souls to hell if it is accepted. It is a damnable heresy.

"What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?" James 2:14

What you describe as belief is what James is against. Your suggesting that a faith without works saves. The book of James says no. And so this book is for your instruction.

Show me your belief without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works.

"Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only." James 2:24

RB

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Where do you get this stuff about what I believe. I have known from a baby Christian that the Gospel is Christ and Him cruciifed and risen from the dead. Our interest in the GOspel is being crucified, buried, and risen with Him. Which I am.



You are either blatantly teaching heresy here or have a really bad way of wording things. Faith and obedience doesn't save me but belief does? Belief that has chosen death to self in Christ is what saves me?

This Gospel preaching is damning souls to hell if it is accepted. It is a damnable heresy.

"What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?" James 2:14

What you describe as belief is what James is against. Your suggesting that a faith without works saves. The book of James says no. And so this book is for your instruction.

Show me your belief without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works.

"Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only." James 2:24

RB

be careful they'll start calling you a catholic.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

be careful they'll start calling you a catholic.

If they do, it shows the sinking sand of the freewillism position.

RB

 

[webdog]

If they do, it shows the sinking sand of the freewillism position.

RB

That really made no sense

 

[skypair]

RB,

You are taking everything personally now so let me just say (from another thread) what I believe the Bible says and be done.

I've been "pushing" this all along -- that we must be saved soul, spirit, and body. If the soul dies on acount of sin (Ezek 18:20), then it would seem clear that the soul would have to be reconciled and in some kind of relationship to God before He would indwell it. It would also seem that it having been us who broke the relationship in sin, it would need to be us who turns back to the relationship whereby we may be indwelt. That's the "decisional justification" half of spiritual salvation -- the salvation of the soul.

The "Sovereign Sanctification" is classic Calvinist -- we are given faith, Holy Spirit indwelling, eternal life, etc. sovereignly by God. We are also given into Christ's kingdom, the church, for sanctification through discipleship or, as Paul puts it, "being reconciled to God, we are much more saved by His life." (again, justified, then sanctified, Rom 5:10) Calvinism seems to begin with this step and assume that the soul is already saved/reconciled to God by God.

skypair

 

[Allan]

RB,

I haven't forgotten you brother. I have become really busy just recently.. I have quite a few things to discuss with you on this but no real time to set it out .. yet (you know me :laugh: )

But I will get back with you.

 

[Rippon]

What concerns me is that your "justification" before God has a false foundation --

skypair

And you told RB that he takes things too personally.Sp,these snipes of yours are all-too frequent in your posts.You have done it to me scores of times also.

Just state your wacky beliefs and be done with it.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

And you told RB that he takes things too personally.Sp,these snipes of yours are all-too frequent in your posts.You have done it to me scores of times also.

Just state your wacky beliefs and be done with it.

Amen! :thumbs:


BTW Skypair,

Originally Posted by skypair

What concerns me is that your "justification" before God has a false foundation --

skypair

I've already told you my foundation is Jesus' righteousness. Can you explain to me why my trust in the finished work of Christ is a false foundation?

 

[Allan]

Allan,

To your questions:



I am thinking there is some other kind of idea your posing your question here to other than my own. For example, it is very odd to me think along the lines that a person is regenerate without also being justified, sanctified, filled with the Holy Spirit and spiritually alive in Christ.

So, probably not answering what your looking for, the answer to "From what are you saved if you are regenerate?" My answer is simplly to answer the question, "From what are saved at all?" Biblically I would say that answer is from the wrath of God.



If I am regenerate then I am a new creation. However, this does not mean biblically that remaining sin is entirely removed.



Yes, I am.



Yes, I am.




I have never heard of such a concept as prolonged regeneration. Regeneration according to my understanding is a creative and sovereign act of Almighty God, it is instant, complete, and whole. I have never seen prolonged regeneration in Scripture.



If the question is, does someone have faith and trust in the Lord Jesus apart from being indwelt by the Holy Spirit (consequently being a new creation and spiritualy alive) my anwer is no. If Christ is not in us, we are none of His.



Don't like answering negative questions because I probaly get them wrong. lol If I am regenerate am I also reconciled to God in relationship (covenant) with Him? Yes.



I have no clue. I think those to understand their salvation in such ways are confused.

RB

RB,

I wanted to get back to this since this is more the crux in my mind that shoudl be examined first.

Even though though faith and regeneration are or at the very least nearly simultanious it is the reformed belief or view that regeneration precedes faith in a 'logical' order. Thus to the reformed mind, regeneration is not actually salvation but that which comes before it.

When I asked the questions to which you gave the above answers it was specifically with regard to regeneration 'before' faith is excersized and thus being actually saved.

So to re-cap and make sure I'm understanding you correctly:
You hold that before a person excersizes faith unto salvation they are regenerate and this regeneration before faith entails the person being justified before God, sanctified unto God, filled with the Holy Spirit, placed in Christ (thus alive).

Do I have that correct so far?