Rom 6:1

Romans 6:1

What kind of gospel do you have to teach to have this kind of response?

Would Finney have received the same response as Paul? Spurgeon?

(We all know it's the wrong assumption and not what Paul taught, but an interesting response to Paul's gospel. Would you get the same objection as Paul did?)

Do the Ezekiel and Isaiah verses you quoted pertain to backsliding Israel or unbelievers hearing the gospel for the first time?

Also, explain 'lawless gospel' and how the saving gospel contains the law?

I found a number of commentators found even this question repulsive, but others believe Paul himself put it forward to answer the foremost and pre eminent question that would arise from a gospel of grace instead of law (old covenant), as this is the first question Paul fields concerning his doctrine of the gospel (aside from a passive one in Romans 4. Also noteworthy is that this question is penned exactly the same as the one in Romans 9 that is a legitamite question that Paul answers)

Douglas Moo's commentary on Romans is noteworthy (found online re Romans 6. I think he works with D A Carson)

If you look carefully at what proceeded this statement in the letter to the Romans, you find Paul teaching very strongly on the grace of God. He makes the point over and over again that works cannot earn us relationship with or right standing in God's eyes. In fact, he teaches the message of the grace of God so strongly that he has to balance it lest he be misunderstood. Ignore chapter divisions. They were placed so that we can easily find our way around. They were placed where someone thought it logical to place them. Read chapter five and into chapter 6 without paying attention to them. Paul says, its all by grace, not by works. It is a free gift, not earned....What shall we say then (referring to everything he has just taught), shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? Since it is the grace of God and not our adherence to law, can we just keep sinning and trust in grace? God forbid! It is by grace, but when we are born again we die to sin and are made alive unto Christ. We have been transformed. No longer is there in us the desire to continue in sin. How can a dead man continue living his old life?

So it is a gospel of the "almost too good to be true" news of God's grace shed abroad to us that would elicit a response that invokes this kind of statement.

If we really teach the grace of God for salvation the way Paul did, instead of the dead religious adherence to laws, rites, and form, we would need to respond to the same question that Paul responded to.

If we really teach the grace of God for salvation the way Paul did, instead of the dead religious adherence to laws, rites, and form, we would need to respond to the same question that Paul responded to.

You nailed it brother. :-)

.

If we really teach the grace of God for salvation the way Paul did, instead of the dead religious adherence to laws, rites, and form, we would need to respond to the same question that Paul responded to.

I think that's an excellent reply. No one questions that the allusion made by the question is dead wrong, but the fact that Paul's gospel illicits such a question speaks volumes about how Paul went about it and the doctrine he taught.

The statement 'lawless gospel' would have been a great compliment to Paul.

Tit 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

By "lawless Gospel" I meant the false Gospel that says you don't need to forsake your sins to be saved. It is true that no amount of obedience can ever earn salvation. The idea that we can be justified by works of the law is a false Gospel. But likewise, the idea that we don't need to give up our sins (repent) in order to be forgiven is also a false Gospel. We are not saved by our obedience, but we must change our mind about living a disobedient life in order to be saved. The Gospel that the prophets preached, John the Baptist preached, Jesus Christ preached, the Apostles preached, all included repentance. A lawless Gospel says that you can be saved while continuing in your sins. God promises wrath for those who continue in their sins. God promises mercy to those who give up their sins. Justification by grace through faith means that we are undeservingly forgiven by an obedient working faith. We are not justified by dead faith, but by true faith. True faith purifies the heart, sanctifies us, works by love, overcomes the world, and obeys God.

Brother, I don't think anyone would argue that repentance is not necessary for salvation. Scripture makes that very clear.

The term "lawless gospel" means that we are saved outside of the law. i.e., it is not in keeping the law that we become right with God, it is in receiving the sacrifice of Christ for atonement for our sins.

We are not saved by faith. We are saved by grace, through faith. It is God's grace by which we obtain salvation. Faith is the vehicle through which we receive His grace. It is our positive response to trust in and receive what God has already provided. For by grace are we saved through faith...

By "lawless Gospel" I meant the false Gospel that says you don't need to forsake your sins to be saved.

Is forsaking your sins what saves you? Or what Christ did on the cross that saves you?

By reading the rest of chpt 6, I see Paul exhorting the church to put sins behind them because of their position in Christ, not to get saved in the first place.

I agree they go together, but there is most definitey an order, and justification comes before sanctification. One is the reason for the other.

Those that confuse this will never hear the response that Paul did.

The Gospel that the prophets preached, John the Baptist preached, Jesus Christ preached, the Apostles preached, all included repentance

Soo, the "good news" declared by them all was that man had to forsake his sin in order to be saved?

"7 Know then that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham. 8 And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, [b]preached the gospel[/b] beforehand to Abraham, saying, “In you shall all the nations be blessed.” 9 So then, those who are of faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith." Galatians 3

You are trying to make the Gospel into a new law. Which none of the people you mentioned ever did!

Here is the Gospel-

"1 Now I would remind you, brothers, of [b]the gospel[/b] I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, 2 and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you—unless you believed in vain.3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures..." 1 Corinthians 15

The Arminian,

God will not extend His mercy unless the conditions of atonement, repentance, and faith are first met. God cannot wisely set aside our penalty (forgiveness) unless there is an atonement (a substitute for penalty) a change of mind about sinning (repentance) and an obedient trust (faith). It would be unsafe for God to simply forgive man. Therefore these conditions must be met first. God cannot simply forgive those who remain in their sins, who continue in their disobedience. Just as God has good reasons for requiring the atonement, and He cannot forgive without an atonement, so also God has good reasons for requiring repentance, and He cannot forgive without man's repentance.

[i]Isa 55:8-9 “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,” declares the LORD. “As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts."

Isa 40:13-14 "Who has understood the mind of the LORD, or instructed him as his counselor? Whom did the LORD consult to enlighten him, and who taught him the right way? Who was it that taught him knowledge or showed him the path of understanding?"[/i]

I think you presume too much about your knowledge of God. That is a dangerous thing, and you should carefully consider your ways.

I think you are misunderstanding this verse. In context it is talking about the wicked forsaking his way and the unrighteous man forsaking his thoughts "for my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are you ways my ways".

This verse doesn't mean that we can't understand God, or that we can't know His mind, or that we can't see His reasoning.

Isa 55:8-9 “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,” declares the LORD. “As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts."

I think you are misunderstanding this verse. In context it is talking about the wicked forsaking his way and the unrighteous man forsaking his thoughts "for my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are you ways my ways". In other words, God's ways are not wicked, God's thoughts are not unrighteous. That is what this verse is saying. "Let the wicked forsake his way and the unrighteous man his thoughts... for my thoughts are not your thoughts and your ways ar enot my ways..."

This verse doesn't mean that we can't understand God, or that we can't know His mind, or that we can't see His reasoning. It is to twist the meaning of that verse and take it out of context to use it that way.

Actually I believe you're both mistaken.
Look at the context. This is one of the most mis-quoted verses in the bible.

In this passage, God implores the backslider to come back to Him, He says...

Is 55:6 ¶ Seek ye the LORD while he may be found, call ye upon him while he is near:
7 Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the LORD, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.
8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.
9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.

What God is saying is this: Forsake your wicked ways and return unto me, and I will have mercy and grant you an abundant pardon. WHY? HOW CAN WE KNOW GOD WILL RECEIVE US BACK?

"BECAUSE MY WAYS AREN'T YOUR WAYS..."

Mankind don't naturally lean towards 'free grace'. We aren't like God.

Since seeing this passage in it's correct light, it's become to me one of the most encouraging verses in the bible. God is telling us, "I'm not like you. I'll readily show mercy and an abundant pardon if you only come back."

We aren't nearly as gracious. We want our 'pound of flesh'. Not so with God.

To twist this passage to show God angrily demanding righteousness before taking us to Himself is the most gross error.

God is not like us. His thoughts are not ours. His ways are higher. Much higher.

He will show mercy. He will pardon abundantly.

Paul understood this grace well. That's why he had to answer the question in Romans 6:1.

Jer 3:12 Go and proclaim these words toward the north, and say, Return, thou backsliding Israel, saith the LORD; and I will not cause mine anger to fall upon you: for I am merciful, saith the LORD, and I will not keep anger for ever.

So... which is it? Justification first, or sanctification? You've aligned yourself with both, in your last and second last post.

Sorry. Couldn't resist challenging you...

I guess the short answer is that how God in His omniscience forgives, ie... 'Rev 13:8, Rev 17:8'.
from before, knowing what he will do in the future (Rom 3:25).

You make a good question based on my post, but the bible says it's Christ that saved us with the shedding of his blood at Calvary.

On the other hand, many times in the bible He calls us to turn to Him to be saved. It doesn't change what saves us, just that the order we experience things isn't the order that God legally saves us in.

Make sense?

ps: There's also the point of whether its someone who's backslidden and is coming back to the Lord or whether it's someone hearing the gospel for the first time (diff between Is 55 and some NT verses).

But to say otherwise that Sanctification comes first is nothing other than works salvation.
I think it's more, in answer to your question, a matter of how salvation actually happened (atonement etc) and how God calls us to enter into it (repentance, faith etc).

Alive-to-God wrote:

Methinks this is a theological non-starter.

I would agree and go even further and say that the whole Cal/Arm debate is a non-starter.

and according to the honesty of our response, He declares us justified or not.

That's Cal/Arm type thing, and though I enjoy the theological debate, I think it's been hammered through pretty good already.

But to answer, I'm not trying to have it two ways, I'm just acknowledging that there's two parties involved.

God does what He does, and that is saving the lost.

We do what we do, and that is responding to the salvific work of God.

So, though my returning doesn't procure my salvation (Christ dying for me did), I nonetheless have to respond to His call to be saved; not to procure it, but to enter into it.

It's basically a hypothetical question: Could the elect of God be saved if they never believed? The answer is no, not because they never did the 'work' of believing to save themselves, but because those that God saves [b]will come to Him[/b] (John 6:37)

Would someone you share the gospel with ever ask the question asked of Paul in Rom 6:1 based on how you deliver it? It's been a good question to ask oneself I think.

How did the first man know he was such a sinner? Because he was looking for God, to God and at God, and finding Him, saw how far short he fell. The other man was looking at himself.

Exactly right. But it is by the grace of God that he was able to see. Without being born again, we can't even see the kingdom of God.

BTW, good dialogue

But they're not lost by the time He actually saves them.

Then He's not really saving them is He? :-)

Now I'm going to show my utter ignorance: please explain in different words what you mean by 'and that is responding to the salvific work of God'. Thanks.

Our theology differs. I believe that God saves man through the atonement (not possible but actual. No one whom Christ has paid the sins of will ever be punished the second time for the same sins in hell. As Charles Spurgeon said, this is the worst heresy that has ever crept into the church) and gives him the gift of faith (Phil 1:29) and the gift of repentance (2 Tim 2:25) and brings him (John 6:44) to Himself.

Christ procured the possibility of salvation for everyone.

We disagree, but I do understand where you're coming from. I believe when Christ died and took upon himself our transgressions and paid our penalty, that is it, we are justified before God. The only thing remaining is for God to 'draw' (John 6:44, James 2:6 is the same word) us to Himself.

Don't you mean 'but because those who come to God, He will save'? That's what your verse (John 6:37) is saying, actually.

A simple look at the structure of the verse shows that it is the giving of the church to Christ that is the effective part, not vise versa (similar to John 10:26, many would say some are not of God's sheep because they don't believe, but Jesus says they don't believe because they are not of His sheep).

As long as you aren't saying he couldn't receive the grace of God until after he was born again. And, as long as you aren't saying he couldn't seek God until after he was born again. And, as long as you aren't saying he couldn't hear God until after he was born again.

Sorry, that's what I'm saying. :-)

Rom 3:9 What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;
10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
18 There is no fear of God before their eyes.

I don't disagree whatsoever that the points you make re our salvation that we do are absolutely neccessary and must be done to be saved. I just believe that all the things we do are done because of God's work in us (Phil 2:13).

However, that example has its own problems, because a baby doesn't know what's going on either before or after it's born. It all gradually dawns on its understanding as it grows up. But from the parent's (God's) point of view, nothing is certain until it breathes in the spirit for the first time. Because it could come to birth but not breathe.

Analogies usually do fall short somewhere or other. I believe God used the 'born again' analogy' to show many things, one of them being that it was God that brought us into salvation and not us... John 1:13

I believe in God's sovereignty very much, but the very fact that God left Adam free to choose to sin, shows that man's free will is patterned on God's free will.

Except for one thing... Man's free will disappeared after he sinned and fell into slavery to sin. Paul would not have quoted Rom 3:10-18 for Adam before the fall, but does for 'all' those afterwards. To say that we compare in freedom exactly to pre-fall Adam is very much to miss one of the most oft expressed doctrines in the bible.

Well, may I publickly praise God that I was evangelised by believers who believed anyone who came to Him, could be saved?

I praise God for that too. The difference between our ideas is that I see in Rom 3:11 Paul says, 'no one seeks God' as well as in Rom 10:20 ' I was found of them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me.'. Now in John 6:37 Jesus says that every single person the Father gives Him 'shall' come to Him (not maybe or hopefully) and he says immediately after that everyone that comes to Him none will be turned away! I believe what your evangelist friend does insomuch that I believe that any that come to Christ can be saved, I just believe Paul and Christ when they say none will come unless the Father draws them.

You are taking a great liberty with the death of Christ, by this statement.

No, I took it right out of Is 53.

I don't think this means what you think it does. Remember that God was the Shepherd of Israel long before Christ came. His people had been referred to as 'sheep', first by David.

Your answer means nothing re what the verse says. I don't see what God as a shepherd in the OT has to do with Jesus saying the reason they don't believe is because they aren't of his fold, not vise versa. The verse couldn't be any plainer. There's no plainer way to put it.

In a way, that is stating the obvious, but at the same time, you give so little credibility to the part man plays in receiving salvation, that it doesn't come over like you acknowledge the love relationship between God and man which very many parts of scripture picture.

Well, I stated that it's imperative to our salvation, so I can't give it more credibility unless I say it's the source of our salvation. And that would be a great heresy. Christ is the source of my salvation. At the cross he said, 'it's finished', not 'it's started'.

Yes, God won't save us against our will, but rather as David said, 'We are made willing in the day of Him power'.

God softens our hearts. That is what the New Covenant is all about. The 'I wills' of the New Covenant in Jer 31 and Ez 36. God declares he 'will' do these things in our hearts because on our own, we won't.

That is why it is called 'free grace', why it says we are 'freely justified' and why it is called an 'election of grace'.

Those were good thoughts.

imnowhere wrote:
Romans 6:1

What kind of gospel do you have to teach to have this kind of response?

To put Romans 6:1 into context, [b]Romans 5:20[/b] [color=660000]Moreover the law entered, that the offense might abound. [b]But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound[/b]:[/color]

[b]Romans 5:21[/b] [color=660000]So that, just as sin has reigned until death, therefore, in this way might grace reign through righteousness toward eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.[/color]

Paul was taking their thinking to the conclusion which they MIGHT come to after hearing what he just wrote; [color=660000]What shall we say then?[/color] shall we not obey the law because we say that we have faith; [b]because it is not of works of the law but of faith[/b] [color=660000]that grace may abound?[/color]

They have the same theology as some now who say that there is no need to repent, because that would be a "works based salvation"

Paul rejects this theology with the next verse:
[b]Romans 6:2[/b] [color=660000]God forbid! How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer in it?[/color]
Notice the play on words:
[b]Dead[/b] to sin, [b]live[/b] any longer in it.

Being dead to something is to be cut off from it.

"God forbid! How shall we, that are dead (cut off) from sin, live (have a connection with it) any longer in it?"

Paul is showing the nonsense of their conclusion; he is definitely showing that one must repent in order to receive grace for righteousness.

Would Finney have received the same response as Paul? Spurgeon?

(We all know it's the wrong assumption and not what Paul taught, but an interesting response to Paul's gospel. Would you get the same objection as Paul did?)

They do not take notice that repentance is the "work" of faith which makes the faith living (James Chapter 2)

It isn't the teaching that brought about this kind of response, but what they believed before the teaching.

Just wondering how you came to that conclusion? It follows on the heels of the doctrine he just laid down and it is the first objection that Paul deals with following his own teaching. It is obviously the teaching that brought it on as they were very 'law' oriented beforehand and Paul's gospel of grace is so over-the-top grace laden that it incited this opposition from the jews. That's like saying it wasn't Paul's teaching that brought the same type of questions in Rom 9:14,19.

They have the same theology as some now who say that there is no need to repent, because that would be a "works based salvation"

Quite the opposite. The jews had dumbed down the law into something that they believed saved them. To say the jews of Paul's day taught there was no need to repent is a new opinion, that's for sure.

However, those the disagree would say that "if one must do something in order to be saved, it is a works based salvation."

Depends if the 'doing' is what brings about the salvation or is in response to God's initiative.

Our answer must stay true to all Paul says about grace. If we merit the salvation it's not grace. If we respond to God's work, it's still grace.

If God gets 'all' the glory, we're fine.

Anonymous:

Justification by grace through faith means that we are undeservingly forgiven by an obedient working faith. We are not justified by dead faith, but by true faith. True faith purifies the heart, sanctifies us, works by love, overcomes the world, and obeys God.

I think the emphasis is in the wrong place. Its true we are justified and sanctified by true faith, but faith is only a means to salvation and our focus and emphasis should be on Jesus and his work on the cross. Jesus Christ is our wisdom, justification, sanctification, redemption.

We are forgiven because Jesus shed His blood on the cross and we receive forgiveness thru faith but its grace that saves us not faith.

What purifies the heart is the cross and the Holy Spirit but its thru faith we receive this purification.

Brother i believe you need the balance of faith and grace and of repentance and holiness. You emphasize too much one-sided truth, the human responsibility and ability to the neglect of devine work of grace.

Keep the balance! :-)

Edited

imnowhere wrote:

It isn't the teaching that brought about this kind of response, but what they believed before the teaching.

Just wondering how you came to that conclusion?

It follows on the heels of the doctrine he just laid down and it is the first objection that Paul deals with following his own teaching.

It is obviously the teaching that brought it on as they were very 'law' oriented beforehand and Paul's gospel of grace is so over-the-top grace laden that it incited this opposition from the Jews.

That's like saying it wasn't Paul's teaching that brought the same type of questions in Rom 9:14,19.No, it's like having a wrong theology when a good teaching is heard.
One will get objections because of a preconceived theology of the listeners.

They have the same theology as some now who say that there is no need to repent, because that would be a "works based salvation"

Quite the opposite. The Jews had dumbed down the law into something that they believed saved them. To say the Jews of Paul's day taught there was no need to repent is a new opinion, that's for sure.

Why do you think that they would say "[color=660000]Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?[/color]"
If they didn't have the idea in their heads what Paul was saying in Rom 4 against works of the law?

What they thought Paul was saying is that "[color=660000]to him that doesn't work, [b]but only believes[/b] on him that justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.[/color]" (Rom 4:5)

They already know that sin is the transgression of the law (1 John 3:4).
However, when Paul starts to say that one must not do "works of the law, they figured that if you don't keep the law, you will be sinning.

That is why they might say in Romans 6:1 [color=660000]What shall we say then? Shall we continue to transgress the law[/color] (shall we not obey the law because we say that we have faith (Rom 4:4-5). Because it is not of works of the law but of faith?)[color=660000], that grace may abound?[/color]"

Do you see their confusion?

However, those that disagree would say that "if one must do something in order to be saved, it is a works based salvation."

Depends if the 'doing' is what brings about the salvation or is in response to God's initiative.

Repenting from what?
Romans 2:13
from not following the [b]MORAL[/b] law which is based in love (Matthew 22:37, John 13:34, 1 Peter 1:22) and from your own conscience (Romans 2:14-15).

Our answer must stay true to all Paul says about grace. If we merit the salvation it's not grace. If we respond to God's work, it's still grace.

If God gets 'all' the glory, we're fine.

Our duty is [color=660000]that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God[/color] (Rom 12:1)

[b]Romans 6:15[/b] [color=660000]What then? Shall we sin, because we are not under the law[/color] (shall we sin by not obeying the law as because we are not justified by the law but by faith)[color=660000], but under grace? God forbid.
[b]:16[/b] Know you not, that to whom you yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants you are to whom you obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?[/color]
[b]Rom 6:18[/b] [color=660000]Being then made free from sin, you became the servants of righteousness.[/color]

What is righteousness?
[color=660000]he that does righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.[/color] (1 John 3:7)
[color=660000]In all manner of conduct, be holy as He who has called you is holy[/color] (1 Peter 1:15)

All in all, we must do something in order for our salvation to be valid; but not to earn anything, but only because we love God.

When we do that which is our duty, it glorifies God.

Did you read my whole post, or just skim over it just to argue against it?

Yes. I did read it all.

Sorry it's taken all day to get back here. I'd like to agree with elected's comment about the one-sidedness of your theology.

I think he was speaking about your side of theology. I could be wrong, but you might want to re read.

Because you seem to believe man has no freewill at all, and that there is no process before the crisis of new birth

I've never said or implied that. No free will at all? Man has a will, it's just not entirely 'free' like God's is. We are slaves to sin or slaves to righteousness. Not 'free'. But man does need to excercise his will, for without faith and repentance he cannot enter into salvation. He needs God's grace to do so, not on his own.

So do I. Now, perhaps you can explain why you think this must mean that He only draws some people? Why can it not mean that He draws everyone? (I'm serious. Please explain. And please don't tell me it's because most people don't get saved. That answer is flawed.)

Please don't ask a question and then tell me how I can and can't answer it. You're the moderate one remember?
Rom 8:30 says all that are predestined to salvation are called. All that are called are justified. All that are justified are glorified.
I'm sure you're familiar with the distinction in scripture between the internal/effectual call and the external/general call of God. Rom 8:30 says all that God calls will be glorified. In this light, to deny the doctrines of grace I'd have to be a universalist to stay true to the text without ignoring or twisting it.

Have you looked at John 6:45 in context, and wondered what 'all' might mean?

Well, from the verse it seems that 'all' those taught of God are those that do come to Him. The all cannot therefore refer to everyone who has ever lived.

That's the problem with your interpretation. It has no spiritual content.

Sorry for that. Why are you asking my opinion then? I thought I was the 'black and white' guy? ;-)

I have never heard 'It is finished' applied to 'salvation', in this way. And, your previous statement about us having been justified at the time of Christ's death (in the sense that we were saved then), comes too close to universalism for comfort.

Too close only if you believe in universal atonement, which almost all of the great theologians of the church age have denied. But it's not about comfort, if it was, I'd believe what you do, honestly. Particular redemption is a hard doctrine, yet biblical. You're right, it's not comfortable. Comfortable would be a theology where man was actually sovereign and had totall free will and was in control of his own salvation and God was waiting to see who might join Him.
Wait, in light of Rom 3 that would be terrifying.

So, what was it that was finished, seeing His death is essential to our salvation?

Do you think the 'spiritual' interpretation would be that he had his own death in mind when he said this as it was moments away? It's hard to make a statement for mankind regarding the greatest work ever done once you've died. Jesus probably understood this and uttered what he did before he died because it would be more helpful to us.

I have never heard 'It is finished' applied to 'salvation', in this way.

If it's not about the atonement for our salvation, what could he be speaking about? This gets more interesting as we go!

I hope you're man enough to chew this question thoroughly

That's awesome, brother. My theology must be bad enough for you to imply that not only have I not even considered these things, but I'm somehow a bit of a coward as well.

My friend, free-will theology is far easier to accept than the doctrines of grace. That is why George Whitefield said we all start out Arminian.

Your posts show that you care deeply about how salvation comes to be. I've shared my views as best I can. I'm sure we'll both continue to grow as God speaks to our hearts and minds.

God bless.

These words written by other men, in whom I am in total agreement with. It is not all will be saved, it is all will know that salvation is available and none are able to agree with Christ's Gospel unless the Father draws them into the Truth by the Holy Spirit, that they might receive, not get by their own wills.

""Christ declares that the doctrine of the Gospel, though it is preached to all without exception, cannot be embraced by all, but that a new understanding and a new perception are requisite; and, therefore, that faith does not depend on the will of men, but that it is God who gives it.

Unless the Father draw him. To come to Christ being here used metaphorically for believing, the Evangelist, in order to carry out the metaphor in the apposite clause, says that those persons are drawn whose understandings God enlightens, and whose hearts he bends and forms to the obedience of Christ. The statement amounts to this, that we ought not to wonder if many refuse to embrace the Gospel; because no man will ever of himself be able to come to Christ, but God must first approach him by his Spirit; and hence it follows that all are not drawn,but that God bestows this grace on those whom he has elected. True, indeed, as to the kind of drawing, it is not violent, so as to compel men by external force; but still it is a powerful impulse of the Holy Spirit, which makes men willing who formerly were unwilling and reluctant. It is a false and profane assertion, therefore, that none are drawn but those who are willing to be drawn, 1 as if man made himself obedient to God by his own efforts; for the willingness with which men follow God is what they already have from himself, who has formed their hearts to obey him.""

""John 6:44
Ver. 44. That by drawing here is not to be understood any coaction, or force upon the will, is a thing on all hands out of question; but whether by it be only to be understood a rational drawing by arguments, (used in the ministry of the gospel), or a further powerful influence upon the soul, inclining it to be willing and obedient, that is the question. The patrons of a power in man's will to do what is spiritually good and necessary in order to eternal life and salvation, understand it of the former only (of which the compelling, mentioned Lu 14:23, is to be understood, for the ministers of the gospel have no other power to compel); but in regard the drawing here mentioned is the act not of the servants, but of the Master; not of the ministers, but of the Father; it is more reasonably concluded that it here signifies a Divine power put forth upon the soul of man, by which it is made obedient to the heavenly call, and willing to close with the offer of Christ in the gospel; for though no such thing can necessarily be concluded from the word draw, yet it is easily concluded from the nature of the motion, in coming to Christ, which is the soul's motion to a sublime, spiritual object, to which no soul hath any power of itself; such is the darkness of the human mind, the obstinacy of the will, the depravation of the affections, unless it be illuminated and drawn by the Spirit of God. No soul is able of itself to discern spiritual things, so as to see that goodness and excellency that is in them, much less to move towards the participation of them.""

These are just two, there are many, many more.

I could copy and paste until Christ comes and no one would understand or believe until the Father Draws them with the Holy Spirit conviction and prompting us to believe. The main Word that must be revealed to those that believe is not of man but of God and Christ and the Holy Spirit of Whom the Whole Word of God is ONE.

John 1:1-4 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

You must be born again? Who does the birthing?
Who gives the soul of man the Light to understand and be drawn? Jesus said, "No man can come to me unless the Father draws him".

Pretty simple, it is all of God and None of man that salvation comes to those that are Christs'.

Then the responsibility comes to man, by the Teacher, The Holy Spirit, That we all come to love The Father as the Son does, now we can repent and believe, by the Spirit and Mind of Christ in us, and the Holy Spirit also teaching us how to renew our minds to the Mind of Christ and be conformed to His Image that we Love as He Loves us.

In The Love of the Father and the Love of the Christ in us: Phillip

DeepThinker wrote:

This whole thing can be summed in these verses.

Romans 9:15 I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

God knows the heart of man. HE knows if & when they will yield to Him or not.

God will be gracious to & show mercy on those HE knows will yield. For this is the character of God.
________________________________

God is not stating that He is arbitrary, for that is against His character.

It is not saying that He can do anything with out reason, just because He is God, for God's character has a boundary of purpose.

God has His own reasons for mercy which are based upon standards outside of Himself which has been before creation and are according to His character; He is...
selfless, Just, righteous, loving, compationate, peaceable, gentle, and easily entreated, full of mercy, without partiality...ect...

Romans 9:16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

Abraham [b]willed[/b] or desired that it the promise might be given to Ishmael.

Isaac also [b]willed[/b] or desired that the promise might be given to Esau.

This verse is in context with Exodus 33:18-20 & Abraham willing that the promise would come through Ishmael as the context proves Genesis 17:18
Moreover, in Genesis 27 Isaac is willing for Esau to have the blessing and Esau "[b]running[/b]" to hunt and make Isaac's favorite meal for the blessing.

God also chooses the one which is not wanted or favored by man.
Jacob wanted Rachel because he favored her more than Leah. But God shown HIS favor on Leah by her child bringing the SEED through Judah.

Dear Logic,

God knows the heart of man. HE knows if & when they will yield to Him or not. God will be gracious to & show mercy on those HE knows will yield. For this is the character of God.
________________________________

God is not stating that He is arbitrary, for that is against His character.

It is not saying that He can do anything with out reason, just because He is God, for God's character has a boundary of purpose.

God said to Jeroboam through the prophet Ahijah:
[i]1Ki 11:37-38 However, as for you, I will take you, and you will rule over all that your heart desires; you will be king over Israel. If you do whatever I command you and walk in my ways and do what is right in my eyes by keeping my statutes and commands, as David my servant did, I will be with you. I will build you a dynasty as enduring as the one I built for David and will give Israel to you.[/i]

But Jeroboam did not yield to God's wish. He accepted the kingdom of Israel and turned them away form God.

I say this out of loving concern for you, Logic, with no intention to hurt. There are times when you presume too much. Once cannot know God the way one can know other people. He is not a man. His ways and his thoughts are beyond ours - as heaven is higher than the earth.

There are many things about himself that God has made known to us, and these are the things that we can cling to with full knowledge - like his love, his mercy, his justice...etc. But there are things that he also warns us that he has kept us ignorant about, and this is one of them. We must not presume to know how he will think with regards to his grace or his mercy. There is no divine formula regarding this that has been revealed to man. In this area, no one can presume what God thinks or what God will do.

[i]Ro 9:15-16 For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” It does not, therefore, depend on man’s desire or effort, but on God’s mercy.[/i]

He is God; He will do as he pleases and no man can say he did wrong.

(Edit - added):
We all deserve the fires of hell anyway, so anything we get is undeserved -- gravy to be thankful for. If others get more, there is no reason to complain. If one gets nothing -- no grace from God -- still there is nothing to complain about. His justice is still served.

Logic wrote:

""God will be gracious to & show mercy on those HE knows will yield. For this is the character of God.""

God also knows that none will yield without His intervening in any life that will yield and believe.

Both old and new testament;

Ps 14:3 They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
Ps 53:3 Every one of them is gone back: they are altogether become filthy; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

1 Corinthians 6:5 I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren?

Even Paul did not know his own salvation, only God knows.

2 Corinthians 12:2-6 I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven. And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter. Of such an one will I glory: yet of myself I will not glory, but in mine infirmities. For though I would desire to glory, I shall not be a fool; for I will say the truth: but now I forbear, lest any man should think of me above that which he seeth me to be, or that he heareth of me.

This is the only glory man has;

Colossians 1:27-29 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory: Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus: Whereunto I also labour, striving according to his working, which worketh in me mightily.

1 Corinthians 1:30-31 But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption: That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.

Glory? None of man, all of God.

Ro 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
Ro 3:12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

In Christ, who is all and in all that are His by the Father's election:

Phillip

Psalm 14 & Psalm 53 are about [b]fools[/b] who say their his heart, "There is no God." They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none ([b]fools[/b]) that does good..."

2 Corinthians 12:2-6 is a rebuke for being able to judge, but not doing it.

Romans 3:10 is a quote from Psalm 53, see above.
Romans 3:12 is a quote from Psalm 14, see above.

I agree. I think 'fool' is a good term for the 'natural man', for he can't understand anything spiritual (1 Cor 2:14), as a matter of fact it says he [b]can't[/b] know them. Now if man can't know spiritual things before he's saved, it's hard to give him much credit at all.

That's why we don't boast in man or ourselves (1 Cor 4:7). We could if we liked, and many do, but it would be amiss.

God is jealous of His glory. He doesn't share it with anyone. Not you, Logic, not me, or anyone else. (Is 42:8)

Spend your time and energy pointing people to Christ and the glory due Him. Not man.

for God's character has a boundary of purpose.

It's simple...

'for God's boundaries have a purpose of character'

'for God's purposes have a boundary of character'

'for God's purposes have a character of boundaries'

Just jokin. no offense. What did you mean?

DeepThinker wrote:

for God's character has a boundary of purpose.

Where do you get your logic?

The confirmed detail is that God does nothing with out purpose

My logic is everyone's logic, not my very own. It is the only logic there is, It's universal.

If you disagree that God's character has a boundary of purpose, then you think God acts with out purpose.
You think God is arbitrary and acts with out criteria.

If you disagree, you go against logic.

It is a system of reasoning as the rules of natural deduction which describe how we may proceed from valid premises to valid conclusions, where the premises and conclusions are expressions in confirmed detail.

Or you can get Logic's answer verbatim off this web site...

http://www.unique-design.net/library/word/logic.html

Having read through the site, Logic's answers now make a lot more sense...

"This website defines a new religious ideology to which its author adheres..."

"All views and opinions presented on this web site are the views and opinions of individual human men and women that, through their writings, showed the capacity for intelligent, reasonable, rational, insightful and unpopular thought..."

"Opinion and thoughts have been adapted, edited, corrected, redacted, combined, added to, re-edited and re-corrected as nearly all opinion and thought has been throughout time but has been done so in the spirit of the original writer with the intent of making his or her thoughts and opinions clearer and relevant to the reader in the present time..."

imnowhere wrote:

It is a system of reasoning as the rules of natural deduction which describe how we may proceed from valid premises to valid conclusions, where the premises and conclusions are expressions in confirmed detail.

Or you can get Logic's answer verbatim off this web site...

http://www.unique-design.net/library/word/logic.html

Having read through the site, Logic's answers now make a lot more sense...

1+1=2
This is logic; this is fact.

"God does nothing with out purpose"
This is fact, therefore logical to know.

"God does nothing arbitrarily and never acts with out criteria"
This is fact, therefore, logical to know.

I don't see how you are disagreeing to all this.

God has already told us that the logic and wisdom and strength of all men everywhere put together doesn't hold a candle to the weakness and foolishness of God.

1 Corinthians 1:17-31 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; (((not logical)))but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
(((NOT LOGICAL))) But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men. For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: That no flesh should glory in his presence. But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption: That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.

There is nothing logical about the Christ birthed in us, we have a new life in us, that is the born again Spirit of Christ in us the hope of Glory. This is foolishness to man, only God can reveal this new nature and life we have by the Christ rebirthed in us. Even the epitome of Law, Logic, understanding, wisdom and strength of Nicodemus was answered with a question of no Logic at all, "go back into my mothers womb?".

Galatians 2:16-20 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid. For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor. For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God. I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

Glory? This mystery is totally illogical and even Peter says is hard to understand.

Colossians 1:25-29 Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God; Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints: To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory: Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus: Whereunto I also labour, striving according to His working, which worketh in me mightily.

How are we perfect?

In Christ our Glory: Phillip

Christinyou wrote:
God has already told us that the logic and wisdom and strength of all men everywhere put together doesn't hold a candle to the weakness and foolishness of God.

The Scriptures say nothing about "the logic of all men"

I have not used any worldly wisdom.

This mystery is totally illogical and even Peter says is hard to understand.

Logic wrote:

Christinyou wrote:
God has already told us that the logic and wisdom and strength of all men everywhere put together doesn't hold a candle to the weakness and foolishness of God.

No He didn't.
The Scriptures say, "[color=660000]the [b]wisdom[/b] of this world is foolishness with God[/color]"

The Scriptures say nothing about "the logic of all men"

I have not used any worldly wisdom.

This mystery is totally illogical and even Peter says is hard to understand.

God always makes sense. He is never "illogical".

Are you telling us that God is always logical, and therefore all his decisions and actions are always predictable?

Where would you get this "logic" that you claim can define God's ways, if it is not from man's wisdom, where does it come from?

I'm trying to get a handle on what you are trying to say, so please have patience with these questions.

Leo_Grace wrote:
Logic,

Are you telling us that God is always logical, and therefore all his decisions and actions are always predictable?

Where would you get this "logic" that you claim can define God's ways,

Do you think God is unreasonable, illogical?

Do you think God is with out purpose?

Do you think God is arbitrary?

Do you think God chooses with out criteria?

if it is not from man's wisdom, where does it come from?

I'm trying to get a handle on what you are trying to say, so please have patience with these questions.

Logic,

Do you think God is unreasonable, illogical?

Do you think God is with out purpose?

Do you think God is arbitrary?

Do you think God chooses with out criteria?

There will be many times when God's choices will be incomprehensible and will seem illogical to man. Anyone who does not acknowledge this truth of God's unreachable superiority thinks too highly of himself.

I am not using "man's wisdom"

Leo_Grace wrote:
Logic,

Do you think God is unreasonable, illogical?

Do you think God is with out purpose?

Do you think God is arbitrary?

Do you think God chooses with out criteria?

I know that God has a reason, a purpose, and a basis for everything he does. However I also know that the wisdom behind his choices is beyond all human knowledge. God's "logic" cannot be comprehended by human "logic".

There will be many times when God's choices will be incomprehensible and will seem illogical to man.

Anyone who does not acknowledge this truth of God's unreachable superiority thinks too highly of himself.

I am not using "man's wisdom"

I take this to mean that you are acknowledging a wisdom that is beyond yours;

All "man's wisdom" is godless, with out considering Him at all.

[b]1Corinth 1:18[/b] [color=660000]For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us who are saved it is the power of God.
[b]:19[/b] For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
[b]:20[/b] Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
[b]:21[/b] For since in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
[b]:22[/b] For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
[b]:23[/b] But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumbling block, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
[b]:24[/b] But unto them who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.[/color]

The preaching of the cross is foolishness to them that perish because they do not acknowledge sin; for with out sin, the cross is indeed foolish.

Furthermore, the Jewish Messiah being crucified was not at all what the Jews expected. It was one of the major reasons for Paul hating the Christians; making the Messiah a curse!?! "Cursed is every one that hangs on a tree" (Gal 3:13).
The Messiah was supposed to reign as king & bring peace.

[b]Pro 3:5[/b] [color=660000]Trust in the LORD with all your heart; and lean not unto your own understanding.
[b]:6[/b] In all your ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct your paths.[/color]Some like to use this verse as their defense for your argument.
This verse is in context of our ways & paths.

It is like trusting a leader who knows the future and what's beyond perception as the one who's being lead knows only the now and whats in front of him.

and not that you are literally using God's wisdom in your own head?

1Corinth 2:1-10
tells us that we may know God's wisdom, which is not "man's wisdom" (verse 4) or "wisdom of this world" (verse 6)
"[color=660000]We have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teaches, but which the Holy Spirit teaches; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.[/color]"

Furthermore, we also may have His wisdom when we take into consideration of our actions who He is as He reveals Himself.

We use God's wisdom when we repent.
We use God's wisdom when we pray.
We use God's wisdom when we obey Him.
We use God's wisdom as we apply His Word in our everyday lives.

Isaiah 55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.

Ezekiel 18:25 Yet ye say, The way of the Lord is not equal. Hear now, O house of Israel; Is not my way equal? are not your ways unequal?

Ezekiel 18:29 Yet saith the house of Israel, The way of the Lord is not equal. O house of Israel, are not my ways equal? are not your ways unequal?

God's ways are so far above our ways, it will take all eternity to even come to a simple understanding like; "Christ in you the Hope of Glory, forever in eternity, even with the Holy Spirit in us forever, that is a new life, rebirthed in the believer. Israel could not do it for thousands of years, how do you expect the unregenerate man to even come to a logical understanding of God, It takes the whole God Head for us to come to salvation and the image of Christ, even with the Mind of Christ in us. God and only God can reveal to the believer what His Logic in our salvation is, God must draw every believer to come to the revelation of Christ as our salvation, "Christ in you the Hope of Glory". Praise God it is not up to my intellect, or logic, because I could never come to the truth and be saved.

In Christ, by the Father and the Holy Spirit only:
By the total work of Christ on the Cross:

Phillip

Logic,

You're implying that there are two different kinds of logic; God's & ours. Logic is logic, no matter who's using it.

Leo_Grace wrote:
Logic,

You're implying that there are two different kinds of logic; God's & ours. Logic is logic, no matter who's using it.

Then you are deluded by your pride. No matter how much you crow or boast, your puny mind cannot match the infinite greatness of God's. God's logic spans endless time and plumbs the depths of reasoning that men are not able to explore.

It's obvious Paul's gospel wasn't coming across as 'logic' either.
The law is logical, not free grace.
Hence a bit of confusion on the part of the hearers.

You are not talking about logic.

Leo_Grace wrote:

You are not talking about logic.

I am talking about logic.

It doesn't matter if God "spans endless time and plumbs the depths of reasoning", He still uses the same logic as we do... 1+1=2.
Or .+.=..

He still uses the same logic as we do...

Really? So would you offer up your Son to die for your enemies? Would you tell a cripple to walk?

Hmm, somehow I don't think so.

Logic wrote:

Leo_Grace wrote:

You are not talking about logic.

I am talking about logic.

No your not, Logic is a system of reasoning which comes to conclusions, judgments, based on facts &/or criteria.

It doesn't matter if God "spans endless time and plumbs the depths of reasoning", He still uses the same logic as we do... 1+1=2.
Or .+.=..

I am talking about true logic, which is always limited by mental capacity, not theoretical logic which you would use to elevate yourself to God's level. 1 + 1 = 2? (Edited:) I think God's logic goes beyond that.