When people stop going to church this is what they start believing

[Lamb]

I will say that I feel some sympathy for people who feel this way since it seems that many people who go to church are very harsh and judgmental. I would rather not be a part of a church like that again. I was in one about 13 years ago and it nearly destroyed the faith I had and took years for me to recover from the hurt that was caused.
However, I don't think that just because there are some people who attend church who are hypocrites means that I need to give up on the whole thing

This thread isn't accusing people who don't go to church of not being believers. It's showing that when people stray from hearing God's Word consistently that they also start to stray from the truth of the Gospel and begin to believe that they'll go to heaven because of their own good behavior toward others.

 

[tango]

The problem with what you're promoting is that you're expecting sinful man to finish what needs to be Holy.

Why is this a problem? If we are given something through grace all we need to do is accept that we need it.

The problem with the alternative is that most of the Bible is a waste of paper, most of what God said over the ages was a waste of his breath because we don't have a choice in it anyway, and the God we claim "loves the world" only loves some of it while condemning others for decisions that he made on their behalf.

 

[tango]

Sincerely, I think suggesting Jesus isn't the Savior because it's what I do that ultimately saves me actually destroys Christianity.

I don't think that's the case at all.

You mentioned previously that you have a PhD in physics. That obviously represents an achievement on your part, the result of years of study, of work, of effort. Could anyone get a PhD? Clearly not - there are some who are probably capable but chose not to put in the work required, and others who are simply not capable of study at that level. Hence the PhD is something you earned, not something you were given. If someone were looking to hire a physicist they would hopefully regard you as a much stronger candidate than me, simply because I don't have such a high qualification in the subject. Hence it would be entirely true to say you earned you way into the job.

The idea that Jesus offers a free pass into heaven is a totally different proposition. The offer is extended equally to the rich and poor, the educated and the uneducated, the intelligent and the stupid, the slave and the free, and so on. It's nothing we earned, so none of us can boast. To loosely relate it to the PhD, it would be akin to a posted job requiring a PhD but in a world where anyone could get a PhD simply by accepting a free gift. Imagine the university chancellor going out into the world armed with a stack of PhD certificates offering them to anyone who accepted. Nobody did anything to earn it, nobody was any more special than anyone else, all could now be notionally equally qualified for the job, so nobody could claim they were anything special because of their efforts. But anyone who really didn't want free entry into the PhD-level job would be free to decline the certificate and attempt to do it on their own, in which case they would fall short.

I never said "EVERYTHING is predestined."

Does it not seem bizarre that God would give us freedom of choice in all the things that made no difference while denying us freedom in the most critical "decision" that exists? If people have no choice in whether or not to be saved then how can we possibly claim God loves the ones he created, knowing they had no chance of ever being saved and then punishing them for not being saved? You either end up with a really odd idea of what love looks like or you have to turn to doctrines like universalism or serpent seed or some such.

Because to SOME extent (and that ain't that much) you DO have a choice in all that.

So I have the choice whether I eat a pizza or a taco for dinner but no choice in where I spend eternity? This still doesn't answer any of the questions about why Jesus even bothered telling us how we should live, if our eternal fate is predetermined and the eternal fates of the people we're apparently supposed to be reaching is equally predetermined. What's the point of evangelism if the eternal fate of everyone we might talk to was set in stone since before we were even born?

No, it does the opposite. It means JESUS is good.

It means Jesus is good for some, and pretty lousy for others. A universal invitation is equally good for all.

It doesn't mean some are better than others if everybody got the same offer. If you and I walk down the same street and the whole street is covered in $100 bills blowing around, if you pick up a sackful of them and I don't you can't say you're better than me because you're rich and I'm not. We both had exactly the same opportunity, you didn't earn anything, you did nothing special, you simply accepted a free gift that I declined. It's not an achievement to accept the free offer that was made to everyone - hence it's not something we earn and not something anyone can boast about.

If our eternal fate is predestined and we do literally nothing, how do you even know whether or not you are saved? Where is there any certainty of anything, if Jesus mysteriously selected some but not others since before the dawn of time? What, if any, assurance do you have that you won't be one of the people who hear "I never knew you, depart from me"? Too bad if we feel our spirit yearning for the promise of redemption,

You missed this part of the post....

In that part you're still presenting the bit Jesus did as being "ineffectual" while the bit I do is "effectual". That completely misses the point. The person who opens the door that was previously locked and bolted does the effectual part - without them it would be impossible for anyone to walk through the door.

... and you missed this part...

That's the part where you say Jesus died for all, while also arguing that he only actually died for some. It just doesn't work to try and spin it every which way like this. Either Jesus died for all (in which case you're looking at a universal invitation that isn't universally accepted, or some variation of universal salvation), or Jesus died for some and not others. If Jesus died for some and not others then Matt 7:21-23 destroys any security we could possibly hold regarding our eternal destiny. There is no room for faith in an eternity in heaven because the whole thing is a crap-shoot - we're either chosen from before birth for heaven or chosen from before birth for hellfire and there's nothing we can do to change anything. It makes a joke of Jesus talking about "few finding the narrow path" because nobody found the path, the select few were dropped onto the narrow path and the masses who "didn't find it" never had a chance to find it.

Why are your loans paid off? Because YOU did..... (cut) So those in heaven got there because they DID....

Why are my loans paid off? Not because of what I did, unless you want to claim the credit for someone else's grace. I think that's the problem here - in this scenario I don't get to claim the credit for being debt free because I did nothing to earn it, nothing to deserve it, I just accepted a free gift offered in grace (and had the faith that saying "yes" to Mr Gates would result in my debt being paid)

I'd change the illustration to this: ".... and Bill gates transferred the money into my account so that I am debt free." Then why are you debt free? Because of Bill.

In my scenario it's still because of Bill. It's just that in your scenario Bill Gates is going around saying how much he wants to pay off everybody's debts while not actually paying off everybody's debts. I get a flyer in the mail promising freedom from debt, go to the bank and find all my debts cleared. You get the same flyer in the mail promising freedom from debt but when you go to the bank you get told "sorry, too bad, it sounds like a promise to everyone but it doesn't apply to you" before being sold into slavery to pay the debts yourself.

What I'm describing doesn't make me any better than anyone else. I don't have a hope of salvation because of my own achievements, but because Jesus offers salvation as a free gift to anyone who accepts it. Matthew 22 talks of invitations to a wedding where some were invited but declined to attend, so the servants were sent out into the streets to find anyone willing to attend. No restrictions, no sense that only the great and the good are welcome, the servants were going out trying to get people, any people, to come to the feast. Nobody was being dragged in, but anyone and everyone was invited. Some chose not to attend.

If we do literally nothing at all, why did Peter tell the assembled masses in Acts 2 to "repent and be baptised"? Why didn't he just tell them the truth - that some of them would be saved and some would not, and there was nothing anyone could do to change their fate? In Acts 2:47 God added to the church daily those who were being saved. In Acts 2:41 it records "three thousand souls" added to them. How could they possibly have known how many, if indeed any at all, were added unless there was some way of determining who was saved and who was not? It would either mean people had a visible mark on them, or that they did something in order to be counted. Like, maybe, repenting of their sins and accepting Jesus? In Acts 7:59 Stephen cries out "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit". I guess it's just too bad for him if he took an unlucky guess - if he had no guarantee of salvation maybe the Bible just left us to guess whether he was welcomed into heaven or told "I never knew you, depart from me". It must really burn (pun fully intended) to be stoned to death for what you believe only to find you weren't chosen from before the dawn of time so you might as well have denied your faith and lived a few more years on the earth before your inevitable eternal punishment.

Years ago, I had an internet friend who was a Hindu.

What I see is other religions requiring works, with a general lack of certainty as to whether you did enough good works. Christianity presents an alternative in that we don't have to earn our place in heaven, we accept it as a gift. It can be a free gift that isn't earned without being a gift that is thrust into the hands of some but not others. I don't see how it even remotely denigrates the sacrifice of Jesus Christ to say we have to accept his offer of a free gift - if there is only one way to God it's not as if we can get there without Jesus. If we could do something to earn our own way into heaven without Jesus then we could claim that Jesus wasn't a savior. But to say the only way there is to accept the sacrifice Jesus made doesn't seem to cause any problems that the idea of an imposed acceptance of the gift creates.

 

[tango]

Here's an easier way to put it. Let's say I'm walking in the desert and see you, lost in the desert, dying of thirst and incapable of doing anything to improve your lot. Luckily I have a load of water with me, so I give you a big bottle of water.

Some questions about this exchange:

1. Is my gift any less life-saving just because you were the one who opened the water bottle and drank it?
2. Do you get to claim any meaningful credit for surviving just because I don't physically hold you down, hold your nose and pour the water down your throat?
3. Is my gift any less life-saving if you choose to pour the water onto the sand and die?

The simple fact is that in this exchange I'm the one who saved your life. Whether you poured the water into your mouth or I did, the fact that I gave the water in the first place is what matters. If you choose to empty the bottle onto the sand you don't get to claim that I didn't save you, especially if we tweak the analogy such that I offer you endless bottles of water until you either drink one and live, or eventually die of thirst. If you die of thirst you don't get to claim it was my fault.

The picture you are painting is one of people dying in the desert while the guy with an unlimited supply of water bottles cradles some, holding them and pouring water into their mouths whether they want it or not. But then the guy walks past others who are dying, not giving them any water while claiming he loves them.

ETA: To tweak the picture a little further, imagine you are so weak you cannot open the bottle, nor can you lift it to your mouth. So I open the bottle for you, and then cradle your head as I gently pour some water into your mouth for you. Do you get to claim that I didn't save your life - you saved yourself - because you were the one who actually swallowed the water?

 

[Lamb]

Here's an easier way to put it. Let's say I'm walking in the desert and see you, lost in the desert, dying of thirst and incapable of doing anything to improve your lot. Luckily I have a load of water with me, so I give you a big bottle of water.

Some questions about this exchange:

1. Is my gift any less life-saving just because you were the one who opened the water bottle and drank it?
2. Do you get to claim any meaningful credit for surviving just because I don't physically hold you down, hold your nose and pour the water down your throat?
3. Is my gift any less life-saving if you choose to pour the water onto the sand and die?

The simple fact is that in this exchange I'm the one who saved your life. Whether you poured the water into your mouth or I did, the fact that I gave the water in the first place is what matters. If you choose to empty the bottle onto the sand you don't get to claim that I didn't save you, especially if we tweak the analogy such that I offer you endless bottles of water until you either drink one and live, or eventually die of thirst. If you die of thirst you don't get to claim it was my fault.

The picture you are painting is one of people dying in the desert while the guy with an unlimited supply of water bottles cradles some, holding them and pouring water into their mouths whether they want it or not. But then the guy walks past others who are dying, not giving them any water while claiming he loves them.

ETA: To tweak the picture a little further, imagine you are so weak you cannot open the bottle, nor can you lift it to your mouth. So I open the bottle for you, and then cradle your head as I gently pour some water into your mouth for you. Do you get to claim that I didn't save your life - you saved yourself - because you were the one who actually swallowed the water?

Your example fails and here is why...the Old Adam is spiritually dead and needs to be revived before he can do anything. He can't open a water bottle. He can't lift it to drink.

 

[Josiah]

[MENTION=11]Lämmchen[/MENTION]
[MENTION=62]tango[/MENTION]


Note: it took me 4 posts to respond to yours, Tango! Sorry, lol Here is post #1. I invite you to read them as a set before responding.

.the Old Adam is spiritually dead and needs to be revived before he can do anything. He can't open a water bottle. He can't lift it to drink.

Exactly. Kind of like zombies.... they can move in a physical sense but they ain't really alive and while they can bite and stuff, they can't do anything to bring themselves to life, they can't fix their problem.

If the dead/unregenerate, atheistic, enemies of God could save themselves (perhaps given the opportunity, given enough time, given sufficient strength) then they wouldn't need a Savior, they would just need an opportunity, time, help (which is course what every other religion besides Christianity teaches; it's why no other has a Savior just a divine given opportunity and time and help.

Sincerely, I think suggesting Jesus isn't the Savior because it's what I do that ultimately saves me actually destroys Christianity.

.

I don't think that's the case at all.

You mentioned previously that you have a PhD in physics. That obviously represents an achievement on your part, the result of years of study, of work, of effort. Could anyone get a PhD? Clearly not - there are some who are probably capable but chose not to put in the work required, and others who are simply not capable of study at that level. Hence the PhD is something you earned, not something you were given. If someone were looking to hire a physicist they would hopefully regard you as a much stronger candidate than me, simply because I don't have such a high qualification in the subject. Hence it would be entirely true to say you earned you way into the job.

1. I stand by my view that suggesting Jesus is not the Savior does ultimately destroy Christianity.


2. You are comparing what those physically ALIVE (with the gift of physical life) may or may not be or may not be able to do with those who are spiritually ALIVE (with the gift of spiritual life) but this doesn't work.

The idea that Jesus offers a free pass into heaven is a totally different proposition. The offer is extended equally to the rich and poor, the educated and the uneducated, the intelligent and the stupid, the slave and the free, and so on. It's nothing we earned, so none of us can boast.

If Jesus is the Savior then it follows that Jesus is the Savior and not any other (including self).


But I disagree that Jesus is only an OFFEROR.

To loosely relate it to the PhD, it would be akin to a posted job requiring a PhD but in a world where anyone could get a PhD simply by accepting a free gift.

.... so first, the one without a brain and who is dead needs to earn a Ph.D. THEN accept a job offer. So, one has the job because they earned it/deserve it and accepted an offer? How is that being SAVED? Is Jesus just offering something to a dead, brainless man because he has earned it? IMO, that's entirely unrelated to being saved.

Imagine the university chancellor going out into the world armed with a stack of PhD certificates offering them to anyone who accepted.

I disagree that Jesus merely OFFERS something, that He saves no one but just OFFERS something. That would make Jesus not the Savior but merely an offerer. It sounds like the Pelagian argument that "Jesus saves no one but makes it possible for all to save themselves."


In that case, a person has a Ph.D. because he/she DID something, the critical thing, the reason they have it, he/she accepted it. Yeah, the chancellor did something - something that accomplished nothing whatsoever, that was entirely and absolutely ineffectual and worthless - but a person DID something and that action is why they now have "Dr." in front of their name. So, who did the critical, effectual part? In this case, Jesus isn't even PART Savior in some synergistic construct, He isn't even 1% Savior (and self 99% Savior). He isn't a Savior at all. He simply offers something. IMO, this is worse than Pelagianism.

Nobody did anything to earn it

But in your construct, THEY are the reason THEY have it. In your construct, it ALL depends on what we DO; we have it because self DID something, we don't because we DID not do something. Self. Doing. EVERYTHING hinges on that in your construct.


In your example, God doesn't even invite or empower (seems to me WORSE than Islam or some forms of Hinduism which hold that the dead cannot do ANYTHING unless God first enlives and God empowers... in Hinduism, the divine makes salvation POSSIBLE for all and not just offering it, moves people to desire it with all their hearts and gives them all the power they need to "take" and eventually we do (although even with divine help, that typically requires millions of lifetimes). But in your example, God just puts an ad in the newspaper: "Freebie available, call 1 800 GET GIFT" But self doesn't have a phone or an account or any desire. And IF they did, they'd have that gift because they called that number.




Continues in next post...




.

 

[Josiah]

I never said "EVERYTHING is predestined."

.

Does it not seem bizarre that God would give us freedom of choice in all the things that made no difference while denying us freedom in the most critical "decision" that exists?

No. It does not follow that what is true in the physical realm MUST ergo be equally true in the spiritual. Or that what is true for the living ERGO MUST be true for the dead.


That Jesus is the Savior does not mitigate that ergo I cannot choose whether to buy a Toyota or a Subaru.


I don't think salvation is achieved by the dead, unregenerate, atheistic enemy of God "deciding." If it were, Jesus would save no one. God would give nothing. Everyone in heaven would have one to thank: self. Self DID the effectual thing. God must be pleased.

Because to SOME extent (and that ain't that much) you DO have a choice in all that.

So I have the choice whether I eat a pizza or a taco for dinner but no choice in where I spend eternity?

Yup.


One has to do with physical things in our physical life. Yes, you can make your own tacos. No, you cannot save yourself.

This still doesn't answer any of the questions about why Jesus even bothered telling us how we should live

Because it's nice to be nice. God desires us to live according to His heart and will. Does that save us? Nope. No one is good but God alone. No one is rightous, no, not even one. If we could save ourselves then we'd need no Savior.

EVEN if we added what non-Christian religions add: all the time and empowering we need (which you leave out).

I hold that Jesus is the Savior. THUS salvation is the result of HIS life, HIS holiness, HIS righteousness, HIS works, HIS life, HIS death, HIS resurrection. I hold faith looks to the Cross, not to the mirror. Now, yes, God desires even dead zombies to be nicer.... and yes, God desires the saved to be ever more Christ-like... but neither of these are the reason we are saved (making self the savior, not Jesus).

No, it does the opposite. It means JESUS is good.

If you and I walk down the same street and the whole street is covered in $100 bills blowing around, if you pick up a sackful of them and I don't you can't say you're better than me because you're rich and I'm not. We both had exactly the same opportunity, you didn't earn anything, you did nothing special, you simply accepted a free gift that I declined. It's not an achievement to accept the free offer that was made to everyone - hence it's not something we earn and not something anyone can boast about.

In your illustration, God did nothing. You are rich because YOU DID something. In this case, God isn't even an OFFEROR.

In your illustration, you are rich for one reason: You saw the money.... you willed the money.... you picked up enough of the money. Some other bloat didn't. You did the good thing.

If we do literally nothing, how do you even know whether or not you are saved?

Because it doesn't depend on my adequately, successfully DOING something.


If a dead, unregenerate, atheistic enemy of God must adquately, successfully DO something - and all eternity depends on this work he does - how can he ever know if he did it adquately, successfully, correctly? In God I can trust, in ME I can never be completely confident. Which is why we are directed to the Cross and not the mirror for salvation.


What you seem to be suggesting, friend, is EXACTLY what the Indulgence Sellers were suggesting (although not as bluntly as you). Luther reported them to the Bishop, noting they were violating the Council of Orange and biblical Christianity, 100% confident the Bishop (who sadly was not well educated) would agree and handle. Instead, the Bishop decided that people would not give as much money for the building of the Vatican if they didn't think this was contributing to their salvation. The Reformation resulted from this.

Where is there any certainty of anything

In self, there is none.


ONLY that self will fall short, self will doubt. If self is ultimately the reason we have or don't have salvation, we have no choice but to fear, to live in absolute terror.





Continues in next post....



.

 

[Josiah]

I admit there is mystery here.... the "dynamic", the "how this cranks out in practice" isn't explained and isn't known. The Doctrine if Election addresses ONLY the saved, it's pure Gospel, and it proclaims this: JESUS is the Savior (thus, you aren't).


It's Sola Gratia - Solus Christus - Sola Fide as one undivided single teaching. Thus faith plays a part. So the Bible is correct, there is no salvation apart from my having faith. Another way to look at this is that to be alive, I must have life. But how does life come about? By the dead one doing x,y,z or by the action of God? In the Nicene Creed, we confess "I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of life" (It's talking about spiritual life there).


YES, the Bible calls all to faith (many times!) And the Bible says faith is the gift of God. BOTH are true. So, all are called to faith (and yes, God wills all to have faith) and faith is given by God (and not all have it). Yup. That's the biblical reality. SOOOO, how does that all 'crank out?' What is the dynamic of that? Well.... the Bible never says. But this it does: God is the giver of life (spiritual and physical).... no one causes themselves to be born (physical or spiritual).... the Savior is NOT two - Jesus (doing the ineffectual part) and YOU (doing the effectual part). Now, you can ADD something the Bible NEVER says (it actually contradict the Bible): "God wants lots to fry in hell and so doesn't give them faith." Logical, maybe, but horribly unchristian and unbiblical. OR you could ADD something the Bible NEVER says (it actually flat out contradicts it): "Everyone is saved because God gives faith to everyone." Or you could ADD something the Bible NEVER says (it actually boldly contradicts it): "Jesus saves no one but gives the opportunity to be saved to all who achieve it." But I choose to stick with what the Bible says: Jesus is the Savior. Jesus does the saving. When you get to heaven, don't pat self on the back - thank Jesus. It's called the Doctrine of Election.


But if it's Jesus does HIS part (the part that doesn't actually save) and I do MY part (the part that actually means I've saved) then Jesus is not the Savior, is he? Who is? I have heard Christian teachers flat out say, "Jesus saves no one but He makes it POSSIBLE for all to be saved." Few are so blunt, so unchristian.... but that gets conveyed in a great diversity of ways - all making the same point, Jesus is not the Savior because He doesn't save anyone - everyone simply ceases an opportunity. THIS IS WHAT THE DEVIL TRIES TO SELL US. He is willing to give Jesus ANY role but one: Savior. He is willing for us to praise Him as God, as Perfect, as Loving.... that He died for all, even that He rose from death, that's all okay with the Devil. You can even call Him the Divine Helper ("God helps those who help themselves.... God gives us all we need so we can do what we need to do to be saved") or the Divine Offerer ("Jesus offers us heaven..... and it's ours if we cease the moment and grab it from Him). Just as long as He's not the Savior

.

Using the analogy of the billionaire paying off my financial debts, imagine that Bill Gates walks in to my meeting with the bank while I'm explaining why I really can't pay my mortgage this month, or next month, or probably ever again. Oh yes, and those loans on my cars, same thing. No money. Sorry. Student loans? Yeah, right. And so on. So Bill offers to pay off all my debts, which was very kind of him. I did nothing to earn such grace and don't deserve it (especially given some of the things I've said about Microsoft over the years). But in the face of such an offer I decide to accept. Did I pay off my debts? Clearly not, Bill did.

Then why are your loans paid off? Because YOU did.....

Then He made it POSSIBLE for you to be debt free...... but the reason you are debt free is entirely, wholly, completely because of what YOU did.

Some put your view this way: Jesus opened the door to heaven but you gotta walk through it by what YOU DO. So those in heaven got there because they DID....

Look up Pelagianism and semi-Pelagianism.


.

Why are my loans paid off?

Because you did something. Gates didn't pay off anything. Gates tossed a bunch of bills on the ground.... YOU saw them.... YOU willed them..... YOU successfully picked up an adequate number of them.... YOU successfully deposited them in the bank.... YOU paid off the loan.


I'd change the illustration to this: ".... and Bill gates transferred the money into my account so that I am debt free." Then why is your loan paid off? Because of Bill.

What I'm describing doesn't make me any better than anyone else.

well... it means your debt is paid off and you have heaven because YOU DID something, everything hinges and depends and rests on that one singular thing: What YOU did. And you seem to hold what YOU did was the good thing, so....




I support the following: Jesus is the Savior. Jesus saves. Salvation is 100% the result of what God does and 0% of what we do so that Jesus is the Savior - not PART Savior (the ineffectual part that accomplishes nothing), not just Door Opener, not just Offerer but the SAVIOR. He does it. It's because of the bloody Cross and empty Tomb - not my heart, my brain, my works back when I was an unregenerate, atheistic, enemy of God void of the Holy Spirit. HOW God does that... well... there's a lot of mystery there. THAT God does it is the centerpiece of the Christian religion - Jesus is the Savior.



See the following video. Skip the first 2.19 minutes (intro). It's still 12 minutes long but you have the attention span for that!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRbIX4EH40Y




Continues in next post...




.

 

[Josiah]

I don't have a hope of salvation because of my own achievements

So you pickied up a sufficient number of hundred dollar bills.... you use the money you picked ..... you successfully and correctly deposited the right number of bills you picked up at the bank to pay off your loan.... that didn't involve anything on your part? Nothing was "accomplished" or done by you? You didn't do anything? Seems to me in your senario, EVERYTHING hinges of you.

Jesus offers salvation

(emphasis mine)


Offering is not the same as doing it, accomplishing it.


Here is our fundamental disagreement. I hold that Jesus is the Savior, you seem to be saying Jesus is the Offerer. "Jesus opened the door to heaven but you gotta walk through it" as Catholics are WRONGLY accused of teaching and as Mormons do teach. I cannot believe you hold to that, based on a long time of reading your posts!

If we do literally nothing at all...

Then Jesus would be the Savior. But if Jesus did SOME things (things that ultimately don't mean anyone is saved) and self does SOME things (things that actually determine if one is saved or not) then AT BEST Jesus is PART SAVIOR (but it's the part that doesn't actually save anyone).


In the Creed, the vast majority of Christians profess, "We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and GIVER of life." Just as God GIVES physical life (I didn't cause myself to come to life 9 months before I was born), God GIVES spiritual life and with it the Holy Spirit and Faith and Justification. It is "the gift of God, not beause of works, lest anyone can boast." Isn't that the opposite of saying, "I did what means I'm forgiven and saved.... I gave myself spiritual life and the Holy Spirit and faith and salvation.... I did x,y,z and that's why I'm saved?"

Acts 2:41 it records "three thousand souls" added to them. How could they possibly have known how many, if indeed any at all, were added unless there was some way of determining who was saved and who was not?

Well, there would be no way to know if all 3000 had adquately and successfully performed the good work you discribe. But faith is "the gift if God" and so doesn't depend on any work on their part, so where faith is, there is salvation. Again, justification is Sola Gratia - Solus Christus - Sola Fide as one undivided singular truth. The first two aspects are always the case with everyone but the last is not, where it is, justification is. So I can look at my Baptism.... I can look at faith that is in Christ.... and know such is NOT because I adequately, successfully DID something (and forever fear I did not) but because GOD GAVE IT TO ME. It is by grace, not by works lest anyone has reason to boast. It is a gift, not a reward.


To use your illustration(?), Bill Gates throws around zillions of hundred dollar bills. And I noted that. And I had the smarts, the will and the ability to pick up what I needed , and the smarts and the ability to deposit the right number of bills it in the bank, all as a dead/unregenerate atheistic enemy of God void of God or the Holy Spirit.

In my case, Gates paid off the loan.

In yours, there is always fear.... did that really happen? Did I do my part for reals? Adequately? Enough?

I don't know about you, but when I look in the mirror at me, well..... I just don't have the ego to know I did everything right and successfully and enough so that I can trust in me.

It would either mean people had a visible mark on them, or that they did something in order to be counted.

I do have a mark. It's faith - the gift of God.

How do I know I'm physically alive? Because I DID something 9 months before my birth? No, because I'm alive. Soli Deo Gloria.

Like, maybe, repenting of their sins and accepting Jesus? In Acts 7:59 Stephen cries out "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit". I guess it's just too bad for him if he took an unlucky guess - if he had no guarantee of salvation maybe the Bible just left us to guess whether he was welcomed into heaven or told "I never knew you, depart from me". It must really burn (pun fully intended) to be stoned to death for what you believe only to find you weren't chosen from before the dawn of time so you might as well have denied your faith and lived a few more years on the earth before your inevitable eternal punishment.

EXACTLY! If it depended on Stephen performance of some act, he could NEVER know if he did enough, did it right, did it successfully. He had confidence because he looked to the Cross, to the SAVIOR. Not to the mirror, to a sinful and fallen bloat who rarely gets things right and never perfectly.

Christianity presents an alternative in that we don't have to earn our place in heaven, we accept it as a gift.

In what you are conveying, we get it because we took it. All God did was spill a lot of bills on the ground. YOU had the smarts, the will, the ability to pick 'em up. So you have money because you achieved it. You don[t have a paid off mortgage because Bill Gates paid it off but because he left a bunch of bills on the floor and YOU had the profound smarts, the good will, the ability to successfully pick up enough of 'em and then the smarts, the will, the successful ability to deposit it to your account and cause the bank to cancel the loan. Gates paid off nothing. AT most, he made it POSSIBLE for you to do it. A possibility-maker, not a debt payer.

If we could do something to earn our own way into heaven without Jesus then we could claim that Jesus wasn't a savior.

Well.... your presentation gives Jesus a job, it's just not of Savior. Possibility-Maker perhaps..... Offerer perhaps..... but does HE SAVE anyone? Does He pay off the debt of anyone? Does he bring anyone into heaven? Or does it ALL hinge on one: self?


Friend, I can't believe you accept this argument.... it just doesn't "fit" with so much I've read from you.... I invite you to reconsider. Again, I join with 2000 years of Christians in admitting I don't know how God "cranks this out" how all the pieces fit together, there is MYSTERY here. Just as I don't understand all the aspects of how God gives physical life, so with spiritual life. Does God change our will and then use that? Well, there are many theories - all of which go beyond Scripture and often run head on with Scripture. I stand with this: Jesus is the Savior, Jesus is the one who saves. And yes, that means I'm not, I don't. In Protestant theology, this is often expressed by a Latin phrase: Soli Deo Gloria. I uphold Sola Gratia - Solus Christus - Sola Fide as ONE united truth, and that it is "the free gift of God lest anyone has reason to boast" (in things like, "I grabbed it at Church Camp when I was 13 and thus I have it" "I saw the door open and so I walked through it" "I was offered something and I was so smart, so willing, so capable that I took it and therefore it's mine"). HOW God does this..... I don't fully know, THAT does this is the centerpiece of Christianity, the foundation of Christianity, the Keystone on which all stands or falls. I am His because He made me His own, as the Bible says....



We're probably hijacking this thread...... and it seems only us two (and maybe Lamm) are participating.... Want to move this to another thread?




Blessings, my friend


Josiah



.

 

[Josiah]

Your example fails and here is why...the Old Adam is spiritually dead and needs to be revived before he can do anything. He can't open a water bottle. He can't lift it to drink.

True story....

I attended a huge MEGA CHURCH near where I live. It is a Baptist church but they keep that pretty much a secret, they just go by a non-denom name and don't reveal their teachings. It could be a free-will/decision theology Baptist church, it could be a Reformed Baptist church or..... , God knows (they keep it a secret, so idea why).

But anyway, the Sunday I was there, there was this big ALTAR CALL at the end of the sermon. Big deal. Lasted several minutes, while lots prayed (some out loud) and the organ played.... But as he was introducing all this and obviously hoping many would come down and it would not be a "bust," this is what he said. I think this is exact, verbatim. "If your heart is beating hard.... if your palms are sweating.... if every cell of your body is saying to come down.... then you ARE a believer! The Holy Spirit is calling on you to proclaim that faith and dedicate yourself to him."

HUMMMM..... I don't have a problem with that. That's an EMOTIONAL confirmation but I don't have a theological problem with that. But then you didn't "get saved" by "coming on down" or by "deciding".... God GAVE that to you! You are just confirming and proclaiming that - and dedicating yourself to a new life in Him (kind of what 90% of Christians do in something called Confirmation).


See the 4 post above...



.

 

[tango]

Your example fails and here is why...the Old Adam is spiritually dead and needs to be revived before he can do anything. He can't open a water bottle. He can't lift it to drink.

(This is pretty much looking at arguments from both you and Josiah here)

Analogies can only go so far.

The trouble with the "we do absolutely nothing" is that it literally turns the Bible into a waste of paper, describing a deity who spent thousands of years wasting his breath handing out instructions of how we should live when nothing makes any difference.

Seriously. What's the point of any of the text in the Bible if we do literally nothing? About all that is worth keeping is Ecclesiastes, that describes everything as pointless. God spent most of the Old Testament telling people how to live when it makes no difference. Jesus must have been some kind of bumbling hal****** because most of what he taught makes no difference. You know, love your neighbor and all that, not that it changes anything but I guess it gave him something to talk about. Even the notion of Jesus dying for sinners is only half the story because apparently he only died for a select few and too bad for the rest of them.

When Paul wrote to the Thessalonians saying how we shouldn't grieve as those who have no hope, how cruel he must have been to talk of having hope when there is only a pipe dream. In the world where we do absolutely nothing and either we are saved or we aren't saved, what hope is there? It's more like the pipe dream of winning the lottery rather than the hope of receiving any kind of promise. You know, there's the promise out there but it only applies to some of us. Jesus told people to repent because the kingdom of heaven was near (Matt 4:17) but why he bothered is anyone's guess if repenting doesn't change anything. Perhaps he should have been clear that only a select few would have that option. Likewise when Peter answered the crowd in Acts 2:38 when he told them to repent and they would receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. As with Paul later on, how cruel can you be offering hope to people when there's not even the remotest assurance that the hope is real? It brings to mind analogies of going into a classroom at school and promising all the children they can go to Disney World, but then taking two of the kids and leaving the other 30 wondering why they didn't get to go.

Even the call to go and preach the gospel is a total waste of time if it's already predetermined who will be saved and who will not. What's the point of preaching if it turns out that the person we're preaching to is predestined to burn? For that matter, what's the point of preaching if it turns out the person we're preaching to is already predestined to be saved? We have nothing to gain - their salvation is already assured. The only way that works is to accept ever-more intrusive predestination and it seems absurd to argue that we don't get a choice where we spend eternity, we don't get a choice whether to obey or disobey commandments but do get a choice whether to wear the blue pants or the green pants.

Heb 11:6 says God rewards those who seek him. But apparently he doesn't really, unless the original manuscript contained a few caveats that didn't make it into our version of Scripture. I really can't see how the argument that we do literally nothing does anything less than turn the Bible into a book packed full of lies and half-truths. I don't see how the argument that Christ calls and we respond fails in any way at all. We're not earning anything so we don't fall foul of Eph 2:8-9, there's a purpose in doing

In 1Co15 Paul talks of how the resurrection is crucial to everything, and how if Christ was not raised from the dead our faith is pointless. But if Christ saves a select few and too bad for everyone else then our faith may be pointless anyway and letters to the Corinthians can join so much other text that serves no purpose. The only potentially redeeming factor here is that 1Co 15:22, "in Christ all shall be made alive" could be used to support universal salvation. Unless, going back to the analogy of the dying man and the water bottle, Christ gives us life and we can choose to drink the water or not. Of course that requires that we make a decision as part of the process.

1Jn 1:8-9 talks of confessing our sins and God forgiving us. Does that make any difference? How would we know? Is this just another letter filled with a false hope?

For good measure this "we do nothing" worldview also destroys any assurance of salvation. How can we possibly be sure of anything if there's literally nothing that we do? If Jesus does absolutely everything and we do absolutely nothing, how do we even know if we are one of the lucky few? Muslims and Hindus have more assurance of salvation than we do. Sure, Muslims have to work for theirs and don't know until the end whether they measured up but at least they've got a sporting chance. Religions that believe in reincarnation at least have the assurance that if they weren't quite good enough this time around they get another go, and another, and another. What hope can Christians possibly have, if there is nothing we can do except get to the end of life and hope we didn't draw the short straw? Apparently our faith turns everything into little more than a game of dice where if you roll triple-six you spend eternity in heaven and anything less condemns you for all eternity.

Using the analogy of Bill Gates throwing stacks of money around I think it takes a particularly curious interpretation of who did the paying to claim that I paid off my loans if he was the one who wrote the check. If we're sat at the bank and Bill says to me "hey tango, want me to pay off all these loans?" and I say "hey Bill, that would be great" so he writes a fat check and pays them all off, it is truly bizarre to argue that I was somehow responsible for paying off the loans. He did all the work, he provided the money, he even wrote the amount on the check - all I did was say "thanks, that would be great". I really can't lay any claim to achieving anything. The trouble with a physical analogy is that it creates opportunities to argue that if I were physically unable to pick up a stack of bills I couldn't pay off my debts, if I picked up $103,900 in bills only to find my outstanding balance was $103,902 then I'd still be in debt, and so on.

This is the part where I seriously wonder if we're talking at cross purposes. I'm not trying to say that I get to take any credit at all, just like I can't take credit for having my debts paid off if a wealthy benefactor waves their checkbook my way. I'm not convinced that you believe in a theology that leaves you not even knowing if you are saved or not. To take the line from one of your posts, "I am His because He made me His own, as the Bible says.... " but you don't say how you know he made you his own. What verse in the Bible says that Josiah is saved, if it's a question that some are saved and some are not? I'm struggling to see any answer to that question other than universal salvation or a world in which you have no idea whether or not you are really saved.

 

[Josiah]

[MENTION=62]tango[/MENTION]
[MENTION=11]Lämmchen[/MENTION]



My response will consume several posts; 3 more follow this one.
I humbly request that you read ALL OF THEM together before responding to any of them; thanks.

(This is pretty much looking at arguments from both you and Josiah here)

GOOD to know these (several) posts were read and considered :smile:

The trouble with the "we do absolutely nothing"

Friend, no one has said "we do absolutely nothing" in the overarching sense you seem to be indicating; what I'm saying is that we don't save ourselves; in THAT we do "nothing." OUR works do not save us; we are not saved by OUR works.

The reasons are simple:

+ The unregenerate, DEAD, atheistic enemy of God - void of faith, void of life, void of the Holy Spirit - CANNOT do anything spiritual. Thus cannot DO the work that means he thus has life, faith, the Holy Spirit, justification. Dead people can't do much, lol

+ The Bible repeatedly states that spiritual life, faith, the Holy Spirit (justification) is "the gift of God, lest any have reason to boast." It also speaks of this as the "inheritance."

+ If our salvation is the result of what the dead, atheistic, enemy of God DOES then Jesus is not the Savior, self is. Perhaps Jesus DOES something.... but whatever "that" is doesn't actually SAVE anyone, it just creates a senario where an individual can save himself, then Jesus isn't the Savior. If the actual factor that results in one being is heaven is some WORK done by the dead, unregenerate, lifeless, faithless, Holy Sprit less (LOL) enemy of God DOES, then there is one reason that dead person got saved - he DID something. The Savior is thus himself. IF one says, "Jesus makes salvation POSSIBLE ...but doesn't save anyone; Jesus OFFERS salvation but if you don't take it that's irrelevant and worthless; Jesus opens the door to heaven but you gotta walk through it" then there's no way Jesus saves anyone, no way Jesus is the SAVIOR at all: he is a possibility-maker or offerer but not a Savior (and certainly not THE Savior).

Friend, this is what the Reformation was all about. CONTRARY TO ACTUAL, OFFICIAL CATHOLIC DOCTRINE, the leadership of the denomination (all sadly BADLY education) supported the radical synergism and Pelagianism of the indulgence sellers... that ultimately we are saved NOT by what Jesus did (that just opened the door) BUT by what the dead/faithless person DOES. Luther (correctly quoting not only Scripture but the Council of Orange, etc., etc.) noted that Pelagius was declared a heretic, synergism was declared a heresy, and that JESUS is the Savior, not self. The Council of Trent in some ways tried to bring the RCC back.... but the language allows for a semi-Pelagian interpretation with a 'progressive justification' model. Protestantism rests on the idea of "Soli Deo Gloria" - that Jesus does the Saving; that your salvation is entirely, wholly the work of Jesus, we are not saved by OUR work (not even faith is a work of self) BUT by Jesus' work (see by siggy to every post; it's the summery of Protestantism).

Friend, every OTHER religion on the planet teaches that we have a problem.... a very big problem.... but every other religion holds that SELF has the ability to climb out of this mess (all the way up to God). YES, GOD must create some path by which this is possible.... YEAH, he cannot do it alone, he MUST have DIVINE help and empowering..... YES, he must have sufficient time to accomplish this.... But God has done HIS part by making it POSSIBLE and now we have to do OUR part, but NO OTHER RELIGION has a Savior because self is the savior of self. I think I mentioned this above, but a Hindu friend of mine put this point this way: "Say there is a baby monkey and baby cat that are in some deadly situation, helpless. All religions but one hold that God is like a mother monkey who comes for her child, but he child mus grab on and hold on as the mother brings the baby to safety. Christianity holds that the mother cat rushes to her kitten, grabs the kitten in her mouth and takes it to safety." Yup. Christianity is the only religion with a SAVIOR because we hold God must do the saving.

You are right: Analogies go only so far, but let me try this one. The Bible it says our spiritual life is a GIFT, an act of GOD (but then so is physical life). In the ancient Creed, we all proclaim, ".... we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and GIVER of Life." I was born on January 23, 1988 (I'd argue GOD GAVE me life 9 months before that, but let's move on, lol). I had nothing to do with this, the microsecond before God GAVE me life, I DID nothing - no good work, no decision, no service, no devotion. But God GAVE me physical life, I became a human, a homo sapiens, ALIVE, already in His heart and plan. Monergistic. GOD did it, God did it all, the "gift of God." I am alive.... I am a human... because GOD did something, GOD gave something, GOD performed a miracle, GOD blessed. "We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and GIVER of life." Now, God USED some "means" there but my parents were right to give GOD all the credit, 100% of the credit. As do I. Now..... not long after I was born, God and my parents and society call on me to GROW, to become ever more responsible, moral, loving, serving (I've been CLOBBERED with such demands ever since!) but that's not what caused me to come alive, that's not why I'm alive, that's not why I'm a human.... another subject for another day and thread.




Continues in next post....



.

 

[Josiah]

Continues from above...

it literally turns the Bible into a waste of paper, describing a deity who spent thousands of years wasting his breath handing out instructions of how we should live when nothing makes any difference.

Friend, I don't think anyone has remotely suggested that what the Bible says makes no difference. I think what is being said is that Jesus is the Savior and thus Jesus does the saving; that the dead/faith-less/Spirit-less atheistic enemy of God doesn't cause himself to come to life, to have the Holy Spirit, to be saved....I think what is being said is that the dead are not saved by their OWN works but by JESUS' works.

The VAST majority of the Bible is written to those alive, to believers, to the children/people of God, to those with the divine gifts of faith, the Holy Spirit, justification. It's sanctification.... it's discipleship.... it's how to live the life GIVEN to them, not how the dead can cause themselves to gain life. God calls the living to divine holiness.... divine perfect morality/righteousness.... divine love and sacrifice.... and MUCH more. Why? So that if the DEAD, faith-less, Spriit-less, atheistic enemy of God will gain salvation IF they become absolutely perfect in holiness, morality and love 24/7, as much as God? No. This is not how the DEAD gain life, it's how those alive are to live. It's NOT my parents shouting to a womb before March 23, 1987 so that I'd give myself life, make myself a human.. it's what my parents said to me BECAUSE I had received the divine gift of life, because I was made a human. It works much the same in our spiritual lives.... our Father who GAVE us spiritual life and saving faith and the Holy Spirit and made us His child, our Parent calls us to grow, to be more like Him (and unlike my physical parents delivering much the same call, my heavenly Father gives me a perfect example and divine power - not JUST a call). That MUCH of the Bible is dedicating to calling the living to live is not suprising: we need specific instructions, we need divine inspiration, we need divine strength - we are CHILDREN. BTW. friend, my parents are STILL giving me motivation and instruction - and I'm 32 years old, with a Ph.D, married, with a child. And I still NEED it. Not "wasted" at all. But they offer it not SO THAT I'll become alive, I'll become a human, I'll eventually accomplished being their child.... but because I am.

Now... SOME of the Bible is written to the DEAD. To the lifeless, the atheistic enemy of God. And the purpose there is to show them they've fallen and they can't get up, they NEED the SAVIOR. This is the First Use of the Law.....

Seriously. What's the point of any of the text in the Bible if we do literally nothing?

Seriously. What's the point of the SAVIOR if we don't need SAVING, rescuing? Why aren't all the OTHER world religions correct (see the above post) and Jesus anything BUT the one who SAVES?


But again, the ALIVE need instruction, inspiration, discipline to LIVE as God desires. But God is NOT saying, "Hey you dead atheistic enemy who denies I even exist and couldn't care less if I did, IF YOU (as a lifeless, Spirit-less, God-less zombie) are as perfect as I am.... if you are as holy as I am... if you do everything I say in faith and love for me.... THEN you will come to life and I'll just sit up here in heaven and shout orders." No, God typically is addressing His CHILDREN, the ones with the divine gifts of spiritual life, saving faith, the Holy Spirit. To go with that physical analogy, there are no schools for those before conception.... but LOTS of schooling for those who have the divine gift of physical life. Friend, my years of schooling are not "wasted" it just as nothing whatsoever to do with what God did somewhere around March 23, 1987. I didn't come alive because I had a Ph.D. but that doesn't mean the Ph.D. is wasted.



Continues in next post..... (why are we so limited?)



.

 

[Josiah]

Continued from above...

When Paul wrote to the Thessalonians saying how we shouldn't grieve as those who have no hope, how cruel he must have been to talk of having hope when there is only a pipe dream.

1. Paul wrote to Christians.... the members of the church in Thessalonika all had the divine gift of spiritual life - saving faith - the Holy Spirit; they were all saved.

2. Paul is NOT saying that the DEAD, unbelieving, Spirit-less, atheistic/enemy of God has hope or even can choose give self divine hope (hope in a God they don't believe in and reject).

3. CHRISTIANS - those with the divine gift of spiritual life/saving faith/Holy Spirit ie salvation need to be reminded that IN CHRIST we have HOPE. Because we are CHILDREN. We need instruction. We need to grow.

In the world where we do absolutely nothing and either we are saved or we aren't saved, what hope is there?

Paul is not saying that the DEAD who reject God and thus won't ever "hope" in God can give themselves life IF they have hope. He is speaking to CHRISTIANS. This is not the HOPE that we'll save ourselves, this is not the HOPE that we'll come to spiritual life, this is the HOPE WE (Christians, the Alive, those WITH divine life/faith/Spriit) HAVE but being immature, being children, being in the process of growing up, too often forget and deglect.

Even the call to go and preach the gospel is a total waste of time if it's already predetermined who will be saved and who will not.

I too reject this Greek philosophy but too often radical Calvinists perpetuate. I addressed this at length above in an earlier post in this thread and won't copy/paste it here.


The Doctrine of Election is simply this: God saves. Jesus is the Savior. No dead, unregenerate, atheistic enemy of God gives SELF spiritual life/saving faith/Holy Spirit (justification). No one CAN save themselves (even if God made a path.... provided more than sufficient power and time - in other words, if all NON-Christian religions were correct). God GIVES life. God SAVES. It all hinges on Jesus..... it happened on the Cross. God GIVES this. The Doctrine of Election simply parrots what the Bible does - this all actually predates Creation itself (so OBVIOUSLY we didn't achieve it!!!!!). It is GOSPEL.... preached ONLY to Christians.... meant to comfort. As I mentioned earlier, I had two older siblings that died - one late in pregnacy and one within minutes of birth. I had EXACTLY the same "problem" as those siblings.... and the outcome could be the same. BUT my parents and older living sibs told me (over and over and over) how much they prayed for ME, how they spoke to me in the womb, how they sang "Jesus songs" to me in the womb, how they set up my nursery.... they unconditionally (ponder all that means!) loved me BEFORE WAS BORN (unconditionally). Years later... when I was too often a JERK... I knew they yet loved me (and that I was breaking their heart). I STILL find comfort in knowing their love does not depend on if I'm meeting their expectations and hopes (and I never will). This is how the Gospel of Election is presented in the Bible. Don't turn it upside down, inside out, twisted radically into pure Law to create a god that does not exist. No, my parents love for ME does not mean they HATE all other people and hope they all go to you-know-where.

We cannot explore the MYSTERY of why come have this gift and some don't. But it is wrong, IMO, to reject the Gospel and Christianity and insist those in heaven EARNED it and those not thus did not, that self saves self or fails to saves self. Christanity rejects that the Savior is seen in the mirror rather than on the Cross, Christianity rejects that the dead give self life. WHY some don't have faith? I can't quote a Scripture that says. But I can quote several that say faith/life/Holy Spirit are the gift of God and that Jesus is the Savior. And that is the centerpiece of my faith.


We are told to LOVE and to TEACH and to BAPTIZE. Why? Because God typically USES that. Does God have to? No, John the Baptist believed even before he was born; God CAN give what He wants however He wants. BUT God typically uses MEANS. Again, my physical analogy: Could God give me physical life on March 23, 1987 without my parents doing anything (wink, wink)? Ask Mary, the Mother of Jesus. Is that the norm? Ask your parents. In classical theology, this is called "The Means of Grace", "tools in the hands of the Carpenter" as Luther put it. Does He HAVE to use tools? Nope. Does He usually? Yup. Even Jesus once used a MUD BALL to give sight to a man born blind.... did He HAVE to? Nope. Did He? Yup. Now, how does He do that? How does He perform His MIRACLE? I don't know..... I don't know how He gave me physical life 3/23/1987.... and I don't know how He gave me spiritual life (IMO, on 1/23/1988 at my Baptism). Life is a miracle. Salvation is a miracle. But it is a DIVINE miracle!!!!

What's the point of preaching if it turns out that the person we're preaching to is predestined to burn?

No radical Calvinists or ancient Greeks are participating in our discussion, my friend. I





Continues and concludes in post 36...





.

 

[Lamb]

For good measure this "we do nothing" worldview also destroys any assurance of salvation. How can we possibly be sure of anything if there's literally nothing that we do?

There is more assurance of salvation by grace through faith alone than by works because it doesn't depend on you at all. How could you know if you are saved if it's left up to you and God has to accept your efforts? There is no assurance ever in that. So what do you do? You stop looking at yourself and look to what Jesus has done. Did Jesus die on the cross? Was the blood sacrificed accepted by God and the Resurrection is proof of that? Does that mean your sins are forgiven?

The answers are Yes, Yes and Yes. That is objective justification since it happened outside of you and for us even before we were born!

Does someone who is adopted have to do something in order to be adopted? Does someone have to do something in order to be named in someone's Last Will and Testament? The answers are no and no. It's the same with us who are redeemed by Jesus. We didn't have to do anything in order for Him to go to the cross to redeem us. We didn't have to give Him our permission or ask Him to do it.

Not everyone will benefit from the cross because those who reject the Savior damn themselves. It's not God's fault.

 

[Josiah]

Continuing and concluding....

1Jn 1:8-9 talks of confessing our sins and God forgiving us. Does that make any difference?

1. Who is "our?" Is it the dead, unregenrate, lifeless, faith-less, Spirit-less, atheistic enemy of God who denies God exists, who denies God's law and wisdom and way?

2. Yes, even the Children of God, those whom the Lord and GIVER of Life has given life, even those saved, still sin (another mystery). We need continuing forgiveness.... Thus is just one way we stay "connected" to God. Now, a couple of times in my life, I needed to confess something to my parents because I was not a PERFECT child 24/7. Good for me to confess it. And my parents forgave me (as is their nature). Is this the cause of my conception on or about 1/23/1987? Nope.

For good measure this "we do nothing" worldview also destroys any assurance of salvation.

I think the exact opposite is true. IF salvation depended on ME, then how could I ever know if I've done everything I need to do? If I've done it good enough? In God I can trust, in ME there's only uncertainty.

In every other world religion - all holding that self saves self by what self does - there is no certainty, no assurance. ANY such certainty would require an ego greater than anyone has. Those who believe their Savior faces them in the mirror MUST live with what Luther called "terror."

Muslims have to work for theirs and don't know until the end whether they measured up

Right! What a HORRIBLE TERROR it is to think it depends on self! "Did I jump high enough? Did I mean it enough? Am I sincere enough? The more you look in the mirror, the greater the uncertainty, the greater the horror, the greater the terror.

We took to the Cross.... and the Resurrection PROVES it "measured up." "Because I live, you will live also." The Cross, the Empty Tomb, Jesus' promise: Good enough for me. Sure beats the Muslim wondering if his life meets God's standard of absolute perfection equal to His own, absolute righteousness equal to His own, total love equal to His own: what God demands. Did JESUS accomplish that? Yes! Easter PROVES it!

Friend, if you have faith then you have salvation. Because then you are relying on JESUS (the One on the Cross) not SELF (the one in the mirror). Where is your faith? The Cross or the Mirror? If it's in the Cross, salvation is yours. Ain't complicated. Luther, "I believe, therefore I'm saved." Now, that's not the end of EVERYTHING (hey, I still have to brush my teeth twice a day) but it IS salvation.



I hope that helps.....


I enjoyed the conversation!


BLESSINGS to you my brother in Christ....


- Josiah




.