I agree that faith pleases God. The scripture you refer to is speaking of the already saved who had faith to obey God. But if we are saved because of faith, then we are not saved by grace. We are saved through faith but not because of it.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
We don't WANT "Free-Will"
- Thread starter HeirofSalvation
- Start date
- Status
Where does scripture say that?
Ephesians 2
5 even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ ( by grace you have been saved),
8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;
This does not answer my question. Show me that responding to God in faith is a work and negates that salvation is by grace.
Skandelon
<b>Moderator</b>
Right, but what he did didn't merit what I gave him, just as our faith does please God but doesn't merit what we get. As Winman points out, faith pleases God. But faith doesn't merit salvation. Salvation is purely gracious.
True. Just as I chose to give my son the iPod even though he couldn't pay for it and didn't deserve it.
That is factually incorrect. Faith does please God. Regardless of what 'side of the soteriological fence you are on,' this fact is true. God may irresistibly cause preselected individual to have faith, but that doesn't change the fact that faith pleases him and they won't be saved without it.
"Many are called, but few are chosen." This phrase is the moral of the analogy of the Wedding Banquet that Jesus taught. Who are the ones chosen in the story? Those clothed in righteousness by faith. The people weren't chosen to enter the banquet prior to being clothed, they were clothed prior to be chosen. That is a fact of the text.
Question beg much?
I'm not going to respond to the rest of your post because I would just be repeating myself. But I will respond to this because I really hate this phrase!!!!! It has become the buzz word of late. :BangHead:
Now I'll go take some tylenol to get rid of my headache. LOL
I'm sorry Amy, but you could not be more mistaken. A person is not saved before they have faith. Abraham believed God, and afterward Abraham was imputed righteous.
Rom 4:20 He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God;
21 And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform.
22 And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.
23 Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him;
24 But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;
25 Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.
No one is saved before they believe. Until you believe you are condemned, you are "dead" in trespasses and sins. It is only when we believe that righteousness is imputed to us and we are saved.
Cornelius believed in God, he had faith, but he was not saved. Only when he believed on Jesus Christ did he receive the Holy Spirit and was regenerated. Until a man has the indwelling Holy Spirit he is still in the flesh (Rom 8:9) and is none of Christ's.
Amy, this teaching that a man is regenerated and saved before faith is error.
Skandelon
<b>Moderator</b>
That is my point. We are NOT saved 'because of faith.' We are saved because of a gracious God who loved people enough to credit righteousness to the account of those who believe. Faith merits or causes nothing. We are saved by Grace. Faith is merely the means through which salvation is applied.
Skandelon
<b>Moderator</b>
No, you'd be engaging in an actual discussion of ideas which might stretch you to think about another perspective and either change your views or become better at defending them. But, to each his/her own...
Then don't do it. It is the lowest form of debate and should be avoided when possible. It is demeaning to say things like, "My view is the same as God's and yours isn't." It's the, "I'm right because you're wrong," argument and it goes no where. Claiming I'm viewing things from 'man's perspective' and you are viewing things from 'God's perspective' is presumptive, demeaning and unnecessary.
Oh please. I've engaged in plenty of debate and discussion on this board without backing down.
You don't get it. If you had really shown grace to your son, you would have given him the Ipod while he was smacking his sister over the head with a stick. But you gave it to him BECAUSE he did something good. That is a not grace. He earned your favor by being nice to his sister.
Skandelon
<b>Moderator</b>
So, by that application of this analogy we are saved "by Grace through sin?" You aren't following the line of reasoning Amy. We both agree that we are saved "by Grace through faith," and I'm simply showing how faith is not deserving of grace, which is something with which we all agree.Oh please. I've engaged in plenty of debate and discussion on this board without backing down.
You don't get it. If you had really shown grace to your son, you would have given him the Ipod while he was smacking his sister over the head with a stick. But you gave it to him BECAUSE he did something good. That is a not grace. He earned your favor by being nice to his sister.
Skandelon
<b>Moderator</b>
By the way, he has smacked his sister before giving her the animal and since giving her the animal. Point being that people can have faith and be a sinner at the same time. You set up a false dichotomy in your last argument by suggesting that God either saved them despite their being sinful OR through their faith , but this is not an either/or supposition, its a both/and supposition. God saved us while sinners through faith.
But the point of analogy was ONLY to show that faith wasn't meritorious. My son didn't EARN the iPod, because of his kindness. The act didn't deserve an iPod.
But the point of analogy was ONLY to show that faith wasn't meritorious. My son didn't EARN the iPod, because of his kindness. The act didn't deserve an iPod.
Again, not only an arbitrary assumption, but one standing in contradiction to the revelation of the Spirit, for the carnal mind is at enmity with God, for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
No ability to obey the commandment. That's what Paul said, and Jesus and I agree.
See my post above.
We could not even have faith except for God's word.
Rom 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
Now, we all believe if we call on the name of Jesus we shall be saved, but why do we believe this? Because God said so! We could not presume this, the only warrant for our faith is God's promise itself. So faith comes by hearing the word of God.
Faith is simply taking God at his word. It doesn't mean we are good, we are all filthy sinners. But when we believe God's word and promises it pleases him and he imparts his grace unto us. It is because God is good, not that we are good or have earned salvation. It is a free gift.
I was going to let this go, but can't. This isn't grace. It isn't even the Gospel. It's just a way of saying God lowered the bar to a height attainable to the natural man.
What a dung heap.
Skandelon
<b>Moderator</b>
But God does give us the ability to fulfill the law (through faith in Christ who fulfilled it in our stead), so how can you appeal to the law as your example for how God doesn't grant the ability to do that which he commands? Can you show us one thing that God commands that he also hasn't granted the ability to fulfill?
Again, you seem to think that because we can't attain righteousness by law through works that we also can't attain it by Grace through faith, but you have yet to provide proof for such a claim.
So, because we are unable to obey the commandments you think we are equally unable to believe in the one fulfilled those commands for us? Doesn't follow.
Skandelon
<b>Moderator</b>
How pleasant. Bearing fruit from your tree again, I see.
Again, God lowered nothing. He sent Christ to fulfill it for us. If you are going to call my posts a 'dung heap' at least represent it correctly.
Skandelon
<b>Moderator</b>
Aaron and Amy,
You both seem dead set against hearing any point I make, even it its one we should have in common. So, maybe you will listen to someone like John Piper, who eloquently explains the point I was attempting to make:
"Is faith meritorious?
How we answer this question depends on our use of the terms involved. The key terms are “merit” and “faith.” As the term is normally used, “to merit” (or “to deserve”) something good from somebody means to perform some act or manifest some quality which has enough value to another person that it morally obligates him to reward it....
Faith in God’s promise obligates him to save the believer not because the quality of faith is meritorious, but because faith is the one human act which calls attention alone to God’s merit, honor and glory and his unswerving commitment to maintain that glory."
You both seem dead set against hearing any point I make, even it its one we should have in common. So, maybe you will listen to someone like John Piper, who eloquently explains the point I was attempting to make:
"Is faith meritorious?
How we answer this question depends on our use of the terms involved. The key terms are “merit” and “faith.” As the term is normally used, “to merit” (or “to deserve”) something good from somebody means to perform some act or manifest some quality which has enough value to another person that it morally obligates him to reward it....
Faith in God’s promise obligates him to save the believer not because the quality of faith is meritorious, but because faith is the one human act which calls attention alone to God’s merit, honor and glory and his unswerving commitment to maintain that glory."
Again, you are assuming that Total Inability is true, and that this verse is teaching Total Inability, when that is not necessarily the case. In fact, Romans 8:9 actually refutes your view, as it says that until a man has the indwelling Holy Spirit he is still in the flesh. But MANY scriptures show a person does not receive the indwelling Spirit until AFTER they believe.
Gal 3:2 This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
Paul's question to the Galatians demands the answer that they received the indwelling Spirit AFTER first hearing and believing the gospel.
Jhn 7:38He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.
39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)
All of the disciples (except Judas) and many thousands of Jews (and some Gentiles) believed on Jesus before the Holy Spirit was given. The disciples did not receive the Holy Spirit until after Jesus rose from the dead.
If you isolate Romans 8:7 from all other scripture it indeed does SEEM to argue that a person cannot possibly believe while they have a carnal mind. But when viewed in light of much other scripture directly dealing with the same subject it is easily shown this interpretation is false.
There is much other scripture that shows a person can believe before they receive the Spirit and are still "in the flesh";
Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Peter told these Jews to repent and believe on Jesus for the remission or forgiveness of their sins and to be baptized, and THEN they would receive the Holy Spirit.
Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
This verse is very plain and clearly shows a person receives the Spirit after first hearing and believing the gospel.
I could show many more, but all of these verses show your interpretation of Romans 8:7 error. The natural man can believe, and if he does he receives the Spirit. You cannot pull one verse out of context to refute many other scriptures that directly deal with the same subject.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status