"Getting Saved"

[Castor Muscular]

Here's a thought, maybe in God's sovereignty He has appointed means by which He will regenerate the elect, and those means are delineated in, of all things, the Bible via the great commission.  Whodathunkit!

If you are talking about God in his sovereignty appointing free will as a means, that's nothing but nonsensical double-speak.  It amounts to nothing less than "God, in his sovereignty, made man sovereign over the turning point of his own salvation."  Or, to put it more simply, it was God's sovereign decision not to be sovereign but I'll pretend he's still sovereign anyway even though that's a logical impossibility. 

 

[ALAYMAN]

No...it doesn't say that.

Maybe not in whatever version of the Bible you read, but God says....

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.

[quote author=rsc2a]

Ahh...so you favor the "ignore the parts we don't like" method of Biblical interpretation.
[/quote]

No, I expect some intellectual integrity from people on a Christian forum, and what I get from you and him is snarky smarminess with a skosh of pretzel hermeneutics, all in the name of trying to win an argument no matter how bad you twist the word of God.

 

[ALAYMAN]

If you are talking about God in his sovereignty appointing free will as a means, that's nothing but nonsensical double-speak.  It amounts to nothing less than "God, in his sovereignty, made man sovereign over the turning point of his own salvation."  Or, to put it more simply, it was God's sovereign decision not to be sovereign but I'll pretend he's still sovereign anyway even though that's a logical impossibility.

Nope, I'm not even arguing any version of the "free will" side of things.  The notion that God uses "means" in the regenerating of the elect is standard reformed/predestinarian thought.  They would add the sacraments as those means, which I might take partial exception to, but there is plenty of historical writing on the reformed side of the aisle to demonstrate that the gospel is the instrumental grounds for salvation of the elect.

 

[rsc2a]

No...it doesn't say that.

Maybe not in whatever version of the Bible you read, but God says....

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.

Yes. That's not what you wrote earlier.

[quote author=ALAYMAN][quote author=rsc2a]

Ahh...so you favor the "ignore the parts we don't like" method of Biblical interpretation.
[/quote]

No, I expect some intellectual integrity from people on a Christian forum, and what I get from you and him is snarky smarminess with a skosh of pretzel hermeneutics, all in the name of trying to win an argument no matter how bad you twist the word of God.[/quote]

I suggest more fiber in your diet. It might help with your inconsistency.

 

[christundivided]

No...it doesn't say that.

Maybe not in whatever version of the Bible you read, but God says....

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.

[quote author=rsc2a]

Ahh...so you favor the "ignore the parts we don't like" method of Biblical interpretation.

No, I expect some intellectual integrity from people on a Christian forum, and what I get from you and him is snarky smarminess with a skosh of pretzel hermeneutics, all in the name of trying to win an argument no matter how bad you twist the word of God.
[/quote]

It amazes me how rsca is so childlish. The details of the Gospel are complicated. Anytime things get "complicated" for rsca... he just jumps on the "back" of a few verses he rides on off into the sunset. The Scriptures are a intricate revelation of the mind of God to humanity. My children us to us my words against me all the time. I might tell them "Yes. You can have some candy." "Of course" they thought I meant they could have "candy" anytime they wanted it. Even without asking.  When I told them to get out of the candy, they want to accuse me of lying to them. " Rsca has this problem with the "Scriptures". He doesn't care why something was stated or what the anecdotal evidence might suggest. What a little baby. 

 

[Castor Muscular]

Nope, I'm not even arguing any version of the "free will" side of things.  The notion that God uses "means" in the regenerating of the elect is standard reformed/predestinarian thought. 

And I have no problem with that.  All I'm saying is that God is not limited to using whatever exists in our knowledge of historically recorded means. 

There are very few principles without exception in the Bible.  One of them is that "No one comes to the Father except through me [Jesus]."  That statement leaves no room for exceptions.  But it doesn't say a lot of the conditions people attribute to it. 

 

[ALAYMAN]

Yes. That's not what you wrote earlier.

Sure it is. My exact words were...


The Bible says that it is the power of God unto salvation

Now do you want to deal with the verse in relationship to your claim?

I suggest more fiber in your diet. It might help with your inconsistency.

More obfuscation.

And I have no problem with that.  All I'm saying is that God is not limited to using whatever exists in our knowledge of historically recorded means. 

There are very few principles without exception in the Bible.  One of them is that "No one comes to the Father except through me [Jesus]."  That statement leaves no room for exceptions.  But it doesn't say a lot of the conditions people attribute to it.

God can do whatever He wants that is within his character.  In that respect I agree with part of the sentiments regarding sovereignty in your earlier post.  Could he save apart from the gospel?  I suppose so, but, the picture painted in the NT is clear enough to me that the overwhelmingly ordinary means He has appointed is via the gospel (preached, or read).

 

[christundivided]

Nope, I'm not even arguing any version of the "free will" side of things.  The notion that God uses "means" in the regenerating of the elect is standard reformed/predestinarian thought. 

And I have no problem with that.  All I'm saying is that God is not limited to using whatever exists in our knowledge of historically recorded means. 

There are very few principles without exception in the Bible.  One of them is that "No one comes to the Father except through me [Jesus]."  That statement leaves no room for exceptions.  But it doesn't say a lot of the conditions people attribute to it.

Your problem with a proper view of God's Sovereign is clear. You fail to recognize that God's Sovereignty is not always tied to God's direct and divine action. Sometimes, God's Sovergnity is displayed in His inaction.

Yet, don't tell me that God's action or His inaction carry the same ideals of responsibility and justice.

 

[Timothy]

Galatians 3:14
"He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit."

 

[rsc2a]

Yes. That's not what you wrote earlier.

Sure it is. My exact words were...

The Bible says that it is the power of God unto salvation

Now do you want to deal with the verse in relationship to your claim?

Yes...this isn't what you just previously stated. It's not all that hard.

The Bible says that it is the power of God unto salvation is different from For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation.

[quote author=ALAYMAN]God can do whatever He wants that is within his character.  In that respect I agree with part of the sentiments regarding sovereignty in your earlier post.  Could he save apart from the gospel?  I suppose so, but, the picture painted in the NT is clear enough to me that the overwhelmingly ordinary means He has appointed is via the gospel (preached, or read).[/quote]

God saves is the Gospel.

 

[ALAYMAN]

The Bible says that it is the power of God unto salvation is different from For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation.

Please elaborate.

God saves is the Gospel.

And if I were talking to a Muslim and said God saves, is that the gospel?

 

[Torrent v.2]

Here's a thought, maybe in God's sovereignty He has appointed means by which He will regenerate the elect, and those means are delineated in, of all things, the Bible via the great commission.  Whodathunkit!

If you are talking about God in his sovereignty appointing free will as a means, that's nothing but nonsensical double-speak.  It amounts to nothing less than "God, in his sovereignty, made man sovereign over the turning point of his own salvation."  Or, to put it more simply, it was God's sovereign decision not to be sovereign but I'll pretend he's still sovereign anyway even though that's a logical impossibility.

You are going to make my head explode.

 

[rsc2a]

The Bible says that it is the power of God unto salvation is different from For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation.

Please elaborate.

The Bible is not the gospel. The Bible tells the gospel.

[quote author=ALAYMAN]

God saves is the Gospel.

And if I were talking to a Muslim and said God saves, is that the gospel?[/quote]

Yes. Highly abbreviated, but still yes. Or you could say, 'The Kingdom of God is at hand.' Both would be the gospel since they are functionally the same thing.

 

[christundivided]

[quote author=ALAYMAN]

God saves is the Gospel.

And if I were talking to a Muslim and said God saves, is that the gospel?

Yes. Highly abbreviated, but still yes. Or you could say, 'The Kingdom of God is at hand.' Both would be the gospel since they are functionally the same thing.
[/quote]

I would say that a Muslim would agree with you and go on about his merry way rejoicing in knowing that Allah saves.

 

[Castor Muscular]

I would say that a Muslim would agree with you and go on about his merry way rejoicing in knowing that Allah saves.

I'm not so sure about that.    From what I understand, no Muslim can know if Allah will save him.  He can only hope, and try to increase his chances by killing some Joos and dying in the process. 

 

[ALAYMAN]

The Bible is not the gospel. The Bible tells the gospel.

The Bible contains the gospel.  Paul says that the gospel is the power of God unto salvation.  The implication is explicitly clear.  The good news contained in the word of God is the means by which salvation is wrought.

God saves is the Gospel.

Yes. Highly abbreviated, but still yes. Or you could say, 'The Kingdom of God is at hand.' Both would be the gospel since they are functionally the same thing.

No mention of Christ is necessary?

 

[rsc2a]

The Bible is not the gospel. The Bible tells the gospel.

The Bible contains the gospel.  Paul says that the gospel is the power of God unto salvation.  The implication is explicitly clear.  The good news contained in the word of God is the means by which salvation is wrought.

The implication is clear. The gospel is that God is capable (and willing!) to save. You know the power of God....

[quote author=ALAYMAN]

God saves is the Gospel.

Yes. Highly abbreviated, but still yes. Or you could say, 'The Kingdom of God is at hand.' Both would be the gospel since they are functionally the same thing.

No mention of Christ is necessary?[/quote]

You tell me...

Now after John was arrested, Jesus came into Galilee, proclaiming the gospel of God, and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.”

 

[ALAYMAN]

The implication is clear. The gospel is that God is capable (and willing!) to save. You know the power of God....

It is through that proclamation that the Spirit quickens the soul, and it either comes in the written form, or the spoken, but in order to be saved (ordinarily) the gospel must be received and believed.

God saves is the Gospel.

Yes. Highly abbreviated, but still yes. Or you could say, 'The Kingdom of God is at hand.' Both would be the gospel since they are functionally the same thing.

No mention of Christ is necessary?[/quote]

You tell me...

Now after John was arrested, Jesus came into Galilee, proclaiming the gospel of God, and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.”
[/quote]

Christ was speaking clearly saying "believe in me".  How much more self-evident could it be that Christ is the center of the gospel?

 

[rsc2a]

The implication is clear. The gospel is that God is capable (and willing!) to save. You know the power of God....

It is through that proclamation that the Spirit quickens the soul, and it either comes in the written form, or the spoken, but in order to be saved (ordinarily) the gospel must be received and believed.

And by doing good, repentance, confession, baptism....

(You also added a word. That changed the meaning of what you've been saying.)

[quote author=ALAYMAN]

[quote author=ALAYMAN]

God saves is the Gospel.

Yes. Highly abbreviated, but still yes. Or you could say, 'The Kingdom of God is at hand.' Both would be the gospel since they are functionally the same thing.

No mention of Christ is necessary?

You tell me...

Now after John was arrested, Jesus came into Galilee, proclaiming the gospel of God, and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.”
[/quote]

Christ was speaking clearly saying "believe in me".  How much more self-evident could it be that Christ is the center of the gospel?[/quote]

He was?

He seemed to be clearly saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.”

 

[ALAYMAN]

And by doing good, repentance, confession, baptism....

You have the free will to persist in your error(s) about the primary and  instrumental means of salvation, but for crying out loud please quit telling people you are reformed, because your theology is a hodge-podge of gobbled-gook and far from any real reformed position.

(You also added a word. That changed the meaning of what you've been saying.)

I only had to look back at post#66 to see this response of mine to Castor...

God can do whatever He wants that is within his character.  In that respect I agree with part of the sentiments regarding sovereignty in your earlier post.  Could he save apart from the gospel?  I suppose so, but, the picture painted in the NT is clear enough to me that the overwhelmingly ordinary means He has appointed is via the gospel (preached, or read).

Must you resort to lies and misrepresentations?

He seemed to be clearly saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.”

Yes, the gospel, the good news that Christ would die for man's sins.  Don't twist the word of God to your own destruction simply because you don't like what it says.