"Getting Saved"

[rsc2a]

When does salvation occur? I was saved. I am being saved. I will be saved.
Is this a process or a point in time? Yes.

That's pretty much what the Bible says.

Who argued against that?

The OP was to define the what/when/how/where/who of eternal salvation (already defined). I am not he one who went on a wild goose chase trying to equate physical rescue from death with spiritual rescue from eternal torment.

Yes...I've addressed that back on page 1.

[quote author=subllibrm]Anyone can win any debate (or declare themselves to have won) if they are not bound to a common definition of the issue being debated.[/quote]

I clearly stated my definition from the very beginning. (It's actually in my very first post on this thread.) It's a definition that is widely accepted (as I showed by providing multiple links.) If I recall correctly, every single link addressed both the "physical" and "spiritual" aspects of salvation by stating that the word "salvation" can be applied to both. (The Bible certainly does.) If someone chooses to ignore what I have written, well, that cannot be helped.

[quote author=subllibrm]FWIW rsc2a has not answered the OP as it applies to the issue of eternal salvation (already defined). The closest he has come is to say he doesn't know (and by implication that it is unknowable).[/quote]

I haven't?

Actually, I explicitly answered that very question.

[quote author=subllibrm]It was only right to provide him with the truth of scripture that not only is it knowable but that the purpose (at least one of them) is to provide all that we need to know that we have eternal life.[/quote]

What?

(Ironically, when I actually provided my answer, your statement was, "I do not see anything that makes me go "no-way" although I did go Hmmm in a couple of spots.")

 

[subllibrm]

Code words and semantical gymnastics.

 

[rsc2a]

Code words and semantical gymnastics.

Please enlighten me...

 

[ALAYMAN]

Your point?

I'm still the one that is trying to understand what ALL of Scripture teaches without adding where it is silent. I'm not hand-waving away the verses that don't fit with my own personal notions. Instead, you say "huh", then you wrestle with (and through) them until you can either explain the apparent contradiction without dismissing what the texts say or simply say "no idea, but both are clearly there".

My point is that you are being less than honest, naïve, or obtuse about how Scripture deals with the subject, all under the guise of being open-minded.

Correction...you accused me of cozying up with heretics.

lol, the Fonz had a hard time saying he was wrong too. 

I think it's funny that you can't even bring yourself to admit that your poor communication skills make you look either inept, or worse, dishonest.

 

[rsc2a]

Your point?

I'm still the one that is trying to understand what ALL of Scripture teaches without adding where it is silent. I'm not hand-waving away the verses that don't fit with my own personal notions. Instead, you say "huh", then you wrestle with (and through) them until you can either explain the apparent contradiction without dismissing what the texts say or simply say "no idea, but both are clearly there".

My point is that you are being less than honest, naïve, or obtuse about how Scripture deals with the subject, all under the guise of being open-minded.

I'm being completely honest with the text...that's why I don't completely ignore the passages I find problematic. To be dishonest would be to hand-wave those passages away as if they were never written, kind of like....

 

[ALAYMAN]

I'm being completely honest with the text...that's why I don't completely ignore the passages I find problematic. To be dishonest would be to hand-wave those passages away as if they were never written, kind of like....

Okay, I'm going to be completely honest and forthright with you.  The list that you and CM gave about methods of salvation, well, I thought originally was merely composed for purposes of chain-yanking.  I didn't take it serious, because I didn't think you (or he) was serious.  If you honestly were being sincere, I have a hard time giving you any credibility at all. 

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=ALAYMAN]Okay, I'm going to be completely honest and forthright with you.  The list that you and CM gave about methods of salvation, well, I thought originally was merely composed for purposes of chain-yanking.  I didn't take it serious, because I didn't think you (or he) was serious.  If you honestly were being sincere, I have a hard time giving you any credibility at all. [/quote]

The fact that we don't deliberately ignore the passages that contradict our doctrinal beliefs make us less credible than one who does? That's an odd statement...

 

[ALAYMAN]

The fact that we don't deliberately ignore the passages that contradict our doctrinal beliefs make us less credible than one who does? That's an odd statement...

Of course it could just be that your perspective and Biblical analysis is wrong, and you're justifying it with sophistry.

 

[rsc2a]

The fact that we don't deliberately ignore the passages that contradict our doctrinal beliefs make us less credible than one who does? That's an odd statement...

Of course it could just be that your perspective and Biblical analysis is wrong...

[quote author=ALAYMAN]...and you're justifying it with sophistry.[/quote]

Wouldn't sophistry be akin to something like, "Yes, I know this verse reads just like every other verse I've cited with the exception of the noun, but it clearly isn't meant to be read like every other verse because the noun is different"?

 

[ALAYMAN]

Wouldn't sophistry be akin to something like, "Yes, I know this verse reads just like every other verse I've cited with the exception of the noun, but it clearly isn't meant to be read like every other verse because the noun is different"?

I think sophistry might look more like equivocation on a Christian forum regarding the topic of salvation and Biblical usage of the term "saved".

 

[rsc2a]

Wouldn't sophistry be akin to something like, "Yes, I know this verse reads just like every other verse I've cited with the exception of the noun, but it clearly isn't meant to be read like every other verse because the noun is different"?

I think sophistry might look more like equivocation on a Christian forum regarding the topic of salvation...

Good thing we were used widely recognized definitions, right?

[quote author=ALAYMAN]...and Biblical usage of the term "saved".[/quote]

You don't know much about the beliefs of church traditions outside your own, do you?

 

[ALAYMAN]

Good thing we were used widely recognized definitions, right?

You remind me of a song by an 80s Hair Band called Dead or Alive.....something about spin.  8)

[quote author=rsc2a]
You don't know much about the beliefs of church traditions outside your own, do you?
[/quote]

I'm sure you're an expert in numerous categories of knowledge, are the president of the Hair Club of America, member of Mensa, invented the internet, and never even stayed at a Holiday Inn last night, but rather than trusting in dead men's creeds and cults traditions, some of us just rely on the Bible for our beliefs ultimately.

 

[rsc2a]

Good thing we were used widely recognized definitions, right?

You remind me of a song by an 80s Hair Band called Dead or Alive.....something about spin.  8)

Are you now denying that it's a widely recognized definition?

[quote author=ALAYMAN][quote author=rsc2a]
You don't know much about the beliefs of church traditions outside your own, do you?
[/quote]

I'm sure you're an expert in numerous categories of knowledge, are the president of the Hair Club of America, member of Mensa, invented the internet, and never even stayed at a Holiday Inn last night...[/quote]

Actually, there is a great deal that I don't know, but I have made it a point to learn about the various Christian traditions, and I've made it a point to learn from the source itself whenever possible. Having sat down with Orthodox priests and having frequent conversations with my friends of varied traditions (from Catholic to Ruckmanite), I kind of have an basic understanding of what they teach...

...which is why I say you are out in left field when you talk about the "Biblical usage" of the term "saved". (Of course, if you even bothered to even do the very basics and look at Strong's, you would know that the word sozo applies to both physical and spiritual salvation including many of the examples I've already cited.) 

[quote author=ALAYMAN]...but rather than trusting in dead men's creeds and cults traditions...[/quote]

Every man is an island or something? (Speaking of unBiblical notions....)

[quote author=ALAYMAN]...some of us just rely on the Bible for our beliefs ultimately.[/quote]

Says everyone who claims to have truth from Scripture...

 

[ALAYMAN]

Are you now denying that it's a widely recognized definition?

I'm denying that you have intellectual integrity.  You're on a fundamentalist forum.  From what I understand of your background, you left that movement, so you know how it (and evangelical circles) use the lingo.  When they say "getting saved" they aren't talking about it in any sense remotely close to how you've been equivocating.  The tone and tenor of the discussion has been about regeneration/sanctification/glorification, and you knew that, but elected to introduce an element that is off topic.

Actually, there is a great deal that I don't know, but I have made it a point to learn about the various Christian traditions, and I've made it a point to learn from the source itself whenever possible. Having sat down with Orthodox priests and having frequent conversations with my friends of varied traditions (from Catholic to Ruckmanite), I kind of have an basic understanding of what they teach...

So what.  Really, who cares?  The relevant discussion centers around what the Bible says, not what the Eastern Orthodox, or Petey Ruckman believe.

...which is why I say you are out in left field when you talk about the "Biblical usage" of the term "saved". (Of course, if you even bothered to even do the very basics and look at Strong's, you would know that the word sozo applies to both physical and spiritual salvation including many of the examples I've already cited.) 

We are talking about regeneration/sanctification/glorification.  As usual, you need reminded to stay on topic.

Every man is an island or something? (Speaking of unBiblical notions....)

I notice that you ignored the import of the qualifier I used when I said "ultimately".  Commentators, creeds, and traditions are interesting, but not binding, period.  It's one of the Solas, and you being reformed and all, well, you know the drill.

Says everyone who claims to have truth from Scripture...

I place a premium on it for my faith and practice.  Ex cathedra???  Not so much.

 

[rsc2a]

Are you now denying that it's a widely recognized definition?

I'm denying that you have intellectual integrity.  You're on a fundamentalist forum.  From what I understand of your background, you left that movement, so you know how it (and evangelical circles) use the lingo.  When they say "getting saved" they aren't talking about it in any sense remotely close to how you've been equivocating.  The tone and tenor of the discussion has been about regeneration/sanctification/glorification, and you knew that, but elected to introduce an element that is off topic.

Actually, I've been sticking to the same definition I introduced in the third post of the thread.

[quote author=ALAYMAN]

Actually, there is a great deal that I don't know, but I have made it a point to learn about the various Christian traditions, and I've made it a point to learn from the source itself whenever possible. Having sat down with Orthodox priests and having frequent conversations with my friends of varied traditions (from Catholic to Ruckmanite), I kind of have an basic understanding of what they teach...

So what.  Really, who cares?  The relevant discussion centers around what the Bible says, not what the Eastern Orthodox, or Petey Ruckman believe.[/quote]

Do you think fundamentalists have the corner on truth or something? Do you think Baptists are inerrant when it comes to doctrine and practice? Which Baptists?

(To say nothing of the fact that you are still refusing to acknowledge that the provided definition for salvation is widely accepted among all of Christendom from the most liberal to the most conservative, from the most liturgical to the most "free"...)

[quote author=ALAYMAN]

...which is why I say you are out in left field when you talk about the "Biblical usage" of the term "saved". (Of course, if you even bothered to even do the very basics and look at Strong's, you would know that the word sozo applies to both physical and spiritual salvation including many of the examples I've already cited.) 

We are talking about regeneration/sanctification/glorification.  As usual, you need reminded to stay on topic.[/quote]

So now we need to ignore how the Bible uses a word when we are discussing how the Bible defines a word?

[quote author=ALAYMAN]

Every man is an island or something? (Speaking of unBiblical notions....)

I notice that you ignored the import of the qualifier I used when I said "ultimately". [/quote]

Yes. And you are still wrong. You don't rely "on the Bible". You rely on your interpretation of the Bible.

[quote author=ALAYMAN]Commentators, creeds, and traditions are interesting, but not binding, period.  It's one of the Solas, and you being reformed and all, well, you know the drill.[/quote]

I happily affirm the five solas, yet I also recognize they aren't necessarily cut and dried. How sola are you willing to make your Scriptura?

[quote author=ALAYMAN]

Says everyone who claims to have truth from Scripture...

I place a premium on it for my faith and practice.  Ex cathedra???  Not so much.[/quote]

You are still practicing ex cathedra practices; the cathedra just happens to be inside your head, and if your head goes against 2000 years of church teaching, then who cares.

 

[subllibrm]

Riddles!