Reformed Salvation

[George Antonios]

If you had created you, your friend, and the victim and they all lived moment by moment only because you allowed them to, and if you could foresee and change a host of things at any time to prevent it then yes - you did ordain it in the way the reformers meant it.

Well then, we can all make much leeway to ourselves with such qualifiers.

Foreknowledge is not Foreordination.
Please bear in mind that the future is not linear. God did not simply foreknow "the" future; he foreknew all possible futures. Did he ordain them all while foreknowing them all? Of course not.

 

[SavedByGrace]

No...we are just reading this misguided posts.

So the Reformed Theologians mentioned in the OP are wrong

 

[George Antonios]

Give it to me in simple English

You're quoting God's commandments
To Adam in Eden?
To Noah after the flood?
To Abraham?
To Moses and Israel under the law?
The commandments of Jesus to Jews under the law as establishing that law of Moses?
To people in the church age of grace?
To the tribulation saints?
To the peoples of the millennial kingdom?

 

[SavedByGrace]

You're quoting God's commandments
To Adam in Eden?
To Noah after the flood?
To Abraham?
To Moses and Israel under the law?
The commandments of Jesus to Jews under the law as establishing that law of Moses?
To people in the church age of grace?
To the tribulation saints?
To the peoples of the millennial kingdom?

Huh? You have lost me

 

[George Antonios]

Huh? You have lost me

2Ti 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

We could, for example, quote a verse commanding us to worship in Jerusalem, but we don't do that because that commandment was given in another dispensation/age.

Your verses that a works-repentance along with faith is necessary for salvation comes from which of the previously listed ages? I.e. what is the dispensational context of your verses?

 

[AustinC]

more RUBBISH!

Not rubbish. The way you mishandle Romans 11:32 causes you to be a universalist. Only if you understand Paul's argument regarding Israel can you understand that "everyone" in verse 32 is not universal to all mankind. But, you don't grasp this and thus you argue for universalism while also denying it. You are inconsistent and sloppy in recognizing Paul's argument, which actually starts in chapter 1 of Romans and concludes at the end of chapter 11. It is an amazing argument and explanation of the gospel. You should really study it in its entirety as it will help you see where you go astray.

 

[AustinC]

2Ti 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

We could, for example, quote a verse commanding us to worship in Jerusalem, but we don't do that because that commandment was given in another dispensation/age.

Your verses that a works-repentance along with faith is necessary for salvation comes from which of the previously listed ages? I.e. what is the dispensational context of your verses?

George, dispensationalism is a terrible hack job of the Bible. It does injustice to the grace of God in saving all God's elect, starting with Adam and going forward to the last of God's elect yet to know of their adoption.
sbg is confused because you are talking in the tongues of dispensationalism rather speaking scripture.

 

[SavedByGrace]

Not rubbish. The way you mishandle Romans 11:32 causes you to be a universalist. Only if you understand Paul's argument regarding Israel can you understand that "everyone" in verse 32 is not universal to all mankind. But, you don't grasp this and thus you argue for universalism while also denying it. You are inconsistent and sloppy in recognizing Paul's argument, which actually starts in chapter 1 of Romans and concludes at the end of chapter 11. It is an amazing argument and explanation of the gospel. You should really study it in its entirety as it will help you see where you go astray.

For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all

the first ALL must mean the entire human race, so the second ALL has to be the same! Note that it says MIGHT HAVE MERCY, which is subjunctive in the Greek, meaning CONDITIONAL, which is REPENTING and FAITH, not automatic.

 

[SavedByGrace]

works-repentance

Jesus says to REPENT for salvtion in Mark 1:15; Luke 24:47; as does Peter in Acts 2:37-38. No "works" attached to this, only OBEDIENCE to the Just demands of God!

 

[Alan Gross]

For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all

the first ALL must mean the entire human race, so the second ALL has to be the same! Note that it says MIGHT HAVE MERCY, which is subjunctive in the Greek, meaning CONDITIONAL, which is REPENTING and FAITH, not automatic.

"them"

 

[DaveXR650]

Foreknowledge is not Foreordination.
Please bear in mind that the future is not linear. God did not simply foreknow "the" future; he foreknew all possible futures. Did he ordain them all while foreknowing them all? Of course not.

This is confusing to me. The reformers did believe that God did more than have a knowledge of what would happen. They varied in how much they believed God directly caused everything that happens. The bottom line is that you cannot perfectly know what will happen in the future, be perfectly able to change something that would alter the end result and then not be responsible in the sense of "ordaining it". If you have evidence of reformers saying it differently post it. No wonder SBG is confused. He gets slammed for going against Calvinism, then gets shown Arminian and dispensationalist arguments.

 

[SavedByGrace]

"them"

Yes both Jews and Gentiles which are the entire human race

 

[SavedByGrace]

This is confusing to me. The reformers did believe that God did more than have a knowledge of what would happen. They varied in how much they believed God directly caused everything that happens. The bottom line is that you cannot perfectly know what will happen in the future, be perfectly able to change something that would alter the end result and then not be responsible in the sense of "ordaining it". If you have evidence of reformers saying it differently post it. No wonder SBG is confused. He gets slammed for going against Calvinism, then gets shown Arminian and dispensationalist arguments.

What you are saying not biblical. Foreknowledge is not the same as Foreordaining. There is a HUGE difference

 

[AustinC]

For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all

the first ALL must mean the entire human race, so the second ALL has to be the same! Note that it says MIGHT HAVE MERCY, which is subjunctive in the Greek, meaning CONDITIONAL, which is REPENTING and FAITH, not automatic.

If you were correct, you would be proposing universalism. But, you are not correct.
I showed you the full context in an earlier post, showing you that the all is referring to all Israel. Yet, in Romans 2 and Romans 9, Paul clarifies that not all Israel is Israel, meaning the dna ancestors are not Israel, but the Israel of God is the children of the Promise. Paul is, therefore declaring that the all, to which you point, is all the chosen and elect children of the Promise.

sbg, you have to read all of Paul's argument instead of looking at half a sentence and then making an unsubstantiated assertion from that half sentence. Honestly, you have to read the entire letter and study what Paul is saying in entirety. You are mishandling the scripture and it is resulting in bad theology on your part.

 

[Salty]

Six hour warning
This thread will be closed no sooner than 930 pm EST / 630 pm PST

 

[SavedByGrace]

If you were correct, you would be proposing universalism. But, you are not correct.
I showed you the full context in an earlier post, showing you that the all is referring to all Israel. Yet, in Romans 2 and Romans 9, Paul clarifies that not all Israel is Israel, meaning the dna ancestors are not Israel, but the Israel of God is the children of the Promise. Paul is, therefore declaring that the all, to which you point, is all the chosen and elect children of the Promise.

sbg, you have to read all of Paul's argument instead of looking at half a sentence and then making an unsubstantiated assertion from that half sentence. Honestly, you have to read the entire letter and study what Paul is saying in entirety. You are mishandling the scripture and it is resulting in bad theology on your part.

UNIVERSALISM, the teaching that end the end every human being will be saved, a DEMONIC and from the PIT OF HELL! It is BLASPHEMY as it distorts the Death of Jesus Christ, which is only applied to those who REPENT and BELIEVE.

PLEASE don't use LIES to try to show that I believe in this HERESY!

 

[SavedByGrace]

Six hour warning
This thread will be closed no sooner than 930 pm EST / 630 pm PST

oh no! we are just getting started

 

[Silverhair]

Here:
SavedByGrace said: ↑
Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Spirit

"Regeneration" is from the Greek, παλιγγενεσία, which is litearlly BORN AGAIN

So, being SAVED is BORIN AGAIN (REGENERATION).

You are claiming that "regeneration" is something that is done by us. You make it more clear here:

SavedByGrace said: ↑
where did I say otherwise? the sinner first must repent and believe, and then the Holy Spirit saves.

The problem is--according to John 3--being born again is not something you do; it is something done to you. The use of the passive voice in John 3 makes this quite clear.l

I have to ask how did you get what you say from what SBG said "according to his mercy he saved us". You are responding to something that was not in the text. SBG did not save regeneration is done by us.

 

[Silverhair]

yes he is posting that and thinks he is not by rewording it.
Thanks for clarifying it.

If you are going to agree with something it would be a good idea if you knew what you were agreeing with. That is not what SBG said, but then you know that.

 

[Silverhair]

Another blame God for mans sin post and thread.

Amazing how for someone that claims to trust what the bible says you really do not trust what the bible says.