Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jan 10, 2009 23:41:31 GMT -4
(1) it is the tendency of all people (saved or not) to try to gain the acceptance of their deity through some kind of work. Even Christians must be reminded of where they came from so as not to start producing dead works or become proud; Uh, no they don't. According to you, only faith counts, and it's God who decides if they have faith or not. They have no choice whether they become proud or start producing dead works, and if they did it still wouldn't effect their chances of obtaining salvation in any way - that is decided only by whether God gave them faith or not. Nobody needs to be reminded of anything. Which is irrelevent. According to you whether they praise God or not will have absolutely no effect on whether they are saved. But it doesn't matter what they hear, or whether they go to church, because either God gives them faith or he doesn't, and if He gave them faith for going to church and listening to a preacher then He would be rewarding their works with salvation, which according to you He doesn't ever do. Then it isn't in fact necessary for him to stir up his faith, is it? Well, except that this scripture makes it clear that Enos was forgiven of his sins long before Christ was born. That's pretty much what "thy sins are forgiven thee" means.
|
|
|
Post by Dead Hoosiers on Jan 13, 2009 3:43:26 GMT -4
I think we have another misunderstanding here. Man is saved at the moment God regenerates him. It is a once and forever event. It's not something that happens because we keep on believing and that if we hang on long enough by our faith (and/or works), maybe we'll make it into heaven. We praise God because He has already saved us--not because it's something He's going to do in the future if we toe the mark. God doesn't change our nature. He gives us a new, additional nature. One that doesn't sin. That new nature dwells inside us alongside our old nature. If this wasn't the case, then why did Paul spend so much of his time correcting, exhorting and encouraging those who were already saved?
Yes it does matter what they hear. Rom 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. (Emphasis mine.) We are saved by responding to the gospel. Rom 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?
People can hear the gospel in places other than in a church. In fact, I'm presenting it to you right here on this discussion board. But the primary focus of "going to church" is for corporate worship, for the building up of our fellow believers through the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and many other things. It is for people who are already saved, since the unsaved don't worship Christ or have spiritual gifts to share. But as I said earlier, unsaved people do walk into church buildings so the gospel is presented from time to time--more in some churches than in others. You can understand why the focus in a gathering of believers isn't about being born again--they already are.
You already said that and I understood you. Only the writings contained in the Bible are considered to be scripture by Christians. Enos isn't scripture. This is the sort of error you encounter when you go to non-biblical, non-inspired sources for your information.
Here are some more of the verses I promised earlier concerning predestination:
Acts 13:48: And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; AND AS MANY AS HAD BEEN APPOINTED TO ETERNAL LIFE BELIEVED. John 1:12-13: But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, WHO WERE BORN NOT OF BLOOD, NOR OF THE WILL OF THE FLESH, NOR OF THE WILL OF MAN, BUT OF GOD.
Philippians 1:29: FOR TO YOU IT HAS BEEN GRANTED FOR CHRIST'S SAKE, NOT ONLY TO BELIEVE IN HIM, but also to suffer for his sake.
Romans 8:29-30: FOR WHOM HE FOREKNEW, HE ALSO PREDESTINED to become conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the first-born among many brethren; and whom He predestined, these He also called; and whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.
Ephesians 1:5: HE PREDESTINED US to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will. Ephesians 1:11 Also WE HAVE OBTAINED AN INHERITANCE, HAVING BEEN PREDESTINED ACCORDING TO HIS PURPOSE who works all things after the counsel of His will.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jan 13, 2009 12:37:45 GMT -4
I think we have another misunderstanding here. I think I understand you just fine. I think you haven't thought through the full implications of what you say you believe. Yes I understand this. You are saying that faith saves, and God gives the gift of faith completely without regard to a person's works. It happens once, and is never revoked. The implications are: 1) No individual choice, action, or merit is involved in being saved. God either chooses to save you and does so or He chooses not to save you and you are eternally damned. You have no say in the matter and no ability to change His decision. 2) Therefore preaching, going to church, good works, stirring up to remembrance, internet debates, etc. are all completely vain. They can have no effect on whether or not God chooses to save you or others. They might well provoke someone to good works, but those good works are completely useless when considering whether the person is saved or not. 3) Therefore God condemns and saves without regard to any sin or merit on our parts. People are condemned to eternal torment and suffering without having ever had any chance to avoid that fate. They were effectively doomed by God's foreknowledge and predestination for them from the moment of their creation, and any appearance of a chance to be saved was merely a cruel joke on God's behalf. And yet this concept of God is still described as being just, and no respector of persons? Exactly - why did Paul bother to spend his time correcting, exhorting, etc. when those people were already saved? According to you his actions had exactly zero effect on the state of the souls of his congregations, because Paul's works could in no way affect God's choice of whether to save them or not. So is it our choice whether we believe or not? Your earlier posts seemed to say that it is not. But according to you in earlier posts, it is God who gives the gift of faith, not a preacher. Having heard from a preacher and believing what he says has no affect on our salvation if God chooses not to give us the gift of saving faith. But according to you such preaching is useless. God either chooses to give them faith or does not, and whether they go to church and hear the gospel or not is irrelevent. If God saved them because they went to church He would be rewarding works. Then why were you bothering to discuss it with me earlier? Did you not realize that the book of Enos is in the Book of Mormon? I'll leave the scriptures you quoted out for the moment, except to note that the early pages of this thread are full of scriptures going back and forth. Obviously we can both find plenty of scriptures supporting our point of view in the Bible, and obviously both of us feel that the scriptures supporting our point of view outweigh those that seem to conflict with them. What then is the point in quoting further scriptures?
|
|
|
Post by Dead Hoosiers on Jan 15, 2009 16:53:55 GMT -4
Oh, you are listening. You have a pretty good grasp of the doctrine of predestination except for that last part--the part where you say it makes God cruel and if you're going just by what I'm posting, that could be because I haven't gone all the way yet. That's how most people view it (even the elect) and why it's been swept under the rug in modern churches. But this doctrine runs throughout scripture and ought not to be ignored.
In my next post I will cover the topic of how God can elect some and not others yet still be the God of love described in the Bible.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jan 15, 2009 17:15:16 GMT -4
In my opinion the idea of predestination is cruel, and makes God a respecter of persons.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Jan 15, 2009 17:47:59 GMT -4
What about if predestination is only done after using foreknowledge to determine what destination would be choosen via free will?
For example. Say I can look forward into time. You come to my house. I lead you to two doors and tell you to choose which room to enter. If I know which room you will freely pick because I can forsee it, then I can have it set up and waiting for you before you make the choice. In this case I have predestined your choice by setting it up before you made it, but also allowed free will by not actually actively interferring in your decision of which room to take.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jan 15, 2009 18:46:32 GMT -4
What about if predestination is only done after using foreknowledge to determine what destination would be choosen via free will? For example. Say I can look forward into time. You come to my house. I lead you to two doors and tell you to choose which room to enter. If I know which room you will freely pick because I can forsee it, then I can have it set up and waiting for you before you make the choice. In this case I have predestined your choice by setting it up before you made it, but also allowed free will by not actually actively interferring in your decision of which room to take. I would call that "God's foreknowledge at work" or "fore-ordination", not predestination. As DH has outlined her ideas of predestination it is clear that there is no real choice being given. God is not just avoiding interference while predicting the outcome, He is actively determinating the outcome by chosing to give faith or withold it regardless of the actions of His victims. If you start to argue that a real choice is being made then you are arguing that God does in fact reward choices (works). The analagous situation to this version of predestination would not be a room with multiple doors to multiple rooms, any of which could be chosen, but a room with one door and several fakes, with you not bothering to have built any rooms behind the other doors and with the appearance of a choice between rooms being a complete illusion.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Jan 15, 2009 19:33:06 GMT -4
Well see I'd disagree that asking for something is a work in the manner of "good works." Works are when you do something for others, they are selfless in nature. Asking for something in the hope of receiving it is inherantly selfish and self serving. It isn't a work.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jan 15, 2009 23:50:21 GMT -4
I'm not sure I understand you. Do you mean that good works are never selfish? What do you consider the conditions under which someone is saved? DH seems to be saying it's simply "those who God gives saving faith to."
|
|
|
Post by Dead Hoosiers on Jan 18, 2009 14:17:18 GMT -4
What about if predestination is only done after using foreknowledge to determine what destination would be choosen via free will? For example. Say I can look forward into time. You come to my house. I lead you to two doors and tell you to choose which room to enter. If I know which room you will freely pick because I can forsee it, then I can have it set up and waiting for you before you make the choice. In this case I have predestined your choice by setting it up before you made it, but also allowed free will by not actually actively interferring in your decision of which room to take. That's the position most of the modern church takes in relation to the subject of predestination (if they even discuss it all), but I don't think it's the correct position based on the verses quoted above, which isn't even a complete list. You can find some very good articles on the subject of predestination (aka "Calvinism") vs. free-will salvation (Arminianism) online. If we're the elect, who elected us? Did we elect ourselves?
|
|
|
Post by Dead Hoosiers on Jan 18, 2009 15:07:25 GMT -4
Yes, that's what I'm saying, but I'm not saying that the unsaved are "victims (of God)."
Here are some of the things scripture tells us about man's condition. I'll skip the quotes unless you ask for them.
the heart of man is deceitful and desperately sick is full of evil is unrighteous, does not understand, does not seek for God loves darkness rather than light is helpless and ungodly is dead in trespasses and sins is by nature a child of wrath cannot understand spiritual things
Due to Adam and Eve's rebellion, ALL men ever born (with the exception of Jesus) were born spiritually dead and separated from God. ALL sin. ALL are under the sentence of death. ALL deserve damnation. If God let us all go to hell, we couldn't argue that He wasn't within His rights or that we didn't deserved it. If we sin in only one point of the law, we are credited with breaking all of it. And we will always sin. That's our (inherited) nature. Get mad at Adam and Eve.
Since we are spiritually dead, full of evil, and don't understand the things of God, or even want to, how could we ever muster up saving faith out of our wicked, desperately sick hearts? Obviously we can't. It takes an act of God to regenerate a man's heart so that he can understand the gospel and respond in faith. And He paid a huge price to redeem those He foreordained. That's love.
No one knows why God chose some and not others. We are not told His reasons. But since He chose some very sinful people (and some good (by human standards), you can't say He is a respecter of persons.
I want to go back to why we go to church. It seems to me that you think going to church is a work which will partially merit you salvation on judgment day, along with your other good works (which you do in order to partially merit salvation).
In Christianity, the elect meet together (go to church) in order to praise God for having already saved them, as well as for edification, and then obey Him (do good works) out of gratitude for His having done so. Paul deals with your objections that a person could then do whatever he likes since he knows he's already going to heaven in the book of Romans. Are you saying that (according to your beliefs) if it weren't for the fact that you need to do good works to get into heaven that you wouldn't do them?
|
|
|
Post by Dead Hoosiers on Jan 18, 2009 15:19:44 GMT -4
Well see I'd disagree that asking for something is a work in the manner of "good works." Works are when you do something for others, they are selfless in nature. Asking for something in the hope of receiving it is inherantly selfish and self serving. It isn't a work. I agree. If I handed you a gift and you reached out and took it, it doesn't mean that by the act of taking you have somehow paid for it.
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Jan 18, 2009 15:39:38 GMT -4
Yes. And by extension, everyone who is not one of you is not special like you. It's very annoying. Even if it's grace that leads to salvation, shouldn't following the example of Jesus lead you to do good works anyway?
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jan 19, 2009 2:14:43 GMT -4
Yes, that's what I'm saying, but I'm not saying that the unsaved are "victims (of God)." Well I am. In your view the unsaved are indeed victims of God. They made no wrong choice to be where they are, had no chance of changing their fate, even if they tried their hardest, yet God is fully prepared to condemn them to endless torment. Indeed, since God created them without the ability to save themselves, knowing full well that they would be condemned to endless torment, He is the party at fault here. In this view the inescapable conclusion is that He created souls specifically in order to be damned. In my view such a God cannot be called just. Oh, I agree that these descriptions of man's nature (or the natural man) are all in the Bible and are all more or less correct. All correct, except the part about getting mad at Adam and Eve because of it. This nature was always a necessary part of God's plan - Adam and Eve did not surprise Him in any way. Also for the most part correct. By ourselves we could never overcome our basic nature and live a sinless life. Without a sinless life we cannot enter the kingdom of heaven. Here's the part where I begin to disagree with you. The scriptures tell us quite often why some are saved and some aren't. I quoted some of these texts earlier, but what it boils down to is that to be saved we must have faith in Jesus Christ, repent of our sins, receive the ordinances of salvation (such as baptism), and obey the commandments of God, enduring to the end of our lives. We cannot be saved if we refuse to repent and obey. "And I say unto you again that he cannot save them in their sins; for I cannot deny his word, and he hath said that no unclean thing can inherit the kingdom of heaven; therefore, how can ye be saved, except ye inherit the kingdom of heaven? Therefore, ye cannot be saved in your sins." Alma 11:37 You are correct in saying that even if we have faith, repent, receive the ordinances, and obey the commandments, this is not enough to save us - our own efforts must fall short, and we need the grace of the atonement in order to be saved - but we must do these things in order to be capable of receiving that grace. In part yes, and in part no. Going to church is not really a good work in and of itself. It is obedience to a commandment, so it can be counted in our favor in that respect, but it's primarily there so the saints (we call all our members saints) can support and teach each other and to give us opportunities to serve each other. The Church would be completely unnecessary for those who are completely righteous if any such existed - it is more of a hospital than an awards festival. Which in your view is largely pointless, since nobody knows who is elect and who isn't, and going to church every day of your life and showing gratitude to God will be a complete waste of your time if God decides you're not in fact one of the elect. No. The reason for doing good works is because you love and want to help those you are serving, not because you expect a reward. Only those who learn this lesson, and who perform good works for the right reasons, can really expect the good works they do to count to their benefit in any way. They must loose themselves in order to gain themselves.
|
|
|
Post by Dead Hoosiers on Jan 22, 2009 17:33:00 GMT -4
All the choices of unregenerate man are wrong and/or flawed, therefore God is not unjust in condemning them. As for "tried their hardest," unregenerate men don't try at all (to believe the gospel), for if they did, that would mean God had elected them. The unregenerate try their hardest to do everything or anything to come in by a different door so as to bypass the gospel. Your belief of trying to merit Christ's sacrifice with your works is an example of of that. All of the New Testament condemns the notion that man can pay even in part for Christ's sacrifice. It's our sin that separates us from God. All sin. Even one sin merits damnation--therefore your works are useless in meriting salvation since even one sin condemns you to hell so that you have nothing of yourself to offer. The only payment for sin is the sacrifice of someone else (Christ), the only man who ever lived a perfect life. You are trying to back up your erroneous belief with non-scripture...another sign that you are trying to come in a different door than the door God told us to use.
I don't say He was surprised. He knew it would happen before He created the world and pre-ordained provision for it. It doesn't follow that their disobedience was a good thing, even though God could bring a greater thing to pass on account of it. Every death and every drop of suffering this world has seen is on account of their disobedience.
Why was Abel's sacrifice acceptable to God and not Cain's?
But I didn't say that. I say that faith and repentance follow regeneration and all is a gift of God. As for ordinances (sacraments?), if you're talking about baptism, that's a public testimony of an inner conversion and also comes after regeneration. Nothing you can do of your own effort can make you capable of receiving forgiveness of sins.
Crazy reasoning. Those who are elect know that they are saved because the Holy Spirit confirms it to them, as well as the Word. (got scripture) The unregenerate are not grateful to God--not the God of the Bible at any rate.
While apparently bypassing the cross, the sacrifice made thereon not being obtainable by any means except by faith, and not works.
I think we're at an impasse. You insist on getting your works involved in the matter of salvation. You have been clearly shown that scripture teaches no such thing and vehemently denies that works play any part in salvation. Salvation by faith alone is the major doctrine of Christianity. This is why the gospel is called good news. The Latter Day Saints believe something else and use other writings to support their belief. Have we sufficiently demonstrated that Christianity and Mormonism do not teach the same thing in connection with just this one doctrine--salvation?
|
|