That's much better than I did.ON THE QUIZ, HAD THEN ALL RIGHT EXCEPT THE QUESTION, THE fATHER ACTS ALONE ON THAT POINT.
It was a tricky question and I think ignores the covenant of redemption (pactum salutis) which would hold that all members of the Godhead participated in that covenant. So do not take missing this one too badly.ON THE QUIZ, HAD THEN ALL RIGHT EXCEPT THE QUESTION, THE fATHER ACTS ALONE ON THAT POINT.
This points to the way, again, that we see salvation. Some see it as an 'event' or a couple of events. Your explanation suggests such, and it is true. It is also true that Salvation isn't necessarily when I called upon the Lord, because you are correct that a prior event occurred. You'd agree with me that God saves/saved us. The wording we use between 'saved' and 'saves' separates how we think of our salvation and the way it happened. When I tell people 'how I was saved' (events that led to it) it tends to be less Calvinistic. When I tell people "how God saved me" it tends to be more Calvinistic (as is also true with you - also 'saved' can be 'saves' in this case too, depending on how our description works.The gospel of our salvation is the event that took place 2000 years before we were even born. Trusting the Lord believing it after hearing it is when we are saved and sealed (1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV, Ephesians 1:13-14 KJV)/when the righteousness of God by the faith of Jesus Christ is put to our account/"upon" us (Romans 3:21-22 KJV).
I hope a few will take time for this and reflect upon scriptures.Take the test:
Salvation Quiz
How did you do? :AMR:
AMR
This points to the way, again, that we see salvation. Some see it as an 'event' or a couple of events. Your explanation suggests such, and it is true. It is also true that Salvation isn't necessarily when I called upon the Lord, because you are correct that a prior event occurred. You'd agree with me that God saves/saved us. The wording we use between 'saved' and 'saves' separates how we think of our salvation and the way it happened. When I tell people 'how I was saved' (events that led to it) it tends to be less Calvinistic. When I tell people "how God saved me" it tends to be more Calvinistic (as is also true with you - also 'saved' can be 'saves' in this case too, depending on how our description works.
Whenever I hear about salvation, I see 1) process and/or 2) eventand/or 3)application. As an evangelical, I had always thought it more of a decision based on Christ's work. Such has me in control of my destiny, as do most theological perspectives: It is what we know.
Later in life, I've come to think 'independence' (free will) is what Satan promised Adam and Eve in the Garden, that they'd be "Like God" and that "They'd be able to decide themselves good and evil."
It then made sense, and I agree, that men must call upon the name of the Lord, but it also meant we were in a state where we decide for ourselves 'like God' so in no need of God in that condition. A lie, yes, but it is the framework of our condition. The Serpent in this case, was saying what he was experiencing for himself: an ability to make his own choices regarding good and evil. Many people attribute our 'free will' to God, but I believe it is more a gift from the Serpent. That was a huge turn-around for me in my theology. I'm convinced from re-reading scripture, that free will is more the result of the Fall than God's intention (not arguing or propping up something against another's theology, just giving some of my observations, I think, directly from Bible study. I'd not imperialize them, just want to help another see where some of us Calvinists are coming from). Thank you for your gracious reply. -Lon
When did you trust the Lord AFTER hearing and believing the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation?
Calvinism is for people believe in a sovereign god- one who isn't subject to popes or free will.
There's not really anything of anti-Calvinist qualms that hold up to scrutiny, and there aren't that many of them at that. They are mostly rehashed over and over again, from those like Robert Pate, who has made yet another thread blabbering the same old nonsense
Robert,
If you want to discredit "Calvinism", a good way to do that would be to quote the source of your claim that Calvinism teaches that the Gospel and justification by faith are not necessary.
I would like to see that source reference!
Robert,
If you want to discredit "Calvinism", a good way to do that would be to quote the source of your claim that Calvinism teaches that the Gospel and justification by faith are not necessary.
I would like to see that source reference!
If you have been declared by God that you are saved before the foundation of the world.
Then you don't need Christ, nor do you need his Gospel. This is why Calvinism is anti-Gospel and anti-Christ.
Grace through faith, just as Paul taught.Are you saved by election or grace?
Where is the source information?
Grace through faith, just as Paul taught.
(Philippians 3:9) Faith
(John 6:29) Belief is our "Work"
Where's yours? Can you back up your Tulip... if the Reformed lens... made by extra biblical (extra canonical) men... is shattered?
Scripture Alone?
Faith Alone?
Christ Alone?
Nope... not while you think that Reformed lens matters.
It sounds so sweet... but you have wrapped it in bitter. Are you Elect?
I was asking for source information from someone else. That's why I quoted their post.