No taking up cross - no heaven ?

Your notion of "saved but still living a wicked life in rebellion against God" is totaly nonsense.

We come to Christ and are "saved" - but then as Matt 18 "forgiveness is revoked" on the basis of what we choose after that. The same is shown in Romans 11 with those cast out of the vine of Christ.

hint: there is no such thing as "SAVED but NOT forgiven"!! There is no such thing as "SAVED but NOT in the vine of Christ"

your definition of saved apparently is as far from the Gospel as one might imagine!

 

This is one of those times when I have to agree with DHK.

 

So, you teach a works-based salvation. You think that your salvation is dependent upon what you do.

I believe that it is dependent upon the finished work of Jesus on the cross.

 

Let's deal with this before we even go any further, because if we can't get past this point it will do no good to go any further

Let me ask you this. Why was the nation of Israel not saved at this time? Most people will say because they didn't believe in Jesus.

That is a huge problem because there were 100s of thousands if not a billion or so people that never had Jesus either until He actually came to this earth.

So how were people saved in the OT and up and until the time of the crucifixion of Jesus? Well it's the same way they are saved today (Ephesians 2:8-9). They were saved by grace through faith that not of themselves it was a gift from God and not of works lest any of them should be able to boast.

It's the exact same way we are saved today by grace through faith.

Now what is grace? Grace is God doing for man what He requires of man and then giving man credit for it.

So what is faith? Faith is believing what God has said about a matter.

So what does God require for the penalty of sin and the payment of sin. Well throughout the OT you can see that God requires death and shed blood.

The best picture you can see of salvation is Exodus 12 where they slaughtered the lamb and spread the blood on the doorposts and lentils and death passed over their house.

Then the nation of Israel continued to slay the pascal animal and God continued to accept that sacrifice therefore the nation was saved.

That practice continued even in the days of Christ and God continued to see the people through the blood of the sacrifice. Now after The Sacrifice was given God no longer accepted the sacrifice of the people. And there was a generation that began that was just as dead spiritually as the Gentiles and from that point forward they had to accept Jesus' sacrifice if they wanted to be saved by grace through faith.

So therefore the Pharisees and the Saducees and the Scribes and yes even the mob that yelled crucify, crucify was a spiritually alive people.

See we have to view the Bible from what the Bible reveals to us not what sounds good or sounds fair. It doesn't sound "right" that those people would be saved, because after all they killed Christ. But they did exactly what was prophesied they would do.

And unfortunately Christendom is in such sad shape that I'm afraid that the same result would happen if He was in our midst today, becuase people certainly aren't interested in being discipled just as they weren't interested in anything but the fluff when Christ was on the earth.

 

Sure there is. I John 1:9 says if we don't confess our sin then God does not forgive us. That is written to saved people.

God says if we don't forgive others then we won't be forgiven. That was written to saved people.

 

This is total error. The Saints ARE saved and the saved are SAINTS we see this repeatedly in scripture. There is no way to imagine that duck is a horse. I totally agree with DHK's opposition to this "saved but not a saint" idea you are trying to invent here.

However you said something that has been very helpful to my understanding of your view. you said that you "need" this contrivance in order to "Believe OSAS" in spite of the obvious texts that point to "loss" for believers. (Romans 11, 2Tim 2, Matt 18 etc).

And that speaks volumes. You are in fact taking a serious approach to those texts - by accepting them - you simply need them to apply to something that is less devastating to OSAS than actual "Salvation" so as to preserve your OSAS speculations.

I agree that if you can "invent" this other heaven this "other level of saved" that can then be "revoked" by all the texts that in fact devastate OSAS - you accomplish the goal of preserving OSAS (of defending it against Matt 18, Romans 11, 2Tim 2 etc) - at the cost of having to invent this "middle heaven" for believers that is "not quite a saint but not lost".

All your "but that is saved-by-works if we let Romans 11 apply to salvation instead of THE KINGDOM" solution makes this a "Kingdom of Christ by works but not salvation by works".

However I argue that the "promise" of the kingdom is given to the saints purely as a part of "The ONE Gospel" that applies to all believers. In other words "By Grace through faith". It is all by grace through faith -- but the same "Matt 7 by their fruits you shall know them" principle applies -- no getting around it.

As 1Cor 6 says "be not deceived" on that point.

in Christ,

Bob

 

BobRyan you are as funny as Brother Bob. You say things like this then in the same breath you say that if we don't forgive someone then we are not saved. That's not grace. That's works.

You teach a works based salvation, which is totally contradictorary of plain Scripture, and yet you say it is all by grace through faith, but you don't even believe that yourself.

You obviously believe it is grace through faith, plus BobRyan's works. Well sorry, but that is not what the Bible says. I'll stick with the Bible.

 

What must I do to be saved?

Believe on the Lord Jesus and forgive people, produce fruit. have plenty of good works, hold on until the end, waver not, be obedient...

I wonder how the Holy Spirit could have forgotten all that other stuff besides "believe". It's no wonder that it's so confusing to people since He forgot to add all those works that are required to be saved.

Now, no one here has ever stated that anyone who is not saved is referred to as a "saint", but I challenge you to show one single passage that clearly shows that everyone who is saved is referred to in Scripture as a "saint".

 

The "funny" part is that you can read Matt 18 and say "HEY I believe that we gain entrance into the Kingdom of God BY WORKS not by FAITH through grace!"

That is really very funny!

I on the other hand argue for ONE GOSPEL. In that ONE GOSPEL the SAVED are those that enter into the kingdom and IT IS ALL by Grace through faith.

As James said "YOU SEE then that a man is JUSTIFIED by works and not by faith alone". As Paul said "It is not the hearers of the Law that are JUST before God but the DOERS of the Law will be JUSTIFIED". Romans 2.

These are not arguments FOR "Salvation by works" they are arguments FOR the real - TRUE view of Salvation by Grace through Faith NOT of works lest anyone should boast - FOR WE have been created for God works that God has designed BEFOREHAND that we should WALK IN THEM.

Your post above is NOT an exegetically sound review of Matt 18 -- it is merely your "preference" posted as IF it was Bible doctrine.

It is not.

I will stick with Matt 18.

I will stick with Roman 2.

I will stick with Romans 6.

I will stick with Romans 8.

I will stick with Romans 11

I will stick with James 2.

In fact - I will stick with "the 66" and that leaves you to tell your stories - but until you are willing to exegete Matt 18 - simply denying it and claiming it as "a works based Kingdom" instead of grace - saved-by-grace-through-faith is simply your way out of a bad problem for OSAS.

In Christ,

Bob

 

#1. I challenge you to show that they are not.

#2. I challenge you to respond to the post ALREADY given showing that those who choose to obey God are saints. (see Ephesians quote above)

In other words "deal with the Bible texts" instead of continually "claiming they are works Gospels" and denying them for salvation.

 

No. Because they didn't believe. Period. However, the Bible is specific enough to say:
"He came to his own (Israel), and his own received him not" (John 1:110).

And this is a huge red herring because we are talking of the time of Christ. The time when Jesus himself said he could do no more miracles in Capenaum because of their unbelief (in Him). We are not speaking of Adam, Eve, Lamech, Jubal, Amran, Jochebed, Obadiah, etc.

Yes this is all true, but irrelevant. for Nicodemus was in the presence of Christ Himself who said: "I am the way the truth and the life, no man comes unto the Father but by me." All who had heard the words of Jesus knew that he had proclaimed himself to be the Messiah, the only Saviour of mankind. Nicodemus was not living in darkness. He stood in the very presence of the Lord. What a privilege that must have been!

You complicate things.
Grace is God's free unmerited favor and that is all. He gives us that which we don't deserve. We didn't deserve salvation. He provided it for us. All we have to do is receive it (John 1:12), though we don't deserve it.

That is not true. Only the ones "who believed in their hearts" that what they were doing was by faith in obedience to God's commands were saved. Many didn't. Many did it out of ritualism. Many did even though they didn't want to, because they had to, or were commanded to. Consider that Israel went into captivity in 722 B.C. and Judah in 586 B.C., both for the cause of unbelief. What did God think of their sacrifices:

Micah 6:6-7 Wherewith shall I come before the LORD, and bow myself before the high God? shall I come before him with burnt offerings, with calves of a year old? Will the LORD be pleased with thousands of rams, or with ten thousands of rivers of oil? shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?
--He didn't even want their sacrifices. With the attitude they had their sacrifices, no matter how many they were, they were no good to God.

Here is what God required: (not sacrifices_
Micah 6:8 He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?

As Micah shows God didn't always accept their sacrifices anyway, so your point is moot. But all of this is irrelevant. Nicodemus stood in the presence of Christ. He knew who Christ is. Christ proclaimed the very way of salvation--Himself. That is who he had to believe. Faith always has an object. The object of Nicodemus's faith had to be Christ or he would remain unsaved. Only Christ could save Him.
Jesus asked: "Will you also go away."
His disciples answered: "Where shall we go, Thou hast the words of eternal life." They knew that the only way to heaven was through Christ.

John 8:44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
--These are the people that you call saved. Jesus called them children of the devil. There's a bit of a contradiction don't you think. They rejected Christ. If you are not born again, you are in the family of the devil. You are a spiritual child of Satan, a child of disobedience, a child of wrath (Eph.2:1-3)
Some other Jews (apostles, disciples (the 70) and thousands of others) believed on him. The Pharisees could not take him publicly for fear of the multitudes who followed him and believed. I am not saying that the majority believed, but that thousands believed, just as 3,000 believed on the Day of Pentecost.

Prophesy doesn't force anyone to do anything. The Pharisees had a choice individually whether to accept or reject Christ; whether to be born again and be saved, or to reject Christ's offer of forgiveness of sin. They did not have to crucify him. Nicodemus didn't. Joseph of Arimathea didn't. They were both on the Sanhedrin.

Make no mistake: Christendom and Biblical Christianity are not the same thing. In order to be a Christian you must be born again. And there are relatively few born again Christians (in the true Biblical sense of the term) in Christendom.
DHK

 

DHK: All we have to do is receive it (John 1:12), though we don't deserve it.

HP: I am a bit curious about this statement. Are you saying that the possibility exists we could resist God’s gift? You say that we must receive it, but is not our receiving it an act of the will termed ‘works’ every time such an act is said to be required of man in areas such as repentance and faith? Why would not ones act of the will in receiving this gift be a works based salvation? You seem to be alluding to the fact that we must 'do something', 'will in a certain direction' to receive salvation.

 

Will the real believers please stand up?

John 3:3-5
3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?
5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

Why would Jesus equate seeing the kingdom with entering the kingdom. Doesn't he know the difference? See the door is not enter the door. See the promised land is not enter the promised land. Moses gave you a perfect example.

Deuteronomy 34:4
4 And the LORD said unto him, This is the land which I swore unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, saying, I will give it unto thy seed: I have caused thee to see it with thine eyes, but thou shalt not go over thither.

Just because you are born again does not mean you will enter, it just means you get to see it.

 

1. It is logically impossible to prove a negative. Prove that there are no purple aliens with yellow polka-dots living in NYC. But, Scripture never calls all the saved "saints". That's a title that is applied only by man.

2. That's exactly what I'm saying and you're denying: The saints are those who choose to obey God, not everyone who is saved.

 

HOG: It is logically impossible to prove a negative. Prove that there are no purple aliens with yellow polka-dots living in NYC.

HP: Hold that logical thought for a minute. I hear all the time people suggesting that if one is not holy and living a pure life, or that if one does not know of any that are or have been living a holy life, or that none have ever lived a holy life, that is proof that none can. Would that be trying to prove something by a negative as well?

 

You may have your man-made theology set up; I believe the Bible which is very simple.

John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

By grace are you saved through faith, and that not of yourselves. It is the gift of God, not of works, lest any man should boast.

Salvation is by faith. It is a choice that one makes. He either believes (has faith) or refuses to believe (does not put faith in) the sacrifice of Christ. That choice is left up to every person. Nicodemus chose to believe. The rich young ruler of Mark 10 chose not to believe in Christ. He walked away from Christ sorrowful, for he trusted in his riches rather than in Christ. You have a choice. Salvation is not forced on anyone. It especially is not forced upon you by God. God does not force salvation on any person. We have a free will to choose to accept or reject his offer of salvation. It is a free gift available to all who will accept it.

Titus 2:11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
DHK

 

DHK: Salvation is by faith. It is a choice that one makes. He either believes (has faith) or refuses to believe (does not put faith in) the sacrifice of Christ. That choice is left up to every person.

HP: This seems to me as being very inconsistent with the tenants of Baptist theology with say that man has NOTHING to do with ones salvation, that our wills and choices in no way have any bearing on it, and that God’s grace is irresistible?

When I mention that I believe there are conditions to salvation such as repentance, I am told that I believe in salvation by works, for nothing we do has anything to do with our salvation. Here you come along and present the condition of man obviously utilizing his will to “accept” the free gift. I ask you again. Is man’s will involved in this acceptance? If it is, why is this not salvation by works, i.e., salvation ‘by the will of man,’ just as I have been accused of believing?

 

As far as I am concerned some of the tenets of Calvinism that you have presented are heresy. If that bothers some people, then so be it.
Irresistable grace happens to be one of them. Of course the grace of God can be resisted. God will not force salvation on any man. Where does the Bible teach that? I would like to see that backed up with Scripture. Over and over again we see in Scripture:
He that believeth...
He that believeth not...
There is always a choice to be made. The choice one makes is not a work. Believing is an act of the heart or mind. That is not in the realm of works. Neither is repentance. Repentance is not feeling sorry for your sins. Neither is it reformation--which is a work. Repentance is a change of mind with respect to one's attitude toward God. At one time a person was living a life of rebellion to God, and a life of sin. He repents, has a change of attitude toward God. Now he lives a life in obedience to God's commands. His attitude toward God has changed. Repentance is a change of attitude towards God. It is not a work. Reformation would be more of an example of a work. A work is something that you do. You are redefining the word "work" to fit your theology, or at least the people that you are listening to are.
What does John 3:16 mean to you.
Whosoever believeth...
It means: "Whosoever worketh his way to heaven.???
Then is believing or faith a work or not??

If you have the ability to believe, you obviously have the ability not to believe. I could post about a hundred verses here to demonstrate that fact. God forces salvation on no one. His grace can be resisted.

"The grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men" And it can be resisted. If it couldn't then all men would be saved.
DHK

 

DHK you have bought into the man-made traditions that have unfortuately clouded the church from understanding for many generations now.

But let's just talk about Nicodemus. On the one hand you say that God accepts the sacrifice and then on the other hand He doesn't.

Well it seems as though Nicodemus was a pretty sincere fella, so I think it would be safe to say that he was carrying out the passover sacrifice in a sincere manner, which God said was good enough for Him to deal with sin, because there was death and there was shed blood and it was a foreshadowing of the Ultimate Sacrifice to come.

So Nicodemus would have been saved prior to Jesus' arrival on earth, because I think it is pretty safe to say that Nicodemus was significantly older that Jesus, because he was one of the rulers of Israel.

So what you are saying is that Nicodemus was a saved man and then became unsaved when Jesus was on the earth and had to be saved again. That doesn't jive with the Bible.

And if Nicodemus wasn't saved then there was a whole hord of folks that weren't saved either and it just becomes a jumbled mess. See it's actually you that is making this whole thing complicated.

If we would just let the Bible say what the Bible says and believe it despite our preconceived notions and ideas it would be a lot easier.

But let's step away from Nicodemus for a second and look at another evidence that Israel was a saved nation.

Jesus said in Luke 19:10 that He came to seek and to save that which was lost. So what was lost? Well in Matthew 15:24 it says that Jesus was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

What does lost mean? Unfortunately the church has equated lostness with spiritual deadness (unsaved). But in order for something to be lost it first has to be in the possession of the owner. So that means one of two things. These people were either saved and were now unsaved (which the Bible doesn't teach) or they were saved, but weren't on the straight and narrow and had lost their way (the Bible does teach exactly this idea).

These were God's children and they were wayward children and Jesus came to seek and to save them not for eternal purposes, but for kingdom purposes. Those are two different ideas.

Their eternal destiny was already set, but God had promised a kingdom and was delivering on that promise, but Israel wanted to have nothing to do with it. They didn't reject Jesus as their eternal Saviour they rejected Him as their King. Again two different concepts.

But because we Gentiles have to accept Jesus as Savior before we can accept Him as King we also think that must be true for everyone else throughout time, but that's just not the way the Bible teaches it.

Again most of Christendom thinks that Israel rejected the message of salvation by grace through faith and that is the message that is now given to the Gentiles, but that is not true at all.

The message that Israel rejected was the message of the kingdom. That is the message that is now available to the Gentiles, but in order for a Gentile to be able to even understand the message he must be made alive spiritually (saved by grace through faith), becuase until that happens a spiritually dead man can not understand a spiritual message, except salvation by grace through faith.

When one is saved by grace through faith then they are in the same position that Israel was in and able to entertain that message and can either accept it or reject it just as Israel did.

By the way why do you think that salvation by grace through faith wasn't even written until the Pauline epistles? If that is the message that was being preached to Israel why did John the Baptist say repent for the kingdom of the heavens is at hand? Why didn't he say believe on the One that is coming for His death and shed blood will cleanse you of your sins?

That's the actual message of grace through faith, but that wasn't the message being preached. It really is simple if we don't try to complicate things.

 

Well I went back and re-read your post and had to comment on this section. (I would like to comment on the rest of it, but until we can understand that Israel was a saved nation it will be pointless.)

Prophesy doesn't force anyone to do anything. That couldn't be further from the truth. Prophesy is God's Word that something is going to happen in the future just as He said it was going to happen. So if what He said doesn't happen just as He said it would then He is a liar. That is not possible, so whatever God has said will happen it will happen you can take that to the bank!!

It was shown in the OT that Jesus was going to be delivered up and crucified by His brothers (story of Cain and Able, story of Joseph and His brothers), which is another way to see that Israel was a saved nation, because they were considered family. Can't be family as an unsaved person.