Salvation by Works.....or Not?

[reformedbeliever]

I believe in a travail/travel from nature to grace. In Luke 15, the "Prodical Son" had to realize that he was lost in the "pig pen", or he wouldn't have thought of the need to go back to Father's house. We were ALL in the "pig pen" when we were sinners, but it took our thoughts and belief on Him to get us out of it. God will save us, but we have to call on Him when we were dead in sins. We were not physically dead, but were spiritually dead. If we were physically dead, we would all go to the Lake of Fire on the Last day. But, because He raised us from a dead state(dead state of sin), He raised us into a lively hope in Christ Jesus! Praise His high and holy name!! It wasn't by our works we were saved, but by our trust/faith/belief in Him, and what He could do for us.

God will save us.... when we call upon Him and believe. Belief is an exercise of the will. We are not born again (the first process of salvation) by an exercise of the will. We are born again of God.

 

[reformedbeliever]

HP: And everyone that I have read on the list can give that a hearty Amen. No one has ever refuted this point.

I just did.

 

[reformedbeliever]

Salvation is offered by Christ to all. Not all accept it.

The lifering is a perfect illustration.

I am sorry you disagree.

The lifering is a perfect example of man being saved by their will.

 

[reformedbeliever]

Don't try to hijack the thread with that 'Total Inability' line. That has already been proven to be false.

John the Baptist proved it when He preached to Herod and Herodias to repent, yet they did not. It makes no sense that God should tell John to go preach repentance if Herod had no ability on his own to repent. That is one instance that blows the 'Total Inability' junk out of the water.

All men everywhere are called to repentance. Not all heed the call. But it is not because they cannot, it is because they choose not to.

Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian. (Acts 26:28)

Agrippa chose to refuse the gift of eternal life. His choice. It was offered.

And as he reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come, Felix trembled, and answered, Go thy way for this time; when I have a convenient season, I will call for thee. (Acts 24:25)

Felix spoke with Paul one on one. Felix chose to refuse the gift of eternal life. His choice. It was offerend.

No, the "T" in TULIP is faulty. Man is not totally unable to do a thing in his unregenerate state. Many in the Bible prove that.

I suppose it made no sense for God to tell Isaiah to go preach but they would go on being blind and deaf to the Word. Hmmmmm

 

[reformedbeliever]

That verse that says God wants all to come to repentance, says ALL, not SOME. You have to do some powerful twisting of Scripture to leave some out.

That verse was writen to Christians not unregenerate men.

 

[reformedbeliever]

Jesus did not say 'All types of men." Don't add to Scripture. He said 'All men.'

Peter did not say 'all types of men,' he said 'all men.'

I hold my position because the Bible teaches my position.

Do a word study. all is used the same way in many instances to mean all sorts of. The same word in the original language.

 

[reformedbeliever]

HP,

Have you noticed Dan V has only posted 4 times on the BB? all in this thread? and all attacking me?

He is here with an agenda. That is quite obvious.

Are you always this paranoid?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

RB: The Bible gives us the answer. We are born again of God, not human will. John 1:12-13

Belief is an exercise of the will. We are not born again of our will but God's.

God will save us.... when we call upon Him and believe. Belief is an exercise of the will. We are not born again (the first process of salvation) by an exercise of the will. We are born again of God.

The lifering is a perfect example of man being saved by their will.

HP: Certainly the Scriptures do say that we are born again by God, and not by the will of man, but that does not insinuate or imply in the least that the will of man is not indeed actively involved, ‘without which’ no man can be saved. The passage you are referring to simple is stating that man’s will is not the grounds of salvation. It is saying that salvation’s plan, its implementation, and setting forth the means to accomplish God’s plan (the atonement) was not, is not, and will never be caused by the will of man.

Indeed belief is an act of the will, as is repentance, faith, and enduring to the end. That is not to say that man accomplishes them without help and influence by the Holy Spirit, but that salvation will not be accomplished without man, willingly yielding his will to God in faith, trust, and obedience. Although man's will is indeed involved in the salvation process, the actions of man will are not thought of as being meritorious in nature, nor are we saved for the sake of anything man can or will do. Man's intents and actions are always thought of in the sense of 'not without which,' not 'that for the sake of.'

Have you read the prison illustration I have posted several times? It sets forth the distinction of the senses in which I am speaking, i.e., not without which and that for the sake of. Until one comes to grips with the meaning and distinction of the senses of which our wills and that of God's are spoken of in realtionship to salvation, one most likely will never be able to place the will of man in a proper biblical perspective as it is involved in the salvation process.

The life ring example was by no means an illustration of salvation by works. It was a wonderful illustration of the salvation process illustrating the two senses perfectly. Nothing mans will can do while drowning in the water can in any way be seen as the means by which, or the grounds of his salvation. Just the same, mans will must reach out his hands voluntarily without force or coercion and lay hold of the life ring to be saved. Thanks SFIC for sharing that with the list.:thumbsup:

Paul illustrates this truth exceedingly clear in Acts 27. Although Paul had received clear revelation that none in the ship would perish, he also warned those on the ship. Ac 27:31 Paul said to the centurion and to the soldiers, Except these abide in the ship, ye CANNOT be saved.

They were clearly saved by a plan devised and implemented entirely of God, but just the same, they had to willingly exercise their wills in obedience in order to see that happen. The clear possibility existed that if they did not exercise their wills in obedience, they would indeed be lost. Their salvation from the sea was not accomplished ‘by their wills’ yet just the same, they were saved by their wills IN THE SENSE OF ‘not without which.’ They were not saved by their wills, but neither were they saved apart from their wills. Their wills were actively involved in one sense yet their wills were not the grounds of their being saved.

.

 

[reformedbeliever]

HP: Certainly the Scriptures do say that we are born again by God, and not by the will of man, but that does not insinuate or imply in the least that the will of man is not indeed actively involved, ‘without which’ no man can be saved. The passage you are referring to simple is stating that man’s will is not the grounds of salvation. It is saying that salvation’s plan, its implementation, and setting forth the means to accomplish God’s plan (the atonement) was not, is not, and will never be caused by the will of man.

Indeed belief is an act of the will, as is repentance, faith, and enduring to the end. That is not to say that man accomplishes them without help and influence by the Holy Spirit, but that salvation will not be accomplished without man, willingly yielding his will to God in faith, trust, and obedience. Although man's will is indeed involved in the salvation process, the actions of man will are not thought of as being meritorious in nature, nor are we saved for the sake of anything man can or will do. Man's intents and actions are always thought of in the sense of 'not without which,' not 'that for the sake of.'

Have you read the prison illustration I have posted several times? It sets forth the distinction of the senses in which I am speaking, i.e., not without which and that for the sake of. Until one comes to grips with the meaning and distinction of the senses of which our wills and that of God's are spoken of in realtionship to salvation, one most likely will never be able to place the will of man in a proper biblical perspective as it is involved in the salvation process.

The life ring example was by no means an illustration of salvation by works. It was a wonderful illustration of the salvation process illustrating the two senses perfectly. Nothing mans will can do while drowning in the water can in any way be seen as the means by which, or the grounds of his salvation. Just the same, mans will must reach out his hands voluntarily without force or coercion and lay hold of the life ring to be saved. Thanks SFIC for sharing that with the list.:thumbsup:

Paul illustrates this truth exceedingly clear in Acts 27. Although Paul had received clear revelation that none in the ship would perish, he also warned those on the ship. Ac 27:31 Paul said to the centurion and to the soldiers, Except these abide in the ship, ye CANNOT be saved.

They were clearly saved by a plan devised and implemented entirely of God, but just the same, they had to willingly exercise their wills in obedience in order to see that happen. The clear possibility existed that if they did not exercise their wills in obedience, they would indeed be lost. Their salvation from the sea was not accomplished ‘by their wills’ yet just the same, they were saved by their wills IN THE SENSE OF ‘not without which.’ They were not saved by their wills, but neither were they saved apart from their wills. Their wills were actively involved in one sense yet their wills were not the grounds of their being saved.

.

You are missing the point my friend. God causes us to be born again, not of our will but His own. Once we are born again (the first part of salvation) we do exercise our will to believe.

1 Peter 1: 3. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,

 

[reformedbeliever]

HP: Certainly the Scriptures do say that we are born again by God, and not by the will of man, but that does not insinuate or imply in the least that the will of man is not indeed actively involved, ‘without which’ no man can be saved. The passage you are referring to simple is stating that man’s will is not the grounds of salvation. It is saying that salvation’s plan, its implementation, and setting forth the means to accomplish God’s plan (the atonement) was not, is not, and will never be caused by the will of man.

Indeed belief is an act of the will, as is repentance, faith, and enduring to the end. That is not to say that man accomplishes them without help and influence by the Holy Spirit, but that salvation will not be accomplished without man, willingly yielding his will to God in faith, trust, and obedience. Although man's will is indeed involved in the salvation process, the actions of man will are not thought of as being meritorious in nature, nor are we saved for the sake of anything man can or will do. Man's intents and actions are always thought of in the sense of 'not without which,' not 'that for the sake of.'

Have you read the prison illustration I have posted several times? It sets forth the distinction of the senses in which I am speaking, i.e., not without which and that for the sake of. Until one comes to grips with the meaning and distinction of the senses of which our wills and that of God's are spoken of in realtionship to salvation, one most likely will never be able to place the will of man in a proper biblical perspective as it is involved in the salvation process.

The life ring example was by no means an illustration of salvation by works. It was a wonderful illustration of the salvation process illustrating the two senses perfectly. Nothing mans will can do while drowning in the water can in any way be seen as the means by which, or the grounds of his salvation. Just the same, mans will must reach out his hands voluntarily without force or coercion and lay hold of the life ring to be saved. Thanks SFIC for sharing that with the list.:thumbsup:

Paul illustrates this truth exceedingly clear in Acts 27. Although Paul had received clear revelation that none in the ship would perish, he also warned those on the ship. Ac 27:31 Paul said to the centurion and to the soldiers, Except these abide in the ship, ye CANNOT be saved.

They were clearly saved by a plan devised and implemented entirely of God, but just the same, they had to willingly exercise their wills in obedience in order to see that happen. The clear possibility existed that if they did not exercise their wills in obedience, they would indeed be lost. Their salvation from the sea was not accomplished ‘by their wills’ yet just the same, they were saved by their wills IN THE SENSE OF ‘not without which.’ They were not saved by their wills, but neither were they saved apart from their wills. Their wills were actively involved in one sense yet their wills were not the grounds of their being saved.

.

We are not born again by the help or influence of the Holy Spirit and man's will, we are born again of God period. John 1:13 does not say with the help of man, but all of God.

 

[reformedbeliever]

HP: Certainly the Scriptures do say that we are born again by God, and not by the will of man, but that does not insinuate or imply in the least that the will of man is not indeed actively involved, ‘without which’ no man can be saved. The passage you are referring to simple is stating that man’s will is not the grounds of salvation. It is saying that salvation’s plan, its implementation, and setting forth the means to accomplish God’s plan (the atonement) was not, is not, and will never be caused by the will of man.

Indeed belief is an act of the will, as is repentance, faith, and enduring to the end. That is not to say that man accomplishes them without help and influence by the Holy Spirit, but that salvation will not be accomplished without man, willingly yielding his will to God in faith, trust, and obedience. Although man's will is indeed involved in the salvation process, the actions of man will are not thought of as being meritorious in nature, nor are we saved for the sake of anything man can or will do. Man's intents and actions are always thought of in the sense of 'not without which,' not 'that for the sake of.'

Have you read the prison illustration I have posted several times? It sets forth the distinction of the senses in which I am speaking, i.e., not without which and that for the sake of. Until one comes to grips with the meaning and distinction of the senses of which our wills and that of God's are spoken of in realtionship to salvation, one most likely will never be able to place the will of man in a proper biblical perspective as it is involved in the salvation process.

The life ring example was by no means an illustration of salvation by works. It was a wonderful illustration of the salvation process illustrating the two senses perfectly. Nothing mans will can do while drowning in the water can in any way be seen as the means by which, or the grounds of his salvation. Just the same, mans will must reach out his hands voluntarily without force or coercion and lay hold of the life ring to be saved. Thanks SFIC for sharing that with the list.:thumbsup:

Paul illustrates this truth exceedingly clear in Acts 27. Although Paul had received clear revelation that none in the ship would perish, he also warned those on the ship. Ac 27:31 Paul said to the centurion and to the soldiers, Except these abide in the ship, ye CANNOT be saved.

They were clearly saved by a plan devised and implemented entirely of God, but just the same, they had to willingly exercise their wills in obedience in order to see that happen. The clear possibility existed that if they did not exercise their wills in obedience, they would indeed be lost. Their salvation from the sea was not accomplished ‘by their wills’ yet just the same, they were saved by their wills IN THE SENSE OF ‘not without which.’ They were not saved by their wills, but neither were they saved apart from their wills. Their wills were actively involved in one sense yet their wills were not the grounds of their being saved.

.

Actually God plucks the unconscious man from the water, the man wakes up (quickened) and then the man wraps his arms around his Savior. The rescue had already happened before the man was conscious.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

2 Peter 3:9 was written in reference to the scoffers who were questioning the Believers, "Where is your God? and where is the promise of His coming?"

Peter tells the reader that God is not willing that any should perish. He was stating the fact that God was offering the gift of Salvation to all those who were still in sin. He was not speaking of the Believer in that verse.

That verse shows God's longsuffering even toward the scoffers who mocked Him.

 

[reformedbeliever]

2 Peter 3:9 was written in reference to the scoffers who were questioning the Believers, "Where is your God? and where is the promise of His coming?"

Peter tells the reader that God is not willing that any should perish. He was stating the fact that God was offering the gift of Salvation to all those who were still in sin. He was not speaking of the Believer in that verse.

That verse shows God's longsuffering even toward the scoffers who mocked Him.

Good morning brother. Actually Peter's letters were writen to the elect. The elect are chosen before the foundation of the world. God is not willing that one of them be lost. The context is that the letter is writen to the elect or Christians.... not the scoffers. The scoffers were indeed saying "where is your God", and Peter was reassuring the elect that God would not allow one of them to be lost. All that the Father gives me will come to me...........

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

RB: You are missing the point my friend. God causes us to be born again, not of our will but His own. Once we are born again (the first part of salvation) we do exercise our will to believe.

1 Peter 1: 3. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,

HP: God indeed is the cause of the plan of salvation, its means, and the influences by which it is presented to us. Just the same, God forces or coeces no man to salvation. Man is the sole cause of his moral intents and the decision to either accept or reject god’s offer of salvation.

There is only one end to your argument of God being the cause of ones salvation, in the sense of man’s will not being involved in making His plan effective in ones life, i.e., pure unadulterated fatalistic determination. Scripture, reason, ad experience all soundly refute that notion as false.

You have it exactly backwards. Man does not first exercise our wills subsequent to salvation, we must exercise our wills antecedent to salvation, ‘in order to be saved.’ “UNLESS ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.”

 

[reformedbeliever]

HP: God indeed is the cause of the plan of salvation, its means, and the influences by which it is presented to us. Just the same, God forces or coeces no man to salvation. Man is the sole cause of his moral intents and the decision to either accept or reject god’s offer of salvation.

There is only one end to your argument of God being the cause of ones salvation, in the sense of man’s will not being involved in making His plan effective in ones life, i.e., pure unadulterated fatalistic determination. Scripture, reason, ad experience all soundly refute that notion as false.

You have it exactly backwards. Man does not first exercise our wills subsequent to salvation, we must exercise our wills antecedent to salvation, ‘in order to be saved.’ “UNLESS ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.”

Fatalism is leaving our destiny to simple fate... impersonal fate. What I believe is the providence of God, not impersonal fate. An Almighty God is in control of our destiny. He has the right to dispose of His creation as He sees fit.

God absoltuely commands everyone to repent... if He didn't would He be just? But then again, do the natives in the furthest reaches of the jungle get to hear the Gospel? Is there any other way to be saved other than Jesus? They are guilty however..... through their conscience Rom 1
God is just and the justifier of those who are saved.

 

[Linda64]

GOD IS NOT WILLING THAT ANY SHOULD PERISH -- “The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.” (2 Pet. 3:9)

Why does the Lord wait to establish His kingdom; why has Christ not returned? This verse teaches us that God is waiting for men to be saved, because it is not His sovereign will that any should perish. Since many will perish and since all will not come to repentance, as we know from other Scriptures, then it is obvious that God’s will can be resisted and thwarted and rejected by man. It is obvious that the sovereign God created man in such a way that this could be possible, but of course this does not mean that God has ceased to be God. It is Calvinism that defines divine sovereignty as irresistibility. The Bible upholds no such definition.

The Calvinist interprets this verse to mean that God is not willing that any of the elect perish. Arthur Pink says, ‘The ‘any’ that God is not willing should perish, are the ‘usward’ to whom God is ‘longsuffering’, the ‘beloved’ of the previous verses” (The Sovereignty of God, p. 207).

Our reply to this is, first of all, if this were the only verse that said that God is not willing that any should perish, we would be able to accept the Calvinist interpretation, but it is not. Isa. 45:22 and Matt. 11:28 and John 3:16 and John 6:40 and Rom. 11:23 and 1 Tim. 1:15-16 and 1 Tim. 2:3-4 and Rev. 22:17 are just some of the Scriptures that say that God wants to save all men.

Thus it is reasonable and Scriptural to believe that the “usward” in 2 Pet. 3:9 is mankind in general as opposed to “the elect” only.

Further, if 2 Peter 3:9 means merely that God is not willing that any of the elect should perish it uses strange language in light of the Calvinist doctrines of sovereign election and irresistible calling. To say that God is not willing that any should perish is to assume that some can perish.

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/calvins-camels.html

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Linda: GOD IS NOT WILLING THAT ANY SHOULD PERISH

HP: A very well thought out, Scriptural, and informative post. :thumbsup:

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

RB: Fatalism is leaving our destiny to simple fate... impersonal fate. What I believe is the providence of God, not impersonal fate. An Almighty God is in control of our destiny. He has the right to dispose of His creation as He sees fit.

HP: Fate is fate, whether or not a person is involved. God being the sole cause of ones destiny is deterministic fatalism any way you slice it.

RB: God absolutely commands everyone to repent... if He didn't would He be just?

HP: Here is the irony of your position. First you say that everything is according to providence, and go to great ends to be sure the dead man you describe lies lifeless, helpless, and unable to even wiggle, let alone repent. If I were to honestly accept your position I would believe that God must be having a case of amnesia. If God caused those to be saved that will be saved, and repentance is necessary for salvation as Scripture teaches, God would have to have done their repenting for them long before they were ever born. If that was the case, when He calls upon man to repent He must be forgetting what he would have to have done in the past, i.e., everything necessary to save the elect, repentance being one of them.

God can call rocks to life, but He doesn’t then blame them for being rocks or punish them for something they have no choice in. To add absurdity to irony, you then throw in a word like “just.” The god you paint blames men and punishes them for eternity for being born in a state they had no choice, in, blamed and held accountable as sinners before they had ever made their first choice, and cast into the lake of fire for eternity for a necessitated fate. Some justice your position portrays. Your position cast a most unthinkable wicked blight on the character of our Just and Loving God.

RB: But then again, do the natives in the furthest reaches of the jungle get to hear the Gospel? Is there any other way to be saved other than Jesus? They are guilty however..... through their conscience Rom 1
God is just and the justifier of those who are saved.

HP: What do the natives have to with anything? So what if they have never heard the gospel. God does NOT hold them accountable for what they do not know, but rather Romans states that God will hold them accountable for what they have heard and do in fact know. They have violated their own conscience, having become a law unto themselves, and for that will God pronounce judgment upon them.

God holds no one accountable for something they have absolutely no knowledge about. “Where there is no law sin is NOT imputed.” “To him that knoweth to do good and doeth it not, to him it is sin.” Light is always a prerequisite of guilt and subsequent punishment, especially in the arena of morals. To think otherwise is to destroy every vestige of morality and justice. God is Just.

 

[Linda64]

The lifering is a perfect example of man being saved by their will.

The fact that man rejects Jesus Christ does not negate God's sovereignty in the least. For in the end, God's Word is true. The man who rejects Christ will find himself in the Lake of Fire by his own choosing.

By your own logic that man's will can negate the sovereignty of God, isn't very logical. For if man's will can negate God's sovereignty, God is not sovereign at all--man is. The Scriptures say--God is sovereign and man is accountable.

God's sovereignty:

Tell ye, and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together: who hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from that time? have not I the LORD? and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me. Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else. (Isaiah 45:21-22)

Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen. (1 Timothy 1:17)


Man's accountability:

Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil. (Ecclesiastes 12:13-14)

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

Why would God say "Look unto me, and be ye saved" if man is "unable" to do so---it says NOTHING about a certain class of people--it is man in general. Why is man told to "fear God and keep His commandments"? Obviously God has created man with a free will to choose-- choosing does NOT negate God's sovereignty--otherwise God would not be sovereign--and He says He is sovereign in His Word. Who is making God a liar?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Linda: The fact that man rejects Jesus Christ does not negate God's sovereignty in the least. For in the end, God's Word is true. The man who rejects Christ will find himself in the Lake of Fire by his own choosing.
Linda: The Scriptures say--God is sovereign and man is accountable God's sovereignty:

HP: After reading the passages you set forth I have a question. Define what it means to you for God to be sovereign. I do not see the word 'sovereign' in any verses you quote, so I am unsure as to what that means to you.