Trying to make sense of the Five "Solas" of Salvation

solodeogloria

Good afternoon!

This is my last post today.

Arkady wrote: »

I have but you continually revert to the strawman of pretending your arguing against works alone instead of Faith combined with doing the will of God, and then jump to claiming that faith alone doesn't mean faith alone when your position becomes contradictory and untenable. Nick left when his contradictions were pointed out and he ran out of ad hominems and still hasn't replied to the questions he was asked.

I think you've misunderstood me. The Bible is clear that our good works come from God so we cannot boast in them. Faith + works is equally problematic to works based salvation. Why? It minimises the cross of Christ.

Arkady wrote: »

And yet your left reverting to "what Luther wrote" and continually having to refer to him and what he said instead of scripture. So much for sola scriptura.

Luther's commentaries about Scripture are still talking about Scripture. I've explained about how Protestants understand sermons and commentaries. It isn't my fault if you don't want to listen to me.

Arkady wrote: »

It's nothing to do with me, its about discussing how the five solas are clearly self contradictory, it is interesting that both Nick and yourself both continually tried to revert to making it about the poster instead of the posts when your contradictory claims are pointed out.

When you imply that I hate you it is about you and it is personal. I'm called to love you and others on this forum and that's what I aim to do.

Can you please answer my question now?

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

Arkady

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

This is my last post today.

I think you've misunderstood me. The Bible is clear that our good works come from God so we cannot boast in them. Faith + works is equally problematic to works based salvation. Why? It minimises the cross of Christ.

Without trying to dodge it yet again, explain exactly how faith and doing the will of God minimises the cross of Christ ?

solodeogloria wrote: »

Luther's commentaries about Scripture are still talking about Scripture. I've explained about how Protestants understand sermons and commentaries. It isn't my fault if you don't want to listen to me.

You're the one claiming sola scriptura while having to continually revert to "what Luther wrote". The more you insist on this contradictory position, the more it helps underline the contradiction.

solodeogloria wrote: »

When you imply that I hate you it is about you and it is personal. I'm called to love you and others on this forum and that's what I aim to do.

Again you attempt to divert to making about the poster when the contradictions of your claims are pointed out, i.e. continually pretending that other denominations position is "works alone", instead of faith and doing the will of God.

solodeogloria wrote: »

Can you please answer my question now?

Clearly state any non-strawmen questions that have not been answered.

The only questions I recall you asking so far, are not questions about faith combined with doing the will of God, but are repeated strawmen ones about how can people be saved by works alone - When no denomination claims they can. When this is repeatedly pointed out to you, and you're asked to prove that any denomination claims this, you always fail to.

antiskeptic

Arkady wrote: »

Written by who ? The new testament places great emphasis on actually doing the will of God.

The Bible says a lot of things and we could spend the rest of our days pitting verse against verse without getting very far. Rather than go that route I thought to suggest the basic working and if your objections were met then you might approach the Bible from that angle and confirm that it fit what I was saying

And why if his sola fide leads will lead to guaranteed salvation as it claims ?

For the reasons outlined a couple of times to you already. The Holy Spirit taking up residence. There is ample NT reference to that notion.

Arkady

antiskeptic wrote: »

The Bible says a lot of things and we could spend the rest of our days pitting verse against verse without getting very far. Rather than go that route I thought to suggest the basic working and if your objections were met then you might approach the Bible from that angle and confirm that it fit what I was saying

For the reasons outlined a couple of times to you already. The Holy Spirit taking up residence. There is ample NT reference to that notion.

Appreciate that, the problem is the 16th century Western European Protestant political invention of salvation only from faith alone and excluding every thing else, from doing God's will, to grace, to Christ, to the Holy Spirit just isn't there.

antiskeptic

Arkady wrote: »

Appreciate that, the problem is the 16th century Western European Protestant political invention of salvation only from faith alone and excluding every thing else, from doing God's will, to grace, to Christ, to the Holy Spirit just isn't there.

Salvation by faith alone has context, doing God's will has a context, grace has a context, the Holy Spirit as a context. They are all there in the Bible in context. We just disagree on the context.

I suggested an approach (a reverse engineering of sorts). You don't want to go there (for good reason, it now appears). Fair enough.

Have at it with the usual alternative: "my verse plucked from context vs. your verse plucked from context" - with whomsoever you please. You'll be at it from here to eternity without resolution.

Arkady

antiskeptic wrote: »

Salvation by faith alone has context, doing God's will has a context, grace has a context, the Holy Spirit as a context. They are all there in the Bible in context. We just disagree on the context.

I suggested an approach (a reverse engineering of sorts). You don't want to go there (for good reason, it now appears). Fair enough.

Have at it with the usual alternative: "my verse plucked from context vs. your verse plucked from context" - with whomsoever you please. You'll be at it from here to eternity without resolution.

Thanks for the refreshingly honest answers anti, and that's a good example of where sola scriptura breaks down again, resulting in countless interpretations and denominations and heresies over the centuries. And we haven't even got into trying to find some logic in the five points of TULIP yet . . . but that's for another thread.

solodeogloria

Good morning all!

Arkady wrote: »

Clearly state any non-strawmen questions that have not been answered.

The only questions I recall you asking so far, are not questions about faith combined with doing the will of God, but are repeated strawmen ones about how can people be saved by works alone - When no denomination claims they can. When this is repeatedly pointed out to you, and you're asked to prove that any denomination claims this, you always fail to.

This is the question:

Edit: the key question we need to ask is this. Where anywhere in the New Testament does it suggest that works contribute to our salvation?

It isn't a straw man as you have argued that works contribute to our salvation. I understand that you mean this partially but this still weakens the cross and it's sufficiency for us. I'm arguing that our works contribute to our sanctification which is different.

The only invention is that grace is achieved by participating in the sacraments. Luther simply taught the Apostolic Gospel. It was the Papacy who argued for grace to be attained by works by our participation and the church being Lord over the Bible. Please show me how grace attained through participation in the sacraments is Biblical.

I make no apologies for being Reformed.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus,
solodeogloria

antiskeptic

Arkady wrote: »

Thanks for the refreshingly honest answers anti, and that's a good example of where sola scriptura breaks down again

A point I was in agreement with you over.

antiskeptic wrote:

This one (sold scriptura) is problematic:

It wasn't so much 'refreshing honesty' involved as it was as a theology which doesn't see how sola scriptura can be upheld. And does see how the others can be upheld in a particular context.

Sola this that and the other are very global terms which can be arranged in any number of ways to form a theology. Some arrangements run into immediate difficulty (such as Calvinisms U), others perhaps not. My interest is in having a theology that makes the most sense to me. Not that this doesn't mean there are no questions, but that some of the massive obstacles get dealt with.

solodeogloria

Good morning all!

Arkady wrote: »

Thanks for the refreshingly honest answers anti, and that's a good example of where sola scriptura breaks down again, resulting in countless interpretations and denominations and heresies over the centuries. And we haven't even got into trying to find some logic in the five points of TULIP yet . . . but that's for another thread.

I'd be up for walking through TULIP also. I personally am not sure if I subscribe to Limited Atonement but I can see Biblical arguments for it. The rest seem to be Biblically true.

I have sympathy with the Swiss memorial view of the Lord's Supper also. It wouldn't be fair to only celebrate the work of the German Reformation in restoring the Apostolic Gospel.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

Arkady

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning all!



This is the question:


It isn't a straw man as you have argued that works contribute to our salvation. I understand that you mean this partially but this still weakens the cross and it's sufficiency for us. I'm arguing that our works contribute to our sanctification which is different.

The only invention is that grace is achieved by participating in the sacraments. Luther simply taught the Apostolic Gospel. It was the Papacy who argued for grace to be attained by works by our participation and the church being Lord over the Bible. Please show me how grace attained through participation in the sacraments is Biblical.

I make no apologies for being Reformed.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus,
solodeogloria

You've tried the same strawman yet again. It's not works and never has been and no denomination claims it is, nor have I, so it's pointless to keep pretending and misrepresenting the position in the style of some second rate cheesy american televangelist. It's not going to fool anyone with even a passing understanding of other denominations. It's faith and works among many other things including the Trinity and God's grace. Again I asked you before : Find a mainstream denomination that claims its works alone, and post proof that they do.

alma73

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning all!



This is the question:


It isn't a straw man as you have argued that works contribute to our salvation. I understand that you mean this partially but this still weakens the cross and it's sufficiency for us. I'm arguing that our works contribute to our sanctification which is different.

The only invention is that grace is achieved by participating in the sacraments. Luther simply taught the Apostolic Gospel. It was the Papacy who argued for grace to be attained by works by our participation and the church being Lord over the Bible. Please show me how grace attained through participation in the sacraments is Biblical.

I make no apologies for being Reformed.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus,
solodeogloria

Where does Christ say that not doing his works will save us? Our works not only contribute to our sanctification, without doing the work that Christ wills us to do we can't be saved.

We all believe we can't be saved without Faith in Christ. However having that faith that Christ died for us does not save us alone. The Devil believes Christ died for our sins, that does not make him saved.

solodeogloria

alma73 wrote: »

Where does Christ say that not doing his works will save us? Our works not only contribute to our sanctification, without doing the work that Christ wills us to do we can't be saved.

We all believe we can't be saved without Faith in Christ. However having that faith that Christ died for us does not save us alone. The Devil believes Christ died for our sins, that does not make him saved.

Good evening all!

I would like you to answer the question I asked. The New Testament is clear that we are saved by grace and not by works and I've quoted lots from the Bible and I have answered every question you have asked.

I would now appreciate if someone could just please answer the question. It's not fair that I answered all your questions and you've ignored mine.

Much thanks in the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

solodeogloria

Arkady wrote: »

You've tried the same strawman yet again. It's not works and never has been and no denomination claims it is, nor have I, so it's pointless to keep pretending and misrepresenting the position in the style of some second rate cheesy american televangelist. It's not going to fool anyone with even a passing understanding of other denominations. It's faith and works among many other things including the Trinity and God's grace. Again I asked you before : Find a mainstream denomination that claims its works alone, and post proof that they do.

Please just answer my question. You don't believe it's works alone but you do believe it is Jesus + works. I get that. Please answer my question because it isn't a straw man.

Arkady

solodeogloria wrote: »

Please just answer my question. You don't believe it's works alone but you do believe it is Jesus + works. I get that. Please answer my question because it isn't a straw man.

No I don't. You don't even know what I believe do you ? And how could you, because I'm not the one making the claims . . the five solas are the topic. So your repeated straw man questions pretending something I don't believe, and what no mainstream Christian denomination believes, are a tired old dishonest attempt to drag the thread away from examination of the massive logical holes in the five solas. But the thing is you're too late, they've been examined here and have failed. I started the thread on the off chance there might have been some logic hidden in there somewhere, but there's nothing, I mean really nothing, that's what's most surprising, not even a sliver after five pages, just desperate attempts at diversions. It's run it's course, and I just post because I want to see you straw man yourself to pieces now.

Tell you what, I'll answer it when you tell me when you stopped beating your wife ? Same style question.

Oh and you demand your straw man questions are answered, without ever answering what I've repeatedly asked you for since the beginning of the thread. Find any mainstream denomination that claims salvation is by works (as you claim others do), and post proof that they claim this. You won't because you can't.

Arkady

@ antiskeptic, can you recommend better forums for discussing this, something with a bit of substance that doesn't try to insult people's intelligence with cut and paste from chick pamphlets / american televangelism / paisleyism ?

alma73

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening all!

I would like you to answer the question I asked. The New Testament is clear that we are saved by grace and not by works and I've quoted lots from the Bible and I have answered every question you have asked.

I would now appreciate if someone could just please answer the question. It's not fair that I answered all your questions and you've ignored mine.

Much thanks in the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

Faith involves an ascent to Gods truth, obedience to God,

it must be working in love (Galatians 5:6).

Paul speaks of faith as a life-long process, never as a one-time experience (Philippians 2:12)

Keeping the faith is a work in progress, because you can loose it. Grace and works or working to keep the faith are inseparable and very much biblical (not just a Catholic tradition). Certainly if Christ had not died everything would be in vain, without him there is no salvation no matter how much we work. But man was created free, and with our Free will we elect Christ. This is an act, with out will we elect Christ, we believe in him.

You can't separate faith and action. Our works (and by work that could simply be praying or living a life like Christ) give testimony to our Faith and keep us close to Christ.

antiskeptic

Arkady wrote: »

@ antiskeptic, can you recommend better forums for discussing this, something with a bit of substance that doesn't try to insult people's intelligence with cut and paste from chick pamphlets / american televangelism / paisleyism ?

CARM.org?

http://forums.carm.org/vbb/forum.php

There'll be mud slinging there too - indeed, I find Christian forums involve more vitriol that even the motorcycling forum I once frequented with my somewhat post-born again zealous evangelizing.

But there's folk who know their stuff and you can engage in as much detail as you like. You'd want to know your Bible though as it'll get pretty much verse for verse, exegisis vs eisegisis, "let's look at the Greek to understand the precise nuances". You'll end up disappearing up your back side.

Try to pick out discussions which (as I tended to do) which revolve around plain English rather than stacks of scripture supposed to prove a point .. and build on those with as many agreed principles (e.g. Love a prime motivator, Justice a prime motivator, Wrath as prime motivator) as possible, so to micro-progress with others who also wanted to progress.

Avoid Calvinist vs. Arminian discussions - they were just killing fields for the human spirit

antiskeptic

Arkady wrote: »

Find any mainstream denomination that claims salvation is by works (as you claim others do), and post proof that they claim this. You won't because you can't.

What's in a word?

It strikes me that any denomination which includes our work as a component in our salvation is distinctly different than a denomination which says by faith alone. So much so that the former can be be said to be a 'salvation by works' denomination. Let me explain.

Salvation by faith supposes the contribution to a persons salvation to stem from God alone. The person makes no positive contribution, even the faith is supplied by God. All the glory goes to God, naturally.

Salvation by faith and works supposes God contributing a portion (opening the path to heaven for the person to work their way along, encouraging the person to follow that path, giving refreshment along the way). Much like a marathon: everything bar the actual work is laid on for the runner.

But you don't give credit to the marathon organizers for holding the marathon, or providing refreshment, etc. These are incidental to the runners efforts. It's to the runner the glory goes.

Indeed, any expression of faith exhibited by the person, that isn't powered by God is itself a work: a work of the will in getting down to prayer so as to tap into the faith that God will provide, the effort in believing in God when the temptation is, in times of trial, towards disbelief.

The marathon man would doubtlessly be thankful to the organizers for rendering his glory possible in provision of the track, refreshments and status that comes on winning. But the glory is his, and his alone. It was his work (and faith-work) which kept him in the race and got him over the line.

At least, that's my view of it.

solodeogloria

Arkady wrote: »

You've tried the same strawman yet again. It's not works and never has been and no denomination claims it is, nor have I, so it's pointless to keep pretending and misrepresenting the position in the style of some second rate cheesy american televangelist. It's not going to fool anyone with even a passing understanding of other denominations. It's faith and works among many other things including the Trinity and God's grace. Again I asked you before : Find a mainstream denomination that claims its works alone, and post proof that they do.

Good morning.

Your position seems to be that works contribute to salvation from this post. If this is true my question is still applicable. If not please clarify. I've never said you believe it is works alone but from this post it's clear you believe works contribute to salvation. In which case I'd like for you to answer my question please.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

solodeogloria

Good morning all!

alma73 wrote: »

Faith involves an ascent to Gods truth, obedience to God,

it must be working in love (Galatians 5:6).

Paul speaks of faith as a life-long process, never as a one-time experience (Philippians 2:12)

Keeping the faith is a work in progress, because you can loose it. Grace and works or working to keep the faith are inseparable and very much biblical (not just a Catholic tradition). Certainly if Christ had not died everything would be in vain, without him there is no salvation no matter how much we work. But man was created free, and with our Free will we elect Christ. This is an act, with out will we elect Christ, we believe in him.

You can't separate faith and action. Our works (and by work that could simply be praying or living a life like Christ) give testimony to our Faith and keep us close to Christ.

On Galatians - context is king. I've quoted extensively from it on this thread. Paul says that justification by works nullifies the cross in Galatians 2:21. In fact objection to works based salvation is the entire thrust of the letter. In chapter 5 where you quoted from Paul is discussing how we should use the freedom we already have through Jesus. Not that works contribute to salvation which he has been arguing throughout the letter. If you read verses 2 to 6 in the chapter you quoted from you'll see that Paul is contrasting faith working through love to law obedience which causes people to fall away from grace. Faith working through love is what we should be aiming for for love and good works are the fruit of faith but in Galatians Paul couldn't be clearer. They don't save anyone. Paul argues that at length. In the rest of the chapter Paul discusses how we should use the freedom we have already in Christ not for license to sin but for God's glory. I discussed this concept earlier in the thread. Is it any wonder at all that Galatians and Romans were the lighter fluid for the Reformation?

On Philippians every Protestant would agree that faith is a race that involves persevering to the last day. This doesn't mean that we are saved by works or that work contributes to our salvation.

There's a lot of value in simply reading what the Bible says carefully asking for the Spirit to guide and carefully interpreting it's words and being soft hearted enough to listen.

The Gospel is the power of God unto salvation for those who believe. That's all . Nothing in my hands I bring.

Despite what the Council of Trent said I don't have a vain confidence. Jesus did it all. See the nails. See the blood. See the cross. See the empty tomb. Why isn't this enough?

Much thanks in the secure rescue of Jesus,
solodeogloria

Arkady

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning.

Your position seems to be that works contribute to salvation from this post. If this is true my question is still applicable. If not please clarify. I've never said you believe it is works alone but from this post it's clear you believe works contribute to salvation. In which case I'd like for you to answer my question please.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

What I mean by works is doing God's will, what do you mean by "works" ?

And while you're at it show us where God commanded people to have faith alone, and that doing his will is not required and can be ignored.

Tell us about how the rich man, with sincere faith in God, chooses to live out his life sitting under a shady palm will achieve salvation without doing anything.

antiskeptic

Arkady wrote: »

And while you're at it show us where God commanded people to have faith alone, and that doing his will is not required and can be ignored.

Perhaps the shoe can be placed on the other foot where you show where doing his will is required in the context of it being necessary for salvation?

Tell us about how the rich man, with sincere faith in God, chooses to live out his life sitting under a shady palm will achieve salvation without doing anything.

How about an acronym: RMSP (rich man shady palm)

solodeogloria

Good evening.

Arkady wrote: »

What I mean by works is doing God's will, what do you mean by "works" ?

And while you're at it show us where God commanded people to have faith alone, and that doing his will is not required and can be ignored.

Tell us about how the rich man, with sincere faith in God, chooses to live out his life sitting under a shady palm will achieve salvation without doing anything.

When Paul speaks about works in Romans chapter 4 he seems to be referring to good deeds. He looks to Abraham in Genesis 15:7 and concludes that Abraham couldn't have been saved by his works, or by circumcision because he received righteousness as a gift. In chapter 1 he has stated definitively that the default state of man is that God's wrath is revealed against Him, chapters 2 and 3 establish that there is no other get out clause for God's judgement without Christ's saving death and Paul uses Abraham as an example in chapter 4.

Works don't contribute (even in part) to our salvation. If the faith that we have is genuine we will love and serve others. However, we don't do these things to be saved, but because we are saved already in Christ Jesus.

It seems that you don't distinguish salvation from sanctification. The Bible does. Paul discusses both the concept of justification and sanctification in Romans. One is how we are made right with God through Jesus' death and resurrection. The other is how we live for Him as a result of that salvation.

So in answer to your shady palm tree situation. If the man in question has been truly transformed by Jesus, He will live for Him. But He is already saved by the cross.

The idea that one doesn't do anything after being saved is a concept called antinomianism (or as Dietrich Bonhoeffer calls it in his Cost of Discipleship - cheap grace) and it is rejected by the vast majority of Protestants myself included.

Paul firmly rebukes it in Galatians 5 which I have already quoted from in this thread if you will go back and read my posts.

This is a discussion that needs to be had with an open Bible. I disagree with the assessment that we can have a constructive conversation about the Gospel without discussing the text of the Bible. The Bible (irrespective of whether or not people accept sola scriptura) is the primary source we have to deal with.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ and in His certain rescue plan,
solodeogloria

Arkady

antiskeptic wrote: »

Perhaps the shoe can be placed on the other foot where you show where doing his will is required in the context of it being necessary for salvation?

This thread is about trying to find some logic in the five solas. The whole of scripture is littered with God asking man to do his will. So how does one get saved without doing his will ? How would Abraham have been saved if he said "God my faith is huge, but since doing your will is not required for salvation, I'll just stay at home,. I'm saved you know. Luther told me so."

Or how about Noah "cheers God, I have faith in you, but i'm not into building arks, I'll just make some more wine, I'm saved anyway"

Or how about Peter "cheers Jesus, I have faith in you and I'm saved, but as doing your will is not required, I'm off to do some fishing, you head off and do some preaching there if you want."

antiskeptic wrote: »

How about an acronym: RMSP (rich man shady palm)

Sure. Or you could even have a real go at the question.

solodeogloria

Arkady wrote: »

Sure. Or you could even have a real go at the question this time.

Or you could answer mine?

Arkady

solodeogloria wrote: »

Or you could answer mine?

God commands throughout scripture to do his will.
And while you're at it you could answer mine, and the others you have failed to.

Arkady

solodeogloria wrote: »

If the faith that we have is genuine we will love and serve others.

So if that's the case why does God command us to ? No need to command anyone if they have faith alone, and no need to do anything if you have faith alone. It's all taken care of accoring to the logic of only faith alone and nothing else.

solodeogloria

Arkady wrote: »

God commands throughout scripture to do his will.
And while you're at it you could answer mine, and the others you have failed to.

Good evening.

I've answered your questions at length and to the best of my ability. You've not even attempted to answer mine. As for God's commandments, they are good and just. The problem is that we have all sinned and we need a Saviour. That's at the heart of the gospel. We need God's rescue and God's help in order to follow God rightfully. That's what He offers us in His Son.

If we weren't saved by grace we'd all deserve hell. Quite honestly.

I won't reply further until you honestly respond to my question.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

Arkady

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening.

I've answered your questions at length and to the best of my ability. You've not even attempted to answer mine. As for God's commandments, they are good and just. The problem is that we have all sinned and we need a Saviour. That's at the heart of the gospel. We need God's rescue and God's help in order to follow God rightfully. That's what He offers us in His Son.

If we weren't saved by grace we'd all deserve hell. Quite honestly.

I won't reply further until you honestly respond to my question.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

Your question has been answered, and here it is again . . . one of the components required for salvation is to do God's will, it's evident throughout scripture. But the snag for you, as you well know, is that Sola Fide along with (oxymoron that it is) all the other solas that claim to be alones is the actual thread topic. That is what is actually being questioned here - the topic. No wonder you're always so desperate to avoid any questions on the solas, and the following questions, just for starters, about your illogical claim of "faith alone".

So how does one get saved without doing God's will ?

How would Abraham have been saved if he said "God my faith is huge, but since doing your will is not required for salvation, I'll just stay at home. I'm saved you know. Luther told me so, he's not into doing God's will, and he doesn't have to." ?

Or how about Noah "cheers God, I have faith in you, but i'm not into building arks, I'll just make some more wine and have snooze, sure I'm saved by my faith alone anyway" ?

Or how about Peter "Cheers Jesus, I have faith in you and I'm saved by faith alone, and as doing your will is not required for salvation, I'm off to do some fishing in my new boat, you head off with the other lads and do some preaching there if you want." ?

In each of those examples, one by one, tell us how they could have been saved by having faith alone and not doing God's will and commandments ?

antiskeptic

Arkady wrote: »

Sure. Or you could even have a real go at the question.

I had a go at the question. You just didn't like (or attempt to deal with) the answer: When saved > Spirit takes up residence > motivation to do God's will follows > doing God's will follows. If resisting the Spirit's urging, then discipline follows.

I've yet to see you address that other than by insisting, it appears, that doing God's will is required for salvation. But that's not how you dismantle an argument - by insisting something else is the case. You pick out the flaw in the argument.

In short, the man can sit under a tree if he likes, just like my 4 and a half year old can threaten to wreck his room if I don't let him out. Knock yourself out both of you! All that happens is that consequences will follow: from God to the rich man, to my son from me.



I've not seen one reason given by you why salvation should be one of those consequences. So he asks/impores/threatens/urges us to do his will? Why suppose salvation involved? Where the connection?

You seem to presuming a position without any argument whatsoever and demanding that others dismantle it. How can a person dismantle an argument that hasn't be erected yet??

Arkady

antiskeptic wrote: »

I had a go at the question. You just didn't like (or attempt to deal with) the answer: When saved > Spirit takes up residence > motivation to do God's will follows > doing God's will follows. If resisting the Spirit's urging, then discipline follows.

So it's faith and spirit, not faith alone at all. The spirit enters, and doing God's will is not required, just hypnotism and the loss of free will. Zapped like zombies.

antiskeptic wrote: »

I've yet to see you address that other than by insisting, it appears, that doing God's will is required for salvation. But that's not how you dismantle an argument - by insisting something else is the case. You pick out the flaw in the argument.

Find me someone in scripture that had faith alone and was not required to do God's will ?

antiskeptic wrote: »

In short, the man can sit under a tree if he likes, just like my 4 and a half year old can threaten to wreck his room if I don't let him out. Knock yourself out both of you! All that happens is that consequences will follow: from God to the rich man, to my son from me.

But why threaten him to do God's will, faith alone, which he has, is all that's required apparently.

antiskeptic wrote: »

I've not seen one reason given by you why salvation should be one of those consequences. So he asks/impores/threatens/urges us to do his will? Why suppose salvation involved? Where the connection?

Ah it's faith alone, but do this or else . . so much for faith alone.

antiskeptic

Arkady wrote: »

So it's faith and spirit, not faith alone at all. The spirit enters, and doing God's will is not required, just hypnotism and the loss of free will. Zapped like zombies.

Salvation by faith opens the door to a whole raft of changes. Akin to the Normandy landings. The Holy Spirit taking residence up is but one of those things. The battle motif is hardly a scriptural secret. The changes don't produce the salvation. The salvation results in the changes. Not faith + spirit= salvation, thus.

-

You're inability/unwillingness to read what's presented you - and reply to it rigorously, is beginning to concern me. I clearly stated that a person can resist the urging of the Spirit and sit on their bums - for which consequences would follow.

Which part of resisting the Spirit (which implies a will to resist) do you not comprehend?


Arkady

You're displaying all the signs of Forum Fatigue. The attempt to deal with all comers as rapidly as they respond to you, means the quality of your responses degrades. Just a printing too much money too quickly reduces the purchasing power of a currency

I'd suggest, rather than head to CARM (where you would be chopped to pieces), you trim your activity back, pick a poster you can engage with, take your time and start producing some quality results.

Over und out

solodeogloria

Arkady wrote: »

Your question has been answered, and here it is again . . . one of the components required for salvation is to do God's will, it's evident throughout scripture. But the snag for you, as you well know, is that Sola Fide along with (oxymoron that it is) all the other solas that claim to be alones is the actual thread topic. That is what is actually being questioned here - the topic. No wonder you're always so desperate to avoid any questions on the solas, and the following questions, just for starters, about your illogical claim of "faith alone".

So how does one get saved without doing God's will ?

How would Abraham have been saved if he said "God my faith is huge, but since doing your will is not required for salvation, I'll just stay at home. I'm saved you know. Luther told me so, he's not into doing God's will, and he doesn't have to." ?

Or how about Noah "cheers God, I have faith in you, but i'm not into building arks, I'll just make some more wine and have snooze, sure I'm saved by my faith alone anyway" ?

Or how about Peter "Cheers Jesus, I have faith in you and I'm saved by faith alone, and as doing your will is not required for salvation, I'm off to do some fishing in my new boat, you head off with the other lads and do some preaching there if you want." ?

In each of those examples, one by one, tell us how they could have been saved by having faith alone and not doing God's will and commandments ?

Good morning all,

My point is that we're saved through faith in Christ's sufficient death alone. We do what God asks because we love Him and because He enables us to do so by transforming our hearts and minds by the Spirit.

On Abraham. Noah and Peter let's quote the passages. On Abraham we see he was reckoned righteous by faith in Genesis 15.

I'll give you another chance to answer my question. We need to get onto tangible Biblical turf now. My question asked about the New Testament and where it says works contribute to salvation. I've quoted lots to undermine that argument in this thread.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

alma73

solodeogloria wrote: »

On Philippians every Protestant would agree that faith is a race that involves persevering to the last day. This doesn't mean that we are saved by works or that work contributes to our salvation.

Ok. Lets get back to fundamentals. We can both agree that we can't be saved without Christ who died on the Cross for our sins. No matter how much we work, without Christ there is no salvation. I presume you agree with this?

Now when a Baptised Christian accepts Christ as his/her Saviour this entails and act. We could not accept he is our saviour and reject Christ or with our Free will we can accept Christ as our saviour. This act of our own free will is essential for our salvation, a Salvation that Christ has paid for, a Salvation that is not possible without Christ, but is also not possible without our act, without an action, a work on our part. (I presume Protestants believe Humans were created with free will).

Once you have accepted Christ as your Saviour and live in his grace, he will demand that you follow the Gospel? Correct? Nowhere in the Gospel does he say a Rich man who believes in him and sits under a palm tree will be saved.. (I think he said the opposite).

Yes, no matter how much good works we do won't make us more saved. Only Christ can save us. However its clear from Christ same Gospel that not doing his commands, by not acting we are not following him, we are not saved.

I think we are both looking at the same Object from different sides. Its like looking at a cylinder and depending where you look from it could be a circle, while others see a cylinder.

The act of electing Christ every day and following him every day with your free will is essential for salvation. Its not a once off action, its constant.

What Catholics believe is very much biblical. Its what Christ taught.

solodeogloria

Good evening all!

alma73 wrote: »

Ok. Lets get back to fundamentals. We can both agree that we can't be saved without Christ who died on the Cross for our sins. No matter how much we work, without Christ there is no salvation. I presume you agree with this?

Yes, I agree with this. Except I would strengthen it. We are saved by Christ alone.

alma73 wrote: »

Now when a Baptised Christian accepts Christ as his/her Saviour this entails and act. We could not accept he is our saviour and reject Christ or with our Free will we can accept Christ as our saviour. This act of our own free will is essential for our salvation, a Salvation that Christ has paid for, a Salvation that is not possible without Christ, but is also not possible without our act, without an action, a work on our part. (I presume Protestants believe Humans were created with free will).

Firstly - I believe that baptism is a response to our salvation not a requirement for it. Baptism is a sacrament, an outside sign of an inward spiritual motion.

Secondly - I believe that God predestines us to salvation. I also believe that we are responsible for what we do. This is Biblical and Paul in Romans in particular spends a lot of time on it (Romans 9-11 and Ephesians 1), Jesus clearly also held to it. You can see this extensively in John's gospel for example. I believe in predestination and human responsibility.

alma73 wrote: »

Once you have accepted Christ as your Saviour and live in his grace, he will demand that you follow the Gospel? Correct? Nowhere in the Gospel does he say a Rich man who believes in him and sits under a palm tree will be saved.. (I think he said the opposite).

You're mixing up two things here. We are saved by Christ alone. We are called to live for Him in light of that salvation. Faith without works is dead, but only because works are the natural fruit of faith. Works do not save. Ephesians 2:8-10 is very clear that even our good works are from God. Romans 4 is clear that Abraham's righteousness was a gift by faith.

alma73 wrote: »

Yes, no matter how much good works we do won't make us more saved. Only Christ can save us. However its clear from Christ same Gospel that not doing his commands, by not acting we are not following him, we are not saved.

I don't agree that our works contribute to our salvation at all. That's where we differ.

alma73 wrote: »

The act of electing Christ every day and following him every day with your free will is essential for salvation. Its not a once off action, its constant.

The Gospel is the power of God onto salvation for those who believe. That's it. The Christian who has been transformed by God will live for Him as a result. That is after Jesus' saving death becomes effective for us through faith, not before it.

alma73 wrote: »

What Catholics believe is very much biblical. Its what Christ taught.

The conclusions of the Council of Trent against Martin Luther don't seem to be Biblical. I agree with much of Catholic teaching, but there are areas I honestly find problematic.

I do appreciate the tone that you have struck with me though. I value good discussion.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

alma73

@solodeogloria. Do you beleive we have free will? Do you believe God created us with free will?

Arkady

antiskeptic wrote: »

Salvation by faith opens the door to a whole raft of changes. Akin to the Normandy landings. The Holy Spirit taking residence up is but one of those things.

You're inability/unwillingness to read what's presented you - and reply to it rigorously, is beginning to concern me. I clearly stated that a person can resist the urging of the Spirit and sit on their bums - for which consequences would follow.

Which part of resisting the Spirit (which implies a will to resist) do you not comprehend?

Again everything you've written contradicts faith alone = salvation, not to mention free will.

Every defence of "sola" fide posted on the thread to date reverts to a version of "well what we really mean is faith + something + something else = salvation."

antiskeptic wrote: »

Arkady

You're displaying all the signs of Forum Fatigue. The attempt to deal with all comers as rapidly as they respond to you, means the quality of your responses degrades. Just a printing too much money too quickly reduces the purchasing power of a currency

I'd suggest, rather than head to CARM (where you would be chopped to pieces), you trim your activity back, pick a poster you can engage with, take your time and start producing some quality results.

Over und out

I popped into Carm to have a look, and it's rubbish to put it kindly. It's specialty is sectarian ad hominem arguments and misquotes, and not something I'd waste my time on either. The site is also obsessed with splitting, categorising, and pigeonholing Christians and discussions into as many different denominations and prejudiced assumptions as possible.

I did a thread search for the solas, and sola fide, in the hope that among the dross in there, someone would have presented a quality logically structured argument, with true premises, leading to a sound conclusion, one that is supported by scripture as whole, and supported by Christian belief and practice throughout the centuries. Again, nothing there.

If something of quality appears that (1) complies with the basic rules of logic and (2) reflects what is actually written in scripture as a whole (rather than the usual out of context misquotes, aka a pretext) (3) and isn't junior level straw manning, and is deserving of putting time into it, then I will.

Until then . . .

Arkady

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning all,

My point is that we're saved through faith in Christ's sufficient death alone. We do what God asks because we love Him and because He enables us to do so by transforming our hearts and minds by the Spirit.

On Abraham. Noah and Peter let's quote the passages. On Abraham we see he was reckoned righteous by faith in Genesis 15.

I'll give you another chance to answer my question. We need to get onto tangible Biblical turf now. My question asked about the New Testament and where it says works contribute to salvation. I've quoted lots to undermine that argument in this thread.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

You question was already answered several times, but here it is again, from the old testament to the new, man is required to do the will of God.
The entire book, from cover to cover.

I see you've avoided the questions you were specifically asked to answer yet again. I'm not surprised.

solodeogloria

Arkady wrote: »

You question was already answered several times, but here it is again, from the old testament to the new, man is required to do the will of God.
The entire book, from cover to cover.

I see you've avoided the questions you were specifically asked to answer yet again. I'm not surprised.

Good evening!

Forgive me but I don't see any Bible passage quoted or explained in any of your posts. I've systematically explained using several passages how my position holds together. I've even explained how Romans, Galatians and a lot of Ephesians works in respect to this topic along with bits of John. All say explicitly that our works don't contribute to salvation.

Nick Park and I answered all of your questions at length.

If you aren't interested in discussing please don't.

alma73: I believe in predestination like Augustine did because the Bible clearly teaches it. I also believe in human responsibility. I'm not sure how both work together but neither was Paul in Romans 9 - 11. Predestination is explicitly mentioned in the Bible and can't be ignored.

Much thanks in the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

Arkady

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

Forgive me but I don't see any Bible passage quoted or explained in any of your posts. I've systematically explained using several passages how my position holds together. I've even explained how Romans, Galatians and a lot of Ephesians works in respect to this topic along with bits of John. All say explicitly that our works don't contribute to salvation.

Nick Park and I answered all of your questions at length.

If you aren't interested in discussing please don't.

alma73: I believe in predestination like Augustine did because the Bible clearly teaches it. I also believe in human responsibility. I'm not sure how both work together but neither was Paul in Romans 9 - 11. Predestination is explicitly mentioned in the Bible and can't be ignored.

Much thanks in the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

You question was already answered several times, man is required to do the will of God. See the old testament and the new. You won't find anywhere man is not repeatedly reminded to do the will of God.

" Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. " - No word of faith alone here.

For every out of context verse and misquote you have re cut and pasted, I can cut and paste ten. When you post something of quality, worth refuting, I'll be glad to post chapter and verse.

I see you've avoided the questions you were specifically asked to answer yet again. Again . . . I'm not surprised.

alma73

@solodeogloria, do you believe God created man with free will?

solodeogloria

Good morning all!

alma73 wrote: »

@solodeogloria, do you believe God created man with free will?

I answered this above. The best I can give you is yes and no. God is absolutely sovereign in what happens in this creation. We have free will insofar as we are accountable and responsible for our actions. The Bible is clear that predestination and human responsibility exist side by side. I can't explain anything beyond what is Biblical here.

Good morning Arkady,

I've explained the context of Ephesians, Galatians and Romans on this thread. If you dispute them take me to task. I try to take as much care as possible with this because it is important not to skew the Bible. So if I'm wrong help your brother to see. Use your works for building me up instead of tearing me down (Colossians 4:6). I think you'll claim I've taken verses out of context until I hold a Catholic understanding of these verses.

John 13 indeed says that we should love one another as Christians but it doesn't say that we need to do this in order to be saved. It is referring to the Christian life after we have been saved through His death or as John refers to it throughout the Gospel the 'hour' where Jesus would be glorified. John 14:15 says if we love Him we will keep His commandments. If good works aren't involved then the faith isn't genuine. The fruits of faith are good works but they do not of themselves save.

So the question remains I'm afraid. In future can you provide chapter and verse for what you quote. This is serious and we need to talk it through properly.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ and in His sure rescue,
solodeogloria

antiskeptic

Arkady wrote: »

Again everything you've written contradicts faith alone = salvation, not to mention free will.

Every defence of "sola" fide posted on the thread to date reverts to a version of "well what we really mean is faith + something + something else = salvation."

Salvation by faith AFTER which things happen to saved people (things that don't themselves affect their being saved by that original faith) isn't faith + xyz = salvation. The xyz has no contribution to their having already saved. Could you quote my contradicting this, given you've apparently read everything I've written?

Arkady

solodeogloria wrote: »

I've explained the context of Ephesians, Galatians and Romans on this thread. If you dispute them take me to task. I try to take as much care as possible with this because it is important not to skew the Bible. So if I'm wrong help your brother to see. Use your works for building me up instead of tearing me down (Colossians 4:6).

The whole problem is your lifting short quotes out of a library, making them pretexts, and trying to shoehorn them into a false hypothesis. Scripture has to be read as a whole, and scripture goes to great lengths throughout emphasise the importance of actually doing the will of God. You can selectively cut and paste scripture and interpret to say anything you choose, including there is no God.

solodeogloria wrote: »

I think you'll claim I've taken verses out of context until I hold a Catholic understanding of these verses.

No, unlike yourself, I don't care what denomination you happen to be, or I what denomination I am, it's irrelevant to the subject and it's logic / non logic. I'm interested in the subject for it's own merits (or lack of in the case) and I follow the truth and logic where it leads. Try it sometime, it might clear up your thinking, which seems to be clouded and skewed by your dislike of one particular denomination. Denominations, and you and I, are actually irrelevant to the logical validity, merits and demerits of the subject.

solodeogloria wrote: »

John 13 indeed says that we should love one another as Christians but it doesn't say that we need to do this in order to be saved. It is referring to the Christian life after we have been saved through His death or as John refers to it throughout the Gospel the 'hour' where Jesus would be glorified. John 14:15 says if we love Him we will keep His commandments. If good works aren't involved then the faith isn't genuine. The fruits of faith are good works but they do not of themselves save.

solodeogloria wrote: »

So the question remains I'm afraid. In future can you provide chapter and verse for what you quote.

I could play the cut and paste tennis game all night.
Seriously, why do you not know it well enough ? Scripture is not verses and chapters to be artificially numbered and chopped up into pieces. I don't recall Christ or the apostles citing verses numbers and artificially divided chapter numbers - God gave us scripture without them. There are no chapters and verse numbers in scripture - so much for "sola" scriptura yet again. If you're going to pretend "sola" scriptura at least quote "sola" scriptura.

antiskeptic wrote: »

Salvation by faith AFTER which things happen to saved people (things that don't themselves affect their being saved by that original faith) isn't faith + xyz = salvation. The xyz has no contribution to their having already saved. Could you quote my contradicting this, given you've apparently read everything I've written?

I can't find anything in scripture that defunct the person, their free will, God, God's grace, and doing the will of God from the equation.
No where can I find anyone saved by "faith alone" in scripture, they all had to do the will of God. This conundrum leaves you painting yourself into the corner that anyone who has faith in God, has all their free will permanently removed and they are zapped into being automatons no longer responsible for any action . . . again contrary to everything we read in scripture.

alma73

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning all!

I answered this above. The best I can give you is yes and no. God is absolutely sovereign in what happens in this creation. We have free will insofar as we are accountable and responsible for our actions. The Bible is clear that predestination and human responsibility exist side by side. I can't explain anything beyond what is Biblical here.

What you say above contradicts completely Christs message. God never created anyone to be predestined to suffer. We were created in the likeness of God to be with God. We decide our eternity. The Picture you have created of God in your posts is not what Christ came to tell us. He is out Father you has prepared a room for us in heaven. You can step towards Christ or you can step away from him. But you decide if you want to follow Christ or not, You have free will to follow him and this very much involves a conscious act without which you are not saved. If you don't follow Christ in this world you can't follow him to heaven.

I don't know where this discussion can go, because we disagree on something so pivotal in Christianity, our free will to follow Christ.

Yes God knows our Choices, But they are OUR choices. We decide our destiny.

You don't have to take the Roman Catholic Teaching on this, look at the Coptic, Armenian, Orthodox Churches. Protestantism was a movement against Roman Catholicism, but it went too far by disregarding fundamental Christian Teaching.

solodeogloria

alma73 wrote: »

What you say above contradicts completely Christs message. God never created anyone to be predestined to suffer. We were created in the likeness of God to be with God. We decide our eternity. The Picture you have created of God in your posts is not what Christ came to tell us. He is out Father you has prepared a room for us in heaven. You can step towards Christ or you can step away from him. But you decide if you want to follow Christ or not, You have free will to follow him and this very much involves a conscious act without which you are not saved. If you don't follow Christ in this world you can't follow him to heaven.

I don't know where this discussion can go, because we disagree on something so pivotal in Christianity, our free will to follow Christ.

Yes God knows our Choices, But they are OUR choices. We decide our destiny.

You don't have to take the Roman Catholic Teaching on this, look at the Coptic, Armenian, Orthodox Churches. Protestantism was a movement against Roman Catholicism, but it went too far by disregarding fundamental Christian Teaching.

Good evening alma73,

When you see and understand that my view is a Bible soaked view you'll see why I believe in God's sovereignty. It is Jesus' character in the gospels that reinforce this idea. Let me quote one passage of many that make my point that Jesus believed in predestination. I could quote others that I've mentioned in John and in Paul's writings.

John 6:41-65 ESV wrote:

Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst. But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe. All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” So the Jews grumbled about him, because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” They said, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?” Jesus answered them, “Do not grumble among yourselves. No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me— not that anyone has seen the Father except he who is from God; he has seen the Father. Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life. I am the bread of life. Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live for ever. And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.”
The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever feeds on me, he also will live because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like the bread the fathers ate and died. Whoever feeds on this bread will live for ever.” Jesus said these things in the synagogue, as he taught at Capernaum.
When many of his disciples heard it, they said, “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?” But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples were grumbling about this, said to them, “Do you take offence at this? Then what if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before? It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. But there are some of you who do not believe.” (For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.) And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.”

Nobody can come to Jesus unless it is granted to him by the Father. Jesus also mentions later on in the Gospel that the disciples did not choose Him (John 15:16). He also mentions that be brings life and judgement. He helps the blind to see but also that those who think they see might become blind (John 9:41). I think you should re-read what Jesus says particularly in these sections of John. He definitely believes in predestination as do all the apostles. Augustine in his later works believed in predestination as a Catholic. It makes sense. If God knows all things he also knows who is saved and who is not.

I can look to Augustine and say he was a Catholic who believed in predestination in his later works. So much so that he influenced John Calvin. I don't need to look to the teaching of any church. I can just look to what Jesus says in the Bible about it.

Arkady: You can't accuse me of chopping and changing passages. I've quoted them at length and I've even explained how entire Bible books work. If you think I'm wrong feel free to challenge my argument. Otherwise I'd recommend that you don't bother with passive aggressive remarks. If I am wrong please teach me. I'm striving to follow Jesus Christ and I'd rather do this positively. If you don't want to reply to me then don't, but I think it is obvious to everyone here that I've looked into the Bible and what it says on these issues at length, which is why I'm making reference to it.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ and in His imperishable Word,
solodeogloria

Arkady

solodeogloria wrote: »

Nobody can come to Jesus unless it is granted to him by the Father.
Jesus also mentions later on in the Gospel that the disciples did not choose Him (John 15:16). He also mentions that be brings life and judgement. He helps the blind to see but also that those who think they see might become blind (John 9:41). I think you should re-read what Jesus says particularly in these sections of John. He definitely believes in predestination as do all the apostles. Augustine in his later works believed in predestination as a Catholic. It makes sense. If God knows all things he also knows who is saved and who is not.

Which contradicts sola fide again.

solodeogloria wrote: »

I can look to Augustine and say he was a Catholic who believed in predestination in his later works. So much so that he influenced John Calvin. I don't need to look to the teaching of any church. I can just look to what Jesus says in the Bible about it.

Which contradicts all your earlier references to Luther et al.

solodeogloria wrote: »

Arkady: You can't accuse me of chopping and changing passages.
I've quoted them at length and I've even explained how entire Bible books work. If you think I'm wrong feel free to challenge my argument. Otherwise I'd recommend that you don't bother with passive aggressive remarks. If I am wrong please teach me. I'm striving to follow Jesus Christ and I'd rather do this positively. If you don't want to reply to me then don't, but I think it is obvious to everyone here that I've looked into the Bible and what it says on these issues at length, which is why I'm making reference to it.

Back to straw manning again. Tell the truth, show me where I said you changed a passage. You don't have to change it to quote it out of context and use it as a pretext. And - At this stage you're just bolding random quotes in that don't support, and aren't even related to what you're saying.

And if you don't want to me to reply then don't address strawman replies towards me, or hide remarks or quotes addressed to me the in replies to other peoples posts in the hope I won't see them.

alma73

@solodeogloria

As you quoted "whoever comes to me I will never cast out" (going to someone involves an act)

I think this is where we part, because without a shared belief in our Free will there can't be a discussion.

Yes we are chosen, yes God knows what we will do, But they are our acts, we decide between good and bad. Christ said to his Apostles to GO and preach the gospel, they were given a mission.

By your logic all your posts here are meaningless because not matter what you do you can't help anyone.. Right? Peaching the Gospel is meaningless because it does not matter anymore, people are already saved. Right? Infact what is the need for a Christian to bear witness to the Gospel, its not going to save any more souls, Right? We might as well just put Christs message on billboards to make they aware they might be predestined for salvation,. and us lucky Christians who think we are saved can go to the Bahamas.

You can decide to follow Christ or walk away from him, That is your choice and it is an act that will lead to salvation or damnation.

solodeogloria

Arkady wrote: »

Which contradicts sola fide again.

Which contradicts all your earlier references to Luther et al.

Good evening!

Forgive me but how to both points? You've not even shown a contradiction between the three solas yet. Nick explained them for you.

alma73 asked me if I believe in free will, I do in a sense insofar as humans are responsible for their actions, but I also hold to predestination as it is Biblical.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

Arkady

solodeogloria wrote: »

Forgive me but how to both points? You've not even shown a contradiction between the three solas yet. Nick explained them for you.

alma73 asked me if I believe in free will, I do in a sense insofar as humans are responsible for their actions, but I also hold to predestination as it is Biblical.

The logical error Nick had to revert to, before dissapearing when he was questioned further about it, was since when does the word sola not actually mean sola at all ? Over and over you claim faith alone = and then when that falls apart again and again you revert to saying well truthfully it's plus plus plus =, and thus you're lefting zig zagging between the endless contradictions over and back, back and fourth, round and round.

Logically, you can't claim that someone can only come to the father by God's will, and then claim it is actually by their faith alone ? then in the next sentence claim someone is predestined by God, and then claim in the next breath salvation is by their faith alone ? Never mind square it all with free will. The thing about Logic is you can't you can't straw man and circumvent it.