New view, or same old view?

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Jarthur001, Mar 17, 2007.

  1. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    Below please find links to what is called another view other then Calvinism or Arminianism.

    I would like to address each link in this thread to see if this indeed is a new view.


    Under "U" from the links.....please look at these quotes..

    QUOTE 1

    QUOTE 2 <<< the new view

    One line I want to point out...When WE are fully assured....then God is able. :)

    Do you agree with both?

    Do you disagree with both?

    If one is right, and the other wrong, why is one wrong and the other right?
     
    #1 Jarthur001, Mar 17, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 17, 2007
  2. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    I believe that site is the site of Zane Hodges who holds an heretical position he calls "free grace." He is one who truly believe that man is saved even he is doesn't really believe. He has radically redefined the nature of saving faith.
     
  3. Jon-Marc

    Jon-Marc
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,752
    Likes Received:
    0
    I do not believe God chooses not to save anyone except in that He has foreknowledge of who will and who will not respond to His call. Romans 8:29 says "For whom he did foreknow, he did also predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son." So I agree that who He saves depends on the sinner responding to His call. We cannot respond if He doesn't call, and He calls to everyone. Unfortunately, not everyone will respond to His call.

    Those who don't respond are forever lost. However, He does NOT say, "I will save that one, but I won't save that one even if he does ask, because I have not predestinated him. Too many people are confused as to what "predestination" means. It does NOT mean that God won't save someone even if they call on him, repent and seek forgiveness simply because he has not chosen them.

    Jesus came to seek and to save ANYONE who would respond to His call and will turn no one away that truly repents and seeks forgiveness. 2nd Peter says that God is not willing that any should perish--so He does NOT choose some over others except in His foreknowledge of who will and who will not come to Him.
     
  4. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    The verse you cite, romans 8:29, draws a straight line from foreknow to glorify. No one gets dropped along the way.

    yes, this is exactly what Calvinism teaches. So you agree with Calvinists at least on this point.

    Yes, again, you are agreeing with Calvinists.
     
  5. webdog

    webdog
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,691
    Likes Received:
    0
    Let's see...God being the author of sin is not heretical, but a viewpoint opposite of yours is? Cite your source that man is saved even if he doesn't believe...in context of his statement, of course.
     
  6. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think God being the author of sin is heretical. But that wasn't the topic here. Arminianism is the opposite of my view, and I don't think it is heretical. So clearly, being opposite of me is not the standard by which I judge heresy.

    I did in a PM to you several months ago when you offered these lengths. I quoted the exact place, in context, where this was affirmed. So I am not sure why you are pretending that you don't know, unless you forgot. You can find that one and post it here for us.

    Here are some more.

    But what I do mean is this: at the moment of saving faith the believer is sure that he is eternally saved. I do not hold to the doctrine of the indefectibility of faith, as Reformed theologians do, or even as John Calvin did. I do hold to the indefectibility of God’s saving work in the believer.
    Several years ago I was in Dr. Charles Ryrie’s apartment with a friend. My friend asked Dr. Ryrie, "Can a believer stop believing?" As usual, Dr. Ryrie was crisp and concise. His answer was: "Of course."
    http://www.faithalone.org/journal/1997i/Hodges.html

    Among the most impressive sections in the book is the chapter entitled, "For Those Who Stop Believing" (chapter 8). Here Stanley clearly says some things which should have often been said before. For example, he writes: "The Bible clearly teaches that God's love for His people is of such magnitude that even those who walk away from the faith have not the slightest chance of slipping from His hand" (p. 74). This is beautifully put. Equally lucid is the striking paragraph: "Faith is simply the way we say yes to God's free gift of eternal life. Faith and salvation are not one and the same anymore than a gift and the hand that receives it are the same. Salvation or justification or adoption- whatever you wish to call it-stands independently of faith. Consequently, God does not require a constant attitude of faith in order to be saved-only an act of faith" (p. 80). A little later, Stanley also writes: "You and I are not saved because we have an enduring faith. We are saved because at a moment in time we expressed faith in our enduring Lord" (p. 80)... (from a book review of Stanley's book on Eternal Security at http://www.faithalone.org/news/y1993/93may5.html).

    This from Robert Wilken: The only way a believer cannot know he is saved is if he stops believing the promise and loses his assurance (but not his life, which is eternal) (http://www.faithalone.org/journal/1997ii/Wilkin.html)

    Hodges also tells a story of a man he knew who was a pastor who gave up his faith. Hodges said he was stilled saved, even though he no longer believed. The story and reference can be found here: http://www.middletownbiblechurch.org/doctrine/hodgesas.htm

    I think he also expresses this in Absolutely Free though it has been a while since I read it.

    All of these quotes reveal that Hodges beleives that a man is saved if he stops believing and no longer believes.

    As I recall, Hodges also says that you do not have to believe in teh death of Jesus to be saved. So there are clearly problems with Hodges view. I don't have all my notes here, but he has been pretty soundly and easily refuted by the exegesis of Scripture.

    When a man says that a mentally competent person can be saved who does not believe that Jesus is the Christ who died for sin, he is a heretic.
     
    #6 Pastor Larry, Mar 17, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 17, 2007
  7. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    webdog,

    Being that you feel this is another view other then Calvinism or Arminianism, would you mind addressing the OP?

    If you do not mind, please show what you do not like about the Arminian statement, being that you are not Arminian, and how the doctrine is stated better in the so called "Free Grace" statement which is what your view is.

    To me the two statements in the OP say about the same thing. I would like to hear why you think they are not the same.
     
  8. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    aaaw hello? :)
     
  9. webdog

    webdog
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,691
    Likes Received:
    0
    I would come to expect more of you James. I have a life outside of the BB. Playing the "aaaw, hello" card is kindergarten-ish and quite lame. You know my views already on it, you just don't agree with it...and that's fine.

    BTW, who ever said that the free grace view was "my view"? While I do agree with certain aspects of it, as with any other theological position, I don't align myself with it 100%.
     
    #9 webdog, Mar 18, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 18, 2007
  10. webdog

    webdog
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,691
    Likes Received:
    0
    ...and as was pointed out to you in the PM's, you pulled quotes clear out of context to say what you wanted it to say.

    The way you talk about Hodges, you sound like you believe you can lose your salvation. Are you secure in Christ or not?
     
  11. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    Your view...joes view...toms view. You said it was another view...and it was you that posted the links.
    When I asked you to show where this is another view, you said...

    You then told me to start a new thread.

    I have..and this thread is to understand your links....and I'm still asking.

    All I have asked so many times, is why is your links to "free grace view" another view?

    To me the links you say is another view are in fact the very same Methodist Church/SDA that we see on their sites....other then OSAS. In fact I want to address each link you gave and said was another view...for I see the same old view in each.

    So again I ask...why do you think this is another view????
    Help me understand. Teach me.

    Not trying to be hard nose....just want to understand what you said.
     
    #11 Jarthur001, Mar 18, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 18, 2007
  12. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    If you pointed that out, then you were incorrect. I don't remember you saying that. As you can tell, my assessment is completely right.

    Yes, I am secure in Christ. I do not believe you can lose your salvation. I also do not believe that Christ will save people who do not believe. Hodges does.

    Let's not distract this thread any further however. I think my point has been clearly shown.

    Why not answer Jarthur's questions ...
     
    #12 Pastor Larry, Mar 18, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 18, 2007
  13. Andy T.

    Andy T.
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,147
    Likes Received:
    0
    As to the OP, they are both saying the same thing. So in this respect, the Free Grace view is no different than the Arminian view.

    As for Webdog's views on election, I imagine that he will say that 'election' does not apply to Gentile believers, as he has recently supported the view of election only applying to Jewish believers. Correct me if I'm wrong, Webdog. And such a view is not Arminian/Free Grace, but is something entirely different.
     
  14. webdog

    webdog
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,691
    Likes Received:
    0

    It would really help first to actually read the links, no?
    It's another view of calvinism from outside of calvinism.
     
  15. webdog

    webdog
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,691
    Likes Received:
    0
    You are wrong. The term "the elect" is in reference to jewish believers, not the act of 'election'. Pharaoh was elected for a purpose, but he was not "the elect".
     
  16. Andy T.

    Andy T.
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,147
    Likes Received:
    0
    Help me understand, then. Are Gentile believers recipients of the act of election in the same way Jewish believers are?
     
  17. webdog

    webdog
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,691
    Likes Received:
    0
    If we are all in Christ, we have a common denominator. In the same sense all of those who preceded us in death that were righteous are not all considered the church, not all righteous person's are considered the elect.
     
  18. Andy T.

    Andy T.
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,147
    Likes Received:
    0
    Can you elaborate a little more? So are you saying that some believers are elected and others are not? I'm sincerely confused.
     
  19. webdog

    webdog
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,691
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'll answer a question with a question: Is every person in Heaven from "the Church"?
     
  20. Andy T.

    Andy T.
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,147
    Likes Received:
    0
    That depends if one is a dispensationalist or not. Since it is appears you are a dispensationalist, I will answer "No". I'm not looking for a rabbit trail on this, though, so you can cut through the chase.
     

Share This Page

Loading...