No A-Z; either 100% T or 100% F

[Mark Beesley]

Originally Posted by Billyray

My sentence is true ""If a tree does not produce fruit it is dead or not really a fruit tree." However I am simply trying to anticipate your objection before you raise it.

You are ***uming that I am going to object, probably not a good idea. So, at this point I will defer addressing the other points you made in your post until such time as I do object, if I do. And if I don't object, well then, maybe we can move on. Fair enough?

So, back to your complete ****ogy and my restatment thereof. Your ****ogy was this:

A fruit tree naturally produces fruit. The fruit do not cause the life of that tree but are a result of the life of that tree. If a tree does not produce fruit it is dead or not really a fruit tree.

My restatement was this:

A saved person naturally produces good works. The good works do not cause the salvation of the saved person, but are a result of salvation of the good person. If a saved person does not produce good fruit he/she is dead or not really a saved person.

So again, ignoring the case of the thief on the cross or other deathbed conversions, does my restatement accurately reflect what you are arguing with your ****ogy?

[Mesenja]

Originally Posted by Libby

Ostler so obviously doesn't know what he's talking about,Mesenja,because Calvinists never speak in terms of "prevenient grace". That is an Arminian term.

As for whom God saves,that is simply an unknown,in the end. I honestly don't know but what God does not have in mind to save "all". All I know is that none of usHere is the definition for the words prevenient and irresistible from the deserve His grace and mercy and yet He is gracious to give it anyway. Even just this life (if that is all there is) is a precious gift. He is a God of Love,a God of mercy and benevolence that is beyond human understanding. Painting Calvinists as believing in a monster of a God is simply inaccurate and the result of faulty understanding (in many areas,including the Bible).

The terminology is a Christian theological concept rooted in Augustinian theology and embraced mainly by Arminian Christians who are influenced by the theology of John Wesley.

Prevenient grace is divine grace which precedes human decision. It exists prior to and without reference to anything humans may have done. As humans are corrupted by the effects of sin,prevenient grace allows persons to engage their God-given free will to choose the salvation offered by God in Jesus Christ or to reject that salvific offer. Whereas Augustine held that prevenient grace cannot be resisted,Wesleyan Arminians believe that it enables, but does not ensure,personal acceptance of the gift of salvation. [Wikipedia:Prevenient Grace]

Does it make any difference if the term prevenient grace and not irresistible grace (or efficacious grace) was used? You are quibbling over irrelevancies.

Irresistible Grace (or efficacious grace) is a doctrine in Christian theology particularly ***ociated with Calvinism,which teaches that the saving grace of God is effectually applied to those whom he has determined to save (the elect) and in God's timing,overcomes their resistance to obeying the call of the gospel,bringing them to faith in Christ. [Wikipedia:Irresistible Grace]

Ostler does say that for Calvinists,grace is irresistible—it cannot be rejected by an evil will because the elect were predestined to salvation and in God's timing,overcomes their resistance to obeying the call of efficacious grace.

For Calvinists,God’s prevenient grace moves the human will to accept God’s efficacious grace. According to Calvin,persons can accept the saving grace only because God has predestined them to salvation and causally determined their will to accept efficacious grace through his prevenient grace. Moreover,God’s prevenient grace is irresistible—it cannot be rejected by an evil will. Those who do not accept God’s efficacious grace,or grace that accomplishes their salvation,fail to do so because God has decided in his arbitrary election to leave them to ****ation. That is,in the Calvinist view God has decided not to grant irresistible prevenient grace to some and thus has decided to abandon them to ****ation. [Bridging the Gulf Blake T. Ostler FARMS Review: Volume-11,Issue-2,Pages:103-77 A review of "How Wide the Divide? A Mormon and an Evangelical in Conversation." by Craig L. Blomberg and Stephen E. Robinson Provo,Utah:Maxwell Ins***ute,1999]

As for answering that "As for whom God saves,that is simply an unknown,in the end. I honestly don't know but what God does not have in mind to save 'all'" it is a dodge. It should bother you enough to find out the answer or at least seriously question that God according to Calvinism can save everyone out of love but has decided to leave some to ****ation.

Once again the question by Blake Ostler is "If God can save everyone,and he desires to save everyone out of love,then why has he decided to leave some persons to ****ation?"

[Father_JD]

Might I ask WHY you haven't deigned to answer my point by point re****al of Ostler's skewed understanding of so-called "Calvinism"????

[Mesenja]

Originally Posted by Father_JD

Might I ask WHY you haven't deigned to answer my point by point re****al of Ostler's skewed understanding of so-called "Calvinism"?

I didn't know anything about this. Sorry for any hurt feelings I may have caused you. My delay in responding has nothing to do with the fact that you posted it.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by Mark Beesley

A saved person naturally produces good works. The good works do not cause the salvation of the saved person, but are a result of salvation of the good person. If a saved person does not produce good fruit he/she is dead or not really a saved person.


So again, ignoring the case of the thief on the cross or other deathbed conversions, does my restatement accurately reflect what you are arguing with your ****ogy?

A saved person naturally produces good works. The good works do not cause the salvation of the saved person, but are a result of salvation. If a saved person does not produce good fruit eventually produce fruit then it is likely that he in not truly saved. However, the bottom line is that we are saved by faith and not by works.

[Mark Beesley]

Originally Posted by Billyray

A saved person naturally produces good works. The good works do not cause the salvation of the saved person, but are a result of salvation. If a saved person does not produce good fruit eventually produce fruit then it is likely that he in not truly saved. However, the bottom line is that we are saved by faith and not by works.

I understand and appreciate your eagerness to move the discussion forward, and I promise that it will. But before moving on to the matter of what you call the "bottom line," I want to make sure we are on the same page with regard to the restatement of your ****ogy.

I believe we are very close to being in full agreement, I just need clarification on one small detail. Originally, the last sentence of my restatement (based on your ****ogy) said,

If a saved person does not produce good fruit he/she is dead or not really a saved person.

You have altered the last sentence slightly to read,

If a saved person does not [] eventually produce fruit then it is likely that he in not truly saved.

Can you explain to me the significance of the changes you made, particularly the insertion of the words eventually and likely?

Thanks.

[Libby]

Originally Posted by Mesenja

The terminology is a Christian theological concept rooted in Augustinian theology and embraced mainly by Arminian Christians who are influenced by the theology of John Wesley.

I just noticed I hadn't replied to this. Honestly, I don't want to spend too much time on this.

Does it make any difference if the term prevenient grace and not irresistible grace (or efficacious grace) was used? You are quibbling over irrelevancies.

Actually, the terms are very different and not irrelevant. Prevenient grace is used to mean more of an "enabling" (as you mentioned) and efficacious grace is...effective.

As for answering that "As for whom God saves,that is simply an unknown,in the end. I honestly don't know but what God does not have in mind to save 'all'" it is a dodge. It should bother you enough to find out the answer or at least seriously question that God according to Calvinism can save everyone out of love but has decided to leave some to ****ation.

Once again the question by Blake Ostler is "If God can save everyone,and he desires to save everyone out of love,then why has he decided to leave some persons to ****ation?"

Consider it a "copout" if you wish, but I have told you the truth. I really don't know (nor do I have any way of knowing) who all God will save, in the end....and neither do you.

[Mesenja]

Originally Posted by Libby

Originally Posted by Libby

I just noticed I hadn't replied to this. Honestly,I don't want to spend too much time on this.

Originally Posted by Libby

Consider it a "cop out" if you wish,but I have told you the truth. I really don't know (nor do I have any way of knowing) who all God will save, in the end....and neither do you.

Don't try to find the answers to any such troubling questions. All you have to do is just believe and everything will be just fine.

[Mesenja]

Originally Posted by Libby

By the way,I read Robinson's book some time ago. He makes it all sound very reasonable,but where he gets tripped up is in the definition of terms. LDS and Christians use the same terms,but they mean such different things that they are actually NOT talking about the same things,in most cases. The divide is,actually,quite wide.

When you get to the point where you overuse this same disingenuous argument then take a fresh approach and say we don't believe in the same Jesus.

[akaSeerone]

And when you have something other than an ad hominem get back with us, otherwise stay away.

You have no argument.....whether you like it or not it is a proven fact that mormonism has a Jesus that is not God, not the Jesus of the Bible so once again your post is irrelevant and just shows your hatred for everything Godly and everything Christian.

Andy

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by Mark Beesley

I understand and appreciate your eagerness to move the discussion forward, and I promise that it will. But before moving on to the matter of what you call the "bottom line," I want to make sure we are on the same page with regard to the restatement of your ****ogy.

I believe we are very close to being in full agreement, I just need clarification on one small detail. Originally, the last sentence of my restatement (based on your ****ogy) said,

You have altered the last sentence slightly to read,
Can you explain to me the significance of the changes you made, particularly the insertion of the words eventually and likely?

Thanks.

Because not ALL people will have fruit in their life--prime example the thief on the cross, and yet be saved. Just like a very young tree--clearly alive and growing yet has not produced fruit--but the tree is still alive.

[Mark Beesley]

Originally Posted by Billyray

Because not ALL people will have fruit in their life--prime example the thief on the cross, and yet be saved. Just like a very young tree--clearly alive and growing yet has not produced fruit--but the tree is still alive.

Ok, great. We agree. I can say, without reservation, and without the qualifiers of eventually and likely that I the believe the following:

A saved person naturally produces good works. The good works do not cause the salvation of the saved person, but are a result of salvation of the good person. If a saved person does not produce good fruit he/she is dead or not really a saved person.

So now I've had to ask myself: What have we accomplished with the ****ogy and subsequent ****ysis? So I went back to where the ****ogy was first offered to see what premise you were supporting with the ****ogy. This was your original post, edited to eliminate unnecessary verbiage.

Originally Posted by Billyray

Works are NOT required for salvation but flow because of our salvation.

A fruit tree naturally produces fruit. The fruit do not cause the life of that tree but are a result of the life of that tree. If a tree does not produce fruit it is dead or not really a fruit tree.

From what I can tell, the ****ogy does not fully support the premise because it does not deal with the following question: How does the fruit tree become a fruit tree in the first place? In other words, How does a saved person become a saved person in the first place? The ****ogy only tells us how we can tell if it is a fruit tree, or said another way, how we can tell if a person is saved.

So now, in furtherance of our discussion, l think there are two question that we need to ask:
1. What is salvation?
2. At what what point in time can a person say, I am saved?

I suggest we deal with only one of these questions at a time. What do you think, and do you have a preference?

[akaSeerone]

If you study Ephesians the second chapter you will get your answer.

There is no reason to deal with your fabricated questions one at a time because the answers you are seeking are right there in the second chapter of Ephesians.

And I am sure with just a short study of the second chapter of Ephesians you will have to agree that mormonism has it all wrong.

Andy

[Mesenja]

Originally Posted by Billyray

1. Born Again
2. Hear the gospel message
3. Faith (place my trust in Christ)
4. Repent (turn away from my sins)
5. Baptism (after my conversion)

Lets test your theory Mesenja. I have done the following steps. Will I be exalted?

Also that is not the New Testament pattern of salvation. Why don't you test your theory out on the conversion stories in THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES and see if it aligns with the steps given there?

[Mesenja]

Originally Posted by Billyray

I agree with you, I think that we should be baptized. I was baptized by a Christian pastor after leaving the LDS church. So does this mean that I am OK?

(please note that even though I think that we should be baptized this does not mean that I think that baptism is required for salvation)

Baptism according to you is a work and this is contrary to your belief in the doctrine of salvation by faith alone.

[Mesenja]

Originally Posted by James Banta

You really believe now that that baptism of John is the same baptism that Paul was teaching in Acts 22:16? Paul had commanded men that knew only the Baptism of John to be re-baptized in Acts 19:1-6. so John's baptism is NOT acceptable to the Church!!! What dose the p***age in acts 22 mean.. Lets look.

Acts 22:16
And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

Let put this in modern language. Why do you put of obedience to Jesus? Get up be baptized and call on His Name so that He can cleanse you of your sin. Unless you ask Him to become His child you will not be forgiven:

John 1:12-13
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
Which were born,not of blood,nor of the will of the flesh,nor of the will of man, but of God.

Romans 10:10
For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

These p***ages teach that you are totally out of agreement with God in His word. IHS Jim

This can only be done in the waters of baptism. Our sins are not remitted by calling on the name of Jesus Christ.


Acts 22:16
16 And now why tarriest thou? arise,and be baptized and wash away thy sins,calling on the name of the Lord.

1 Corinthians 6:11
11 And such were some of you:but ye are washed,but ye are sanctified,but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus,and by the Spirit of our God.

***us 3:5
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;

[Mesenja]

Originally Posted by Billyray

Justin Martyr believes in baptism--I believe in baptism. But baptism does not save. Salvation is by faith in Christ.

The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus
JUSTIN MARTYR

Chapter XIII.—Isaiah teaches that sins are forgiven through Christ’s blood.

“For Isaiah did not send you to a bath,there to wash away murder and other sins,which not even all the water of the sea were sufficient to purge;but,as might have been expected,this was that saving bath of the olden time which followed those who repented,and who no longer were purified by the blood of goats and of sheep,or by the ashes of an heifer,or by the offerings of fine flour, but by faith through the blood of Christ,and through His death, who died for this very reason,as Isaiah himself said,when he spake thus:‘The Lord shall make bare His holy arm in the eyes of all the nations,and all the nations and the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of God. "

ST. JUSTIN MARTYR (inter A.D. 148-155)

Whoever is convinced and believes that what they are taught and told by us is the truth,and professes to be able to live accordingly,is instructed to pray and to beseech God in fasting for the remission of their former sins,while we pray and fast with them. Then they are led by us to a place where there is water;and there they are reborn in the same kind of rebirth in which we ourselves were reborn:In the name of God,the Lord and Father of all,and of our Savior Jesus Christ,and of the Holy Spirit,they receive the washing with water. For Christ said,"Unless you be reborn,you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." ...The reason for doing this,we have learned from the Apostles. (The First Apology 61)

[Father_JD]

Originally Posted by Mesenja

I didn't know anything about this. Sorry for any hurt feelings I may have caused you. My delay in responding has nothing to do with the fact that you posted it.

Thanks, M...er, I guess so. I'll patiently await your studied response from my point by point re****al of Ostler's remarks.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by Billyray

Originally Posted by Mark Beesley

because 1 John 2 says that if we claim to know Christ (have accepted Christ's gift) but we are not obedient in keeping the commandments

Mark, we have gone over this on this board hundreds of times. Yet you seem to not understand. Works are NOT required for salvation but flow because of our salvation.

A fruit tree naturally produces fruit. The fruit do not cause the life of that tree but are a result of the life of that tree. If a tree does not produce fruit it is dead or not really a fruit tree.

Originally Posted by Mark Beesley

From what I can tell, the ****ogy does not fully support the premise because it does not deal with the following question: How does the fruit tree become a fruit tree in the first place? In other words, How does a saved person become a saved person in the first place? The ****ogy only tells us how we can tell if it is a fruit tree, or said another way, how we can tell if a person is saved.

I have tracked back the quotes. You are wrong on this point Mark. That was never a question that YOU raised but now you are acting like I did not answer one of your questions.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by Mark Beesley

1. What is salvation?

http://www.gotquestions.org/Christia...salvation.html
More often, the word “salvation” concerns an eternal, spiritual deliverance. When Paul told the Philippian jailer what he must do to be saved, he was referring to the jailer’s eternal destiny (Acts 16:30-31). Jesus equated being saved with entering the kingdom of God (Matthew 19:24-25).

What are we saved from? In the Christian doctrine of salvation, we are saved from “wrath,” that is, from God’s judgment of sin (Romans 5:9; 1 Thessalonians 5:9). Our sin has separated us from God, and the consequence of sin is death (Romans 6:23). Biblical salvation refers to our deliverance from the consequence of sin and therefore involves the removal of sin.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by Mesenja

Believing in Jesus is to follow him in this act of being baptized as well.

Originally Posted by Mesenja

Here are the five elements that forms the blueprint for every conversion story in Acts. What is consistent in all of them is the ordinance of baptism.

1. Hear
2. Believe
3. Repent of our sins
4. Confess
5. Be baptized (fully immersed) in water for the forgiveness of our sins.

Born Again
Hear the gospel message
Faith (place my trust in Christ)
Repent (turn away from my sins)
Baptism (after my conversion)

Lets test your theory Mesenja. I have done the following steps. Will I be exalted?

Originally Posted by Mesenja

Also that is not the New Testament pattern of salvation. Why don't you test your theory out on the conversion stories in THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES and see if it aligns with the steps given there?

I am quoting YOU directly. You are the one that made this list now you seem to be backing away. Make up your mind.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by Mesenja

Baptism according to you is a work and this is contrary to your belief in the doctrine of salvation by faith alone.

That did not address my question.

Originally Posted by Billyray

I agree with you, I think that we should be baptized. I was baptized by a Christian pastor after leaving the LDS church. So does this mean that I am OK?

(please note that even though I think that we should be baptized this does not mean that I think that baptism is required for salvation)

[Mesenja]

Originally Posted by Billyray

That did not address my question:"So does this mean that I am OK?"

Give me a specific and clear question and I will see if I can give you an answer. I have no idea what you mean by asking me if you are okay. If you are alluding to the question of your baptism being valid then no it is not. Baptism must be performed by one who has proper priesthood authority.

[Mesenja]

Originally Posted by Libby

Faith alone saved the thief on the cross. Real faith...saving faith..is all that's necessary. All of the verses I've quoted (and many, many more) say exactly that. You can't just throw those out, Marvin,and pretend they don't exist. No one is saying works are not necessary (or that works will not follow a saving faith). They will,most definitely if time permits. But,it is not the works that have the power to save. Works are the fruit of salvation. Only faith in Jesus Christ and his atoning sacrifice,has the power to save.

The only place in the Bible where it uses the term faith alone is in a refutation of this false doctrine.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by Mesenja

Give me a specific and clear question and I will see if I can give you an answer.

You stated below in reference to salvation (LDS exaltation)

Here are the five elements that forms the blueprint for every conversion story in Acts. What is consistent in all of them is the ordinance of baptism.

1. Hear
2. Believe
3. Repent (turn away from my old ways)
4. Confess (profess faith in Christ)
5. Be baptized

I have done the above 5 after leaving Mormonism and having my named removed from the LDS church. Will I be exalted if I follow your 5 steps above?