Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 80 (8897 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-18-2019 3:19 PM
149 online now:
Diomedes, dwise1, edge, JonF, kjsimons, ooh-child, PaulK, Percy (Admin), ringo, Tangle, WookieeB (11 members, 138 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 848,431 Year: 3,468/19,786 Month: 463/1,087 Week: 53/212 Day: 14/39 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
2345678Next
Author Topic:   Works, Faith, & Salvation (for Iano)
truthlover
Member (Idle past 2132 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 1 of 106 (265779)
12-05-2005 12:53 PM


I discussed getting into this topic with Iano in another thread.

Proposed:

1.) Paul talks about salvation from two perspectives, past and future. A Christian, using Paul's letters, both has been saved and will be saved, and he discusses both perspectives very differently.

2.) Past tense salvation is based on faith apart from works, and it is a salvation from the power, influence, and effects of sin. It has nothing whatsoever to do with going to heaven, except to equip a disciple with the power (grace) to do the things associated with future tense salvation.

3.) Future tense salvation is based on works and has nothing to do with faith, except insofar that faith supplied the means to do the works that future tense salvation is based on. It is a salvation from condemnation, and it's goal is entering eternal life and heaven.

4.) While the other NT writers don't discuss salvation in such specific terms, their comments on salvation, which always mix works and faith, line up completely with Paul's more specific description.


Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by truthlover, posted 12-05-2005 2:00 PM truthlover has not yet responded
 Message 3 by iano, posted 12-05-2005 2:53 PM truthlover has not yet responded
 Message 4 by Phat, posted 12-05-2005 3:11 PM truthlover has responded
 Message 6 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-05-2005 7:52 PM truthlover has responded

  
truthlover
Member (Idle past 2132 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 2 of 106 (265796)
12-05-2005 2:00 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by truthlover
12-05-2005 12:53 PM


Sorry, iano. Spelling's not my problem. 44, and already I can't read. I sure thought that was a j.

adminnwr asked for references.

My favorite is in Rom 5:9,10:

quote:
Much more then, having now been justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

Note the consistent contrast. The two past tense sections mention his blood and his death, while the two future tense sections mention Y'shua himself and his life. The past tense refers to justification and reconciliation, while future tense is salvation from wrath.

Here's the concept behind it that I believe is very consistent elsewhere in Paul's writings, too. There is a judgment coming that everyone will face. (The Protestant idea that believers will be at a different judgment than unbelievers has no justification in Scripture and is contradicted by Matthew 25.) Since "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God," then everyone (just about) needs help to be judged with favorable results. By his death, Y'shua justifies the sinner and reconciles him to God. This justification is not just a proclamation of righteousness. It really creates righteousness, as described in Romans 6:

quote:
v. 6: Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, so that we should no longer serve sin.

Notice that this verse is tied to his death as well. The body of sin is destroyed, so that we who were once slaves to sin might live in newness of life.

However, as Rom 5:10 has told us, if we "have been" justified by his death, we are much more to be saved by his life. There's several verses saying this, but the best is actually in Galatians 2:20:

quote:
I am crucified with Christ, nevertheless I live. Yet not I, but Christ lives in me, and the live I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.

After "having been" justified, being redeemed from the power of sin, we are to live a new life in Christ that is by his life, not our own. This is the "will be saved from wrath" that Paul speaks of, and it is accomplished by his life.

The person who lives by the life of Christ lives as Christ lived, subject to God. The result, of course, is good works, because that is how Christ lived. These good works are essential if one is to be saved from wrath at the judgment.

quote:
Matt 25 - This is the passage of the sheep and the goats. As can be seen, the only difference between the sheep and the goats is their works; what they did and didn't do.

John 5:27-29 - Here Y'shua says he has authority to execute judgment and that he will call both those who have done good and those who have done evil out of the grave to receive either life or condemnation.

Rom 2:6 - The judgment is said here to be according to works, with those doing good works reaping eternal life and those who disobey reaping condemnation.

2 Cor 5:10 - This passage doesn't give the repayment, but it does say that both good and bad works will be judged.

1 Pet 1:17 - This says that God judges everyone without partiality (and this includes without partiality to believers) according to their works.

2 Pet 1:5-11 - While this doesn't directly mention the judgment, it does say to "give diligence to make your calling and election sure" by "doing these things." This diligence in "doing these things" will (future tense) provide an entrance into Y'shua's everlasting kingdom.

Rev 3:4,5 - Again, judgment is not mentioned, but this does say that only the worthy will walk with Christ in white and the rest will have their names blotted out of the Book of Life.

Rev 20:12 - Protestants generally teach, with no scriptural backing, that this is a different judgment than the ones Christians will be at. That is silly, of course, and all the dead are said here to rise to judgment. They are judged according to their works, and it is those whose names are not in the Book of Life who are cast into the lake of fire. (Note, of course, the relationship to Rev 3:5 here, and how this relates to Jn 5:27-29 and Matt 25. Everyone is there together; not two judgments.)


The idea is really pretty simple, and it's very consistent both in Scripture as well as being what everyone in the church believed for the first few centuries the church existed. Christ died to deliver us from sin. We receive that deliverance by faith apart from works. That deliverance comes in the form of mercy, the forgiveness of past sins, and grace, the power to overcome sin. If we are diligent to add to our faith the virtues described in 2 Pet 1, then we shall also be saved in the future, at the judgment, because we will have patiently continued to do good (Rom 2:7), and we shall receive eternal life and an entrance into the everlasting kingdom of Y'shua the King. For it is only those who endure to the end who shall be saved, whether or not they have been saved by faith.

Well, there it is outlined for you, iano. The discussion I have avoided until this point.

I will deal with one objection at this point, because I know iano has had it, and I know it's a common one. Protestants claim that God judges sinners for even one sin. Anything less than perfection will send a person to hell. This is ridiculous, and it makes God obscenely unfair. There is nothing in Scripture to suggest that God is anything like this. God is full of mercy and ready to pardon. However, he will not clear the guilty, and therefore there is a judgment. It is a judgment you and I cannot make, but Y'shua can make, between the righteous and unrighteous, the sheep and the goats. It is the difference between those who sow to the spirit and reap eternal life and those who sow to the flesh and reap corruption. It is not the distinction between the perfect and imperfect, but between those who patiently continued in well-doing and those who persisted in disobedience to God.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by truthlover, posted 12-05-2005 12:53 PM truthlover has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by purpledawn, posted 12-05-2005 8:53 PM truthlover has not yet responded
 Message 11 by iano, posted 12-06-2005 11:47 AM truthlover has responded

  
iano
Member (Idle past 13 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 3 of 106 (265800)
12-05-2005 2:53 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by truthlover
12-05-2005 12:53 PM


Hi Truthlover.

No worries about misspelling my name. I've been called worse.

One of the things I reckon many including myself suffer from here is a tendency to:

- argue as opposed to debate
- haul the topic all over the place by using supporting arguments about which there is as little agreement as there is for the central issue under discussion
- go too quick.

I don't suggest that all these can be resolved just by mentioning them, but taking things at a gentler pace might help. I'm in no hurry. What do you reckon?

I'll print off your posts and have a read. You've outlined above something which I wouldn't have gathered as easily from the many posts between us thus far. 2 types of salvation. Past and future. Hmmm. I may need to ask a question or two to clarify the more precisely what you mean so that I can head along the track I feel best refutes this view. This not with a view to entrapment but simply to avoid making assumptions based on not knowing your viewpoint at the outset


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by truthlover, posted 12-05-2005 12:53 PM truthlover has not yet responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 12156
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 4 of 106 (265802)
12-05-2005 3:11 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by truthlover
12-05-2005 12:53 PM


Salvation: Past tense and Future Tense
Hi, Truthlover! I am the one who promoted your thread, even if it is a bit wordy and rambling. *sigh...* Now Im gonna have to get to work on a reply to it, since Iano is nowhere to be found just yet. :rolleyes:

I have never been totally clear on your concept of salvation nor Ianos. I know that Jar believes that everyone is saved, but I am not sure about my position on this topic. Lets discuss it and maybe I will get struck with a bolt of clarity!

Works, Faith, & Salvation

I believe that everyone on the planet knows about God. Some choose to have no opinion on the subject and are without a belief as defined by human wisdom. Others have various religions and philosophies--creeds and confessions--while others simply have a joy about them in doing good deeds for the simple act of helping humanity.

Anyone who knows me knows that I love Websters and definitions when I attempt to frame an issue and start a topic! I also have a book by a theologian, R.C. Sproul, which is entitled Essential Truths Of The Christian Faith. Here is what Sproul has to say about salvation:

Sproul writes:


  • The broad meaning of salvation is "to be rescued from a threatening situation". The Bible uses salvation in several tenses, referring to God's past, present, and future work of redemption.
  • Justification is sometimes used as a synonym for salvation; at other times it is seen as one aspect in the whole scheme of redemption. Salvation is of the Lord and from the Lord.
  • The scriptural references, which I have yet to look up---perhaps they will be referred to in this thread--are these: Ezekiel 36:26-27, Zephaniah 1, John 3:16-17, Romans 1:16-17, 1Corinthians 1:26-31, and 1Thessalonians 1:6-10.

    This message has been edited by AdminJar, 12-05-2005 02:27 PM


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by truthlover, posted 12-05-2005 12:53 PM truthlover has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 5 by truthlover, posted 12-05-2005 5:21 PM Phat has not yet responded

      
    truthlover
    Member (Idle past 2132 days)
    Posts: 1548
    From: Selmer, TN
    Joined: 02-12-2003


    Message 5 of 106 (265828)
    12-05-2005 5:21 PM
    Reply to: Message 4 by Phat
    12-05-2005 3:11 PM


    Re: Salvation: Past tense and Future Tense
    even if it is a bit wordy and rambling

    My OP is wordy and rambling? Gosh, post #2 must have been indecipherable.

    There doesn't appear to be anything to answer in your post, so I won't try. My many words in post #2 were meant to try to cinch down what I was saying and make it tighter, not ramble and make it wider. Hopefully, you can pick out the relatively narrow point I was trying to make. The rest is just clarification.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 4 by Phat, posted 12-05-2005 3:11 PM Phat has not yet responded

      
    macaroniandcheese 
    Suspended Member (Idle past 2000 days)
    Posts: 4258
    Joined: 05-24-2004


    Message 6 of 106 (265864)
    12-05-2005 7:52 PM
    Reply to: Message 1 by truthlover
    12-05-2005 12:53 PM


    but then the bible says that noah and abraham and david were righteous, even perfect. this nature is solely due to their faith and dependence on the lord no matter what they did. noah was a drunk; abraham dishonored his wife and distrusted god to provide him an heir; david was an adulterer and a murderer.
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by truthlover, posted 12-05-2005 12:53 PM truthlover has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 8 by truthlover, posted 12-05-2005 9:04 PM macaroniandcheese has responded

      
    purpledawn
    Member (Idle past 1530 days)
    Posts: 4453
    From: Indiana
    Joined: 04-25-2004


    Message 7 of 106 (265876)
    12-05-2005 8:53 PM
    Reply to: Message 2 by truthlover
    12-05-2005 2:00 PM


    Salvation and Judgment
    quote:
    The idea is really pretty simple, and it's very consistent both in Scripture as well as being what everyone in the church believed for the first few centuries the church existed. Christ died to deliver us from sin. We receive that deliverance by faith apart from works. That deliverance comes in the form of mercy, the forgiveness of past sins, and grace, the power to overcome sin. If we are diligent to add to our faith the virtues described in 2 Pet 1, then we shall also be saved in the future, at the judgment, because we will have patiently continued to do good (Rom 2:7), and we shall receive eternal life and an entrance into the everlasting kingdom of Y'shua the King. For it is only those who endure to the end who shall be saved, whether or not they have been saved by faith.
    Nicely said!

    Thumbs Up

    ABE: Definite POTM

    This message has been edited by purpledawn, 12-06-2005 06:37 AM


    There are two ways of spreading light: to be the candle or the mirror that reflects it. -Edith Wharton
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 2 by truthlover, posted 12-05-2005 2:00 PM truthlover has not yet responded

      
    truthlover
    Member (Idle past 2132 days)
    Posts: 1548
    From: Selmer, TN
    Joined: 02-12-2003


    Message 8 of 106 (265883)
    12-05-2005 9:04 PM
    Reply to: Message 6 by macaroniandcheese
    12-05-2005 7:52 PM


    but then the bible says that noah and abraham and david were righteous, even perfect. this nature is solely due to their faith and dependence on the lord no matter what they did. noah was a drunk; abraham dishonored his wife and distrusted god to provide him an heir; david was an adulterer and a murderer

    I don't believe that even the Law and History is trying to say that Noah, Abraham, and David were righteous no matter what they did. I think Psalm 51 by itself serves as an answer to that.

    Of course, I don't think you were trying to prove righteousness by faith with that comment. I'm thinking you were just taking a dig at the evil in those men. Am I wrong?


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 6 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-05-2005 7:52 PM macaroniandcheese has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 9 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-05-2005 10:04 PM truthlover has responded

      
    macaroniandcheese 
    Suspended Member (Idle past 2000 days)
    Posts: 4258
    Joined: 05-24-2004


    Message 9 of 106 (265906)
    12-05-2005 10:04 PM
    Reply to: Message 8 by truthlover
    12-05-2005 9:04 PM


    no. i'm trying to demonstrate that god is more concerned with perserverence of faith and trust than with proper action. people screw up. he knows that. but those who cling to their hope will prevail.
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 8 by truthlover, posted 12-05-2005 9:04 PM truthlover has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 10 by truthlover, posted 12-06-2005 7:20 AM macaroniandcheese has not yet responded

      
    truthlover
    Member (Idle past 2132 days)
    Posts: 1548
    From: Selmer, TN
    Joined: 02-12-2003


    Message 10 of 106 (266011)
    12-06-2005 7:20 AM
    Reply to: Message 9 by macaroniandcheese
    12-05-2005 10:04 PM


    no. i'm trying to demonstrate that god is more concerned with perserverence of faith and trust than with proper action. people screw up. he knows that. but those who cling to their hope will prevail.

    Ok, thank you for the clarification.

    While I think there's *some* truth to this, and while I agree this is important, I don't think the truth of this contradicts, refutes, or disagrees with my points in posts 1 & 2.

    God does care at some level about proper action. David, one of your examples, not only penned Psalm 51, but also wrote, "Yahweh rewarded me according to my righteousness; according to the cleanness of my hands he has recompensed me. For I have kept the ways of Yahweh, and I have not wickedly departed from my God" (Ps 18:20,21).

    When he sinned, he cried out, "Do not cast me away from you presence, and do not take your Holy Spirit from me" (Ps 51:11). He added, "Deliver me from bloodguiltiness...Then I will teach transgressors your ways, and sinners will be converted to you" (Ps 51:14,13).

    Clearly, he was worried about God's response to his wickedness. His son was taken over his sin, and when he conducted a census against the warnings of God's prophets, he lost 70,000 citizens of his kingdom to the judgment of God. The only reason he was not cast from God's presence is because he had "a broken spirit and a broken and contrite heart," and God did not despise that.

    God is very merciful. To everyone, he says, "If the wicked will turn from all the sins that he has committed and keep all my statutes and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live...All his transgressions...shall not be mentioned" (Ezk 18:21,22), but the opposite is true as well: "When the righteous turns from his righteousness and commits iniquity...all his righteousness that he has done shall not be mentioned...in his sin that he has sinned he will die" (Ezk 18:24).

    Even Abraham, Noah, and David were men who feared God, and that is the command and teaching of the apostles.

    quote:
    Paul: "You stand by faith. Do not be haughty, but fear...for he may not spare you" (Rom 11:20,21).

    Peter: "If you address as Father him who impartially judges according to each one's work, then conduct yourself throughout the time of your journey here in fear" (1 Pet 1:17).


    brennakimi: "people screw up. he knows that. but those who cling to their hope will prevail."

    People do screw up, and mercy is at the heart of the message of King Y'shua. I would only add, those who cling to their hope and repent will prevail. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit and contrite heart.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 9 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-05-2005 10:04 PM macaroniandcheese has not yet responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 12 by purpledawn, posted 12-06-2005 6:30 PM truthlover has responded

      
    iano
    Member (Idle past 13 days)
    Posts: 6165
    From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
    Joined: 07-27-2005


    Message 11 of 106 (266046)
    12-06-2005 11:47 AM
    Reply to: Message 2 by truthlover
    12-05-2005 2:00 PM


    I'm not sure how to deal with this thread TL. One of the problems seems to be something we all suffer from and that is biblical quote-mining in order to support our respective positions. By selective use of scripture I could make the case for salvation by faith alone - period. I too, would make statements to the effect that the early church taught this. I could also say the whole of scripture supports that view.

    One of the problems with a particular verse plucked out is that the context is lost and the only route is to delve into that aspect of it. Take:

    Romans writes:

    Much more then, having now been justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

    'Much more then'. As he does when he says things like "therefore" and "But now..." Paul is coming to some conclusion based on something he has said already. So we must go back and look at what he has said before in order to shine light on this. And from before we would probably get redirected to before that too.

    Where does one start. Romans is probably the best book for explaining in toto, the mechanism of how this plan of salvation works. In order to start somewhere in Romans, say chap 5, we would need to agree with what chap 1-4 were saying. And that is unlikely. Do we start at Romans 1:1?

    I would argue that Chap 5 is purely about assurance of salvation by faith. I would argue that Chap 4 is about salvation by faith. I would argue that the gospel is begun at Romans 3:21. I would argue the Romans 1:16 to Romans 3:20 is about showing the need of the gospel both to the irreligious and the religious. To the Jew and to the Gentile. You see the problem?

    Other than how to figure a way to discuss, I had some questions based on what you wrote in order to clarify your position in my own head. If your view on how getting to heaven is true then there will be a mechanism available which we can follow. I understand view of past and present salvation but if possible I'd like to hear how the mechanism works a bit further. No biblical references necessary just how you think it works. Some clarification on the following would help

    TL writes:

    Protestants claim that God judges sinners for even one sin. Anything less than perfection will send a person to hell. This is ridiculous, and it makes God obscenely unfair. There is nothing in Scripture to suggest that God is anything like this.

    Why specifically would that be unfair? Is there some level of sin below which God thinks everything is okay and above which his wrath is made manifest? If we have to form a view on how God looks upon sin then the garden of Eden should demonstrate it to us. Look what happened as a result of eating one apple. Was that unfair? We know that anyone who follows all the law but stumbles over even a tiny piece of it is guilty of breaking it all. And sin is lawbreaking. Could you comment on how this is got around. Is our level of trying the key factor?

    The person who lives by the life of Christ lives as Christ lived, subject to God. The result, of course, is good works, because that is how Christ lived. These good works are essential if one is to be saved from wrath at the judgment.

    Lived as Christ lived. But Christ lived a perfectly sinnless life. Total obedience to his father. Total obedience to the law. You on the other hand cannot. You accept that you do and will sin. Could you explain to me how it is that your sin is dealt with. What happens to it technically

    It is not the distinction between the perfect and imperfect, but between those who patiently continued in well-doing and those who persisted in disobedience to God.

    Patently patient continuence in well-doing is a progressive sounding statement. There is no line drawn for us to know if we are on the right or wrong side of the salvation track. Someone may think they are patiently continuing but if they are being pragmatic and honest they also are aware of the sin within. Can I presume that you cannot be sure whether you will be a sheep or a goat until the day when God makes his judgement known. If you are sure then how do you know this (your own subjective measurement suffices?) and if not, is that the sign of a loving father that he would have you stew in uncertainty fearing damnation all the way until the moment of your judgement?

    This message has been edited by iano, 06-Dec-2005 04:47 PM


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 2 by truthlover, posted 12-05-2005 2:00 PM truthlover has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 14 by truthlover, posted 12-07-2005 9:16 AM iano has responded

      
    purpledawn
    Member (Idle past 1530 days)
    Posts: 4453
    From: Indiana
    Joined: 04-25-2004


    Message 12 of 106 (266155)
    12-06-2005 6:30 PM
    Reply to: Message 10 by truthlover
    12-06-2005 7:20 AM


    Repentance
    quote:
    God is very merciful. To everyone, he says, "If the wicked will turn from all the sins that he has committed and keep all my statutes and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live...All his transgressions...shall not be mentioned" (Ezk 18:21,22), but the opposite is true as well: "When the righteous turns from his righteousness and commits iniquity...all his righteousness that he has done shall not be mentioned...in his sin that he has sinned he will die" (Ezk 18:24).
    Why do you think some believers have trouble understanding or accepting the idea of repentance?

    It was and is a very important part of Judaism.


    There are two ways of spreading light: to be the candle or the mirror that reflects it. -Edith Wharton
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 10 by truthlover, posted 12-06-2005 7:20 AM truthlover has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 13 by truthlover, posted 12-07-2005 9:04 AM purpledawn has not yet responded

      
    truthlover
    Member (Idle past 2132 days)
    Posts: 1548
    From: Selmer, TN
    Joined: 02-12-2003


    Message 13 of 106 (266339)
    12-07-2005 9:04 AM
    Reply to: Message 12 by purpledawn
    12-06-2005 6:30 PM


    Re: Repentance
    Why do you think some believers have trouble understanding or accepting the idea of repentance?

    In very general terms, because the idea of repentance, as you're speaking of it here, is not part of the state religion.

    Martin Luther is known as the leader of a religious reformation, but really his was a political, tax-driven reformation. The state just happened to be a religious state. Luther's religion was the "faith only" religion he invented. America is a descendant of Protestantism, and Luther's views are far more influential on Protestants than the Bible is. The Bible is simply reinterpreted or explained away, and the measure of truth, by which even the Bible is judged, is Martin Luther's message.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 12 by purpledawn, posted 12-06-2005 6:30 PM purpledawn has not yet responded

      
    truthlover
    Member (Idle past 2132 days)
    Posts: 1548
    From: Selmer, TN
    Joined: 02-12-2003


    Message 14 of 106 (266342)
    12-07-2005 9:16 AM
    Reply to: Message 11 by iano
    12-06-2005 11:47 AM


    One of the problems seems to be something we all suffer from and that is biblical quote-mining in order to support our respective positions.

    I don't believe I do this, nor do I believe that I have a motive for doing this. I don't have a position to defend, except the one I got from the Bible and the early church. If I find that I am wrong, I can change my position to a more Scriptural one without fear of reprisal.

    By selective use of scripture I could make the case for salvation by faith alone.

    You could, and Martin Luther did. However, without selective use of Scripture and without quote mining, you could not make such a case.

    I gave a general description of the position I'm putting forth. For brevity's sake, I gave some Scriptures to back it. My hope would be that someone trying to decide whether my position is Scriptural would look at the Scriptures themselves and see whether the past tense and future tense use of salvation by Paul is really as I described. If they found that wasn't consistent, then I would expect them to show me the exceptions or the consistent pattern that doesn't agree.

    You're just saying, "Well, everyone's biased and no one knows." I don't believe that. I think that's a copout.

    I too, would make statements to the effect that the early church taught this.

    Well, you could, but it wouldn't be true, and you wouldn't have any way of knowing whether it's true. I, however, have read the 2nd century writings of the church extensively, and I do know whether it is true.

    Why specifically would that be unfair? Is there some level of sin below which God thinks everything is okay and above which his wrath is made manifest?

    This has all been thoroughly discussed in other threads, and I specifically addressed it in a previous post as the objection I knew you would bring up. It is crazy that you would ask this.

    Could you comment on how this is got around. Is our level of trying the key factor?

    Again, this is specifically addressed above.

    Patently patient continuence in well-doing is a progressive sounding statement. There is no line drawn for us to know if we are on the right or wrong side of the salvation track.

    In a previous post--in this thread--I said that iano would bring up one objection, so I'd go ahead and specifically address it. You asked several questions, but they all boil down to this one objection that I answered earlier and that I've answered three or four times in other threads.

    As far as I can tell, iano, there was not one substantive response in your post.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 11 by iano, posted 12-06-2005 11:47 AM iano has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 15 by iano, posted 12-07-2005 1:26 PM truthlover has responded

      
    iano
    Member (Idle past 13 days)
    Posts: 6165
    From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
    Joined: 07-27-2005


    Message 15 of 106 (266408)
    12-07-2005 1:26 PM
    Reply to: Message 14 by truthlover
    12-07-2005 9:16 AM


    tl writes:

    I don't believe I do this (quote-mining), nor do I believe that I have a motive for doing this. I don't have a position to defend, except the one I got from the Bible and the early church. If I find that I am wrong, I can change my position to a more Scriptural one without fear of reprisal.

    I can't see how one can avoid this in this kind of debate. You put up a verse and then assert a view as to what it means. The verse starts out with the phrase "much more then..." Much more than what? What is Paul connecting this statment to? What has been his argument up to that point from which we can best see the context in which he now makes this statement?

    We don't know. And all the other verses you use are placed to support the your own analysis of what Paul meant in the initial verse. But all of these suffer from the same problem. What is the context in which they are made. I accept that you were necessarily surface skimming for the purposes of brevity, but all discussions so far have included such isolated verses cast in (by all parties) to make whatever the point was at the time. But nothing in the way of detailed, methodical study as to context and purpose of the passage in which the verse was nested.

    I'm not criticizing you for this. The nature of such debates makes it difficult to land on a particular doctrine and work it out in the time available. That's why I felt we could only approach this with a more detailed study of the context of a particular verse. Not hopping from verse to verse and assertion to assertion. But even that brings up the problem with the passage in which the verse is nested being a consequence of passages before. Hence my question: do we have to start at Romans 1?

    You contend 2 levels of salvation pre and final it seems. You could either go on to support that contention doing the study off Romans to show that the argument the verse appears to make is indeed that argument - in context. The verse can't be just left there in isolation or added to any number of similarily isolated verses

    Or we could look at me rebutting your stance by examining the basis on which those 'warning' verses in the epistles (for example) you point to, are made. It would move along the following lines.

    The epistles are letters written to churches. Real, actual churchs back then. Then as now, there are people in these physical, visible churches who were not Christians. They attended the church but that didn't necessarily make them Christian. A warning is given within the letters intended for those who read them make sure they are not mistaken in thinking they are Christians when they are not. "If you love him you will obey his commands -are you doing so? This is how you know. This is how you test. Check and make sure that you are not under a false assumption". A Christian WILL see the spirits action on them unto fruit and they CAN be assured they are Christians because of that. They can be sure to that all that applies to Christians (including assured salvation) is true of them. The people who only think they are Christians will read and may realise that they are in fact not Christians. They have been warned. Warning verses.

    Assurance for Christians / Warning for those who just think they are.

    I would imagine given that you have started the thread and made the outline assertion that you be the one to demonstrate that these passages make that case, for example, showing that these warning passages refer to people who have been justified or are in Christ or have been declared righteous (the first salvation as you contend) and may not make it to the second salvation.

    You put up Romans as an example. Romans is as good a book describing mechanics of salvation as any. We can't study contexts of lots of verses. So why not work that one out. I say Romans 5 is only about assurance of salvation for those in Christ. You say it two salvations is contained within. So, go show it. Provide explaination for the verses that conflict with that idea.

    You asked several questions, but they all boil down to this one objection that I answered earlier and that I've answered three or four times in other threads.

    As well as dealing with the problem of on what basis do we proceed (talks about talks) I asked a background question that has interested me for a while now. You mentioned in this thread the thinking behind your stance in a way that made it far clearer than anytime previously. Salvation 1 by faith, salvation 2 (final) by works.

    All I was asking was a clarification to some basic questions that would be asked of such a stance:

    - if 2nd salvation is related to level of obedience then is there any way for a person of your position to be sure that they will be saved.

    - what is the cut off point for salvation/damnation for a person who is travelling the path you travel.

    - if not a question of quantitive degree of obedience is it to do with the effort and intent behind the attempts at obedience. It not so much what you do but how hard you try to do

    - How is the sin you commit at the times you don't obey dealt with. Is it just forgotten?

    I'm not looking for any backup for your position. I just wanted to know what it was. You could spend as many sentences outlining it as you did in describing 2 levels of salvation. I found that clarified things well

    This message has been edited by iano, 07-Dec-2005 06:29 PM


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 14 by truthlover, posted 12-07-2005 9:16 AM truthlover has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 16 by truthlover, posted 12-07-2005 5:58 PM iano has responded

      
    1
    2345678Next
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.0 Beta
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019