ECT Grace is unconditional but not universal

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Sadly, this is the behavior of many who profess to be saved by the grace of God. They almost think it sinful if they act obediently, or attend worship services, or hold to historical church creeds . . . for by doing, they think they are actually denying the saving grace of God.

It is very twisted . . .

Repentance is granted only by the grace of God, which produces a sanctified (holy) life. A lifetstyle of no repentance, no holy living, no obedience only reveals: no love of God, no knowledge of God, no grace of God, no salvation by God.

IMO.

That is why I do not think grace is universal or common to man, for very few humans evidence the marks of repentance and faith that come only from God.

Your Calvinistic mind blinds you from Spiritual truths.

 

[Sonnet]

Abraham was a righteous man BEFORE God ever spoke to him. In fact, his righteousness was the reason God did speak to him. But you will never understand that. You are incapable of taking into yourself such a truth. It is over your head.

Romans 4:1-5
What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, discovered in this matter? If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about—but not before God. What does Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.” Now to the one who works, wages are not credited as a gift but as an obligation. However, to the one who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness.

 

[Sonnet]

Wrong premise. Wrong question.

Why is 'Who determines who will be hearing' thus?

You certainly don't consider man able to hear. Who else. then, made it happen?

Of course. The problem is man's will not being able to choose God's righteousness because an unrenewed unchanged mind can't begin to fathom such.

But the righteousness that is by faith says: “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’ ” (that is, to bring Christ down) “or ‘Who will descend into the deep?’ ” (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead). But what does it say? “The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart,” that is, the message concerning faith that we proclaim: If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

"And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself."

 

[Sonnet]

Who is "us?"

Just wondering why you did not reply to my response:

Whomever his auditors are when he proclaims the gospel. When he first met the Corinthians, 'us' would have been them as unbelievers. So too, when he preaches to others (v.11 - 'this is what we preach') it will be other unbelievers (mostly unbelievers - Romans 15:20).

And when he wrote the letter it was those to whom the letter was addressed and, because he is reminding them of what he said when he came to them, them as unbelievers.

And this:
#86

But you explicitly said that the gospel for believers and unbelievers is the same - so, therefore, you will preach the equivalent of 'Christ died for our sins' to unbelievers or you will contradict yourself and, more worryingly, satisfy the condition for Paul's curse.

You think, 'Christ did not die for everyone,' is the same gospel as, 'Christ died for our sins'?

And this:
#87

What did Paul preach to the Corinthians when he first came to them?

Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain. For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures...

Whether, then, it is I or they, this is what we preach and this is what you believed.

But you wont do as Paul and the Apostles did will you Nang?

 

[Cross Reference]

Romans 4:1-5
What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, discovered in this matter? If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about—but not before God. What does Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.” Now to the one who works, wages are not credited as a gift but as an obligation. However, to the one who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness.

I'll receive that as an agreement. . .

 

[Sonnet]

I'll receive that as an agreement. . .

I'm just saying that no one will be righteous except through faith.

 

[Cross Reference]

I'm just saying that no one will be righteous except through faith.

Yes. However, in this by Abraham it was a gift but the reward for him having faith. That it is written that Abraham is the father of faith for all who believe in Christ.

 

[TulipBee]

no,seriously if you feel as though you must repent to be saved and you have not yet disobeyed God today by all means go ahead and disobey him so you can repent and then be saved...

"Repent to be saved" equals work for salvation and creates boasting which is a duplicate of semi pelagianism

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

You didn't answer the question. All the Israelite that were in need of a cure were provided for. They would turn and look if they trusted that which was proposed to them.

The gospel you are preaching can never be considered good news and makes Jesus' choice of analogy wrong.

Let's look at the bolded above of your statement. "That which was proposed to them" was the thing thought and spoken about. A noun. Healing (as an analogy for salvation).

"Trusted" is a verb, not a noun. (And trust [elpis] is not faith [pistis], but that's another subtle distinction of interrelated terms that get conflated; so that will have to be clarified later.) Trusted, the verb, is not faith, the noun. The difference between faith and "faith-ing" is noun and verb.

As a noun, faith is "the thing believed"; just as hearing, as a noun, is "the thing heard". Romans 10:17 clearly indicates "the thing believed" comes OUT OF/FROM (ek) "the thing heard".

As an example, if there are fireworks and no explosive report as a sound, then there is no thing heard. The report is the thing heard. The human auditory sense is not initiatively doing an action.

And the thing heard is by means of (dia) the Word (Rhema) of God/Christ (there are textual variants with each, likely the latter being preferred).

Their action of looking was from their "faithing", which requires them to have the noun of faith. And that faith (noun) came out of the report/hearing (noun), which was by means of God's Rhema (Word).

That which was proposed to them is what delivered faith by the report, and by that faith they "faithed" and looked.

Without the Rhema, there would be no faith. They had none until it was administered and directed by God through His Rhema.

The best news man could ever have is that he can't and doesn't effect his own salvation by his own "faithing". For if he did, it would not have come from God; but from himself.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Let's look at the bolded above of your statement. "That which was prosposed to them" was the thing thought and spoken about. A noun. Healing (as an analogy for salvation).

You seem to place a lot of faith in proper English. Before you open your Bible do you pray to God the Father for wisdom and knowledge for what you're about to read/study? Or, do you simply dissect each word and phrase for nouns, verbs, adjectives, etc, and depend on your "English Professor" way of looking at Scripture? Remember, the Bible is a Spiritual book, as such, you must depend on being led of God to understand and learn. Forums are not a place for teaching proper English or mathematics. This is not a College atmosphere. We're here to share our opinions and faith, not to be spoken to like a student listening to his teacher/Professor expound on his/her area of expertise. Simply put, it's a forum not a school class environment for people like you to show off their educational background.

 

[Nang]

You seem to place a lot of faith in proper English. Before you open your Bible do you pray to God the Father for wisdom and knowledge for what you're about to read/study? Or, do you simply dissect each word and phrase for nouns, verbs, adjectives, etc, and depend on your "English Professor" way of looking at Scripture? Remember, the Bible is a Spiritual book, as such, you must depend on being led of God to understand and learn. Forums are not a place for teaching proper English or mathematics. This is not a College atmosphere. We're here to share our opinions and faith, not to be spoken to like a student listening to his teacher/Professor expound on his/her area of expertise. Simply put, it's a forum not a school class environment for people like you to show off their educational background.

Obviously you do not know what biblical exegesis is . . .

 

[Cross Reference]

Obviously you do not know what biblical exegesis is . . .

Obviously you can't seem to make the distinction between redemption and salvation. . . I don't wonder at that.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

You seem to place a lot of faith in proper English. Before you open your Bible do you pray to God the Father for wisdom and knowledge for what you're about to read/study?

For years and years and years, and still... YES. It was that wisdom and knowledge (which is a knowledge that is different than what you have for this very reason) that directed me to a cumulative understanding based on the actual Greek text rather than my own opinions and deductions, unlike virtually everyone else.

Or, do you simply dissect each word and phrase for nouns, verbs, adjectives, etc, and depend on your "English Professor" way of looking at Scripture?

The latter from the former. No need for a false dichotomy to excuse ignorance and a lack of stewardship in applying wisdom and knowledge given by God.

Remember, the Bible is a Spiritual book, as such, you must depend on being led of God to understand and learn.

Which is why I clearly and concisely always speak doctrinal truth rather than depending upon myself. It's those who are winging it that always presume otherwise.

Forums are not a place for teaching proper English or mathematics. This is not a College atmosphere.

It's a theology forum. So if you and most others can post all varieties of opinion-based false theology, then correct theology is valid at any level.

When someone's basic ignorance of their own language and how it affects doctrine by mistranslation and misconception, they don't like being corrected; and they don't want to entertain the possibility that they are wrong. That's why you don't like me and my style. It exposes your error, and that threatens your foundation of belief and your very existence, etc. It's a base cognitive survial instinct of the flesh.

We're here to share our opinions

And that's the problem. Opinions aren't truth unless they are. And you don't get to be the gestapo who makes sure no one engages in actual theology instead of consensus opinion of the masses. You're promoting dialectic over didactic, and your whole agenda is to censor anyone who would dare know more than you and unveil your heresy and false beliefs as doctrine from mere "opinion" rather than exegesis and hermeneutics.

You don't get to determine who can and can't be on a forum, just because you've wasted your life pursuing your false opinions over doctrinal truth. You have the option of scrolling past anything anyone says. But you feel you're the Overlord who gets to restrict others or demean them just because of your own inferiority and insecurity presenting itself as the pride it is.

and faith,

You don't even know what pistis (faith) IS.

not to be spoken to like a student listening to his teacher/Professor expound on his/her area of expertise.

But you sure want to speak to everyone like they're a student listening to YOU as an authority. Nobody on TOL is more extreme than you in this regard.

Simply put, it's a forum not a school class environment for people like you to show off their educational background.

It isn't a theological educational background. My Bachelor degrees are all in music. My Master's Degree is as a Physician's Assistant. All my theology comes from personal study as directed by the Holy Spirit. And my upcoming Doctral Degree will speak for itself as led by the Spirit according to the Word.

I can understand why you feel so inadequate, having squandered your entire life wallowing in many areas of untruth. But you don't get to police anyone else when you're barely able to put together a vague attempt at covering up your own ignorance with arrogance and constant ad hominem.

You're always compensating for what's missing in you, so don't blame me for your shortcomings and lack in having fiddled your life away in self-importance and spiritual immaturity according to gross theological error.

Go bully some kids at an elementary school or something. Your geriatric antics in attempting to oust me from the forum are sad and pathetic, revealing a pitiful old man who frittered his life away on posturing to present opinions in a forum and try to lower the standard for truth to competing opinions.

Scroll past if you don't like it. Or put me on ignore. Better yet, take heed to the truth and put aside your pretense that you know something.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Obviously you do not know what biblical exegesis is . . .

Obviously.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Why is 'Who determines who will be hearing' thus?

Because "determining" is volition/intention as the will in action as a verb. You just referred to hearing (the noun) as hearing (the verb), presuming hearing is an action that accomplishes something. That's the quandry you're in. That's why you can't understand. Because of English construction, your heart and mind is patterned to process such nouns as verbs. You can't get away from it. It's your fundamental epistemological default.

You keep processing nouns as verbs, insisting man can effect his own salvation; but then denying that it's a work. Faith (belief) is not a work; but believing (faith-ing) IS a work. By saying that any man believes and is saved, it means that man has accomplished his own salvation.

Faith is a noun. It isn't doing. One must have faith TO do anything as believing. That faith comes from hearing, which is also a noun. It's not the action of hearing. Hearing doesn't save. Any action associated with, or subsequent to, hearing doesn't save.

The thing heard and the thing believed saves. That's the Rhema of God, and it's by God's grace and the faith that He gives.

You certainly don't consider man able to hear.

The verb again. This is the hugest obstacle for Modernism-sculpted English thinkers/speakers. You can't even think or speak about the noun. It's always the verb. And that's because you presume man can save himself by believing. The belief/faith that comes out of the thing heard is the Word (Rhema) of God flowing forth.

Rhema is Rheo- and -ma. Rheo- is both to flow and to speak; and -ma is the Greek suffix that always represents "the result of". Rhema is the resulting flowing of speaking as a noun. And it's anarthrous, not articular.

It takes a bit to understand that, and one has to be willing instead of clinging to a presupposed disposition by one's own conceptualization in English. Englishizers have NO grid whatsoever for Greek anarthrous nouns, and instead have something ELSE in their place. It's a double whammy.

Who else. then, made it happen?

Again looking for a verb. The anarthrous Rhema refers to latent qualitative functionality that is NOT a verb, but is activity.

For instance, a table that is holding up several items is simply exhibiting its anarthrous qualities as a noun by "doing" that. It's an activity related to the nature and design of its "tableness". A table is never "tabling" to hold up a lamp or book or candles or whatever. It's a noun. But there is a latent functional activity for that table that includes its designed purpose.

God's Word, hearing, and faith (and ALL Greek nouns) each have that anarthrous form. English can only use adjectives and endless employment of semantics to provide some translational equivalent, because this is a structural inequity between donor and receptor languages.

The faith (noun) that flows forth from God has the latent functionality within itself. Faith "does" it, but it's not a "doing" as a verb.

But the righteousness that is by faith says: “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’ ” (that is, to bring Christ down) “or ‘Who will descend into the deep?’ ” (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead). But what does it say? “The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart,” that is, the message concerning faith that we proclaim: If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

"And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself."

Go back and read what I've delineated if you really want to understand. Calvinists need to do so, too.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Obviously you can't seem to make the distinction between redemption and salvation. . . I don't wonder at that.

Says the anti-Christian heretical schismatic who promotes another Jesus...

 

[God's Truth]

The forgiving and saving grace of God comes to sinners unconditionally through faith; not by works.

Repentance is not required to be forgiven (justified) by God; rather repentance is evidence the sinner has been saved by God's power and grace, through gifted faith, alone.

All empirical and scriptural knowledge, denies any hope of universal forgiveness (atonement). Such is simply wishful thinking, that only perverts the Truth.

Nick's earlier thread OP includes the quote of Romans 5:18 to suggest that the death of Jesus Christ universally paid for "all" sins, but Romans 5:19 quantifies Paul's gospel message as pertaining only to "many."

All have a chance to be saved, for Jesus is the Savior of the WHOLE WORLD.

1 John 2:2 He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

Jesus tells us what we have to do to be saved.

This grace is conditional.

We have to obey to get saved, and we have to obey to stay saved.

Obeying Jesus is why he chooses to save those he saves.

Obeying Jesus is how we are blessed.

Obeying Jesus is how we become his family.

Obeying Jesus is how we become his friend.

Obeying Jesus is how we eat the flesh of Jesus.

Obeying Jesus is how we get life.

Obeying Jesus is how we live through the Spirit.

Obeying Jesus is how the Spirit lives through us.

Obeying Jesus is how we clothe ourselves in the Lord.

Obeying Jesus is how we please the Lord.

 

[Nang]

All have a chance to be saved, for Jesus is the Savior of the WHOLE WORLD.

I disagree . . nothing is left to "chance" within the purposes and will of God.

1 John 2:2 He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

Jesus tells us what we have to do to be saved.

This grace is conditional.

We have to obey to get saved, and we have to obey to stay saved.

Obeying Jesus is why he chooses to save those he saves.

Obeying Jesus is how we are blessed.

Obeying Jesus is how we become his family.

Obeying Jesus is how we become his friend.

Obeying Jesus is how we eat the flesh of Jesus.

Obeying Jesus is how we get life.

Obeying Jesus is how we live through the Spirit.

Obeying Jesus is how the Spirit lives through us.

Obeying Jesus is how we clothe ourselves in the Lord.

Obeying Jesus is how we please the Lord.

The above is a delineation of the moral demands of the old Covenant of Works, by which no soul has ever found life, for no corrupted human being is capable of perfect obedience, and all of us by nature, fail to perform this covenant.

It is only by being brought into the Covenant of Grace by the grace of God, and the perfect obedience of Jesus Christ alone, that any soul finds everlasting life.

 

[Cross Reference]

I disagree . . nothing is left to "chance" within the purposes and will of God.



The above is a delineation of the moral demands of the old Covenant of Works, by which no soul has ever found life, for no corrupted human being is capable of perfect obedience, and all of us by nature, fail to perform this covenant.

It is only by being brought into the Covenant of Grace by the grace of God, and the perfect obedience of Jesus Christ alone, that any soul finds everlasting life.

C'mon, Nang. Explain how you know you are saved anymore than anyone else who claims to be but is not of your religious persuasion?

 

[Cross Reference]

A sorrow for sins comes first. That drives the sinner to God for forgiveness.

"And so John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness, preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins" (Mark 1:4).

For which repentance brings forgiveness else what is the result of that one who prsumptuously believes he has been forgiven only to return to "his vomit"? 2. Why would he do that if he also claims to be born again?