Saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone.

[Kurieuo]

Alright K - let's look at your side of the discussion again.

As Jac clarified, it is true that for my position Jac sees we can not know we have faith. I on the other hand do not believe this for my position. I claim to know I will still have faith in Christ when I die. Jac challenges that claims for he finds it odd. The funny thing about knowledge, and this is where Jac and I appear to differ, is that any knowledge we have can be wrong.

Right now, this is all I need to deal with. Look at the part I bolded. Are you REALLY saying that you believe absolute certainty is impossible? Do you really believe that we can't know ANYTHING for sure?

I believe we can have certain knowledge of ourselves and our sensations. Yet I see it as impossible for anyone who explores epistemology at depth, not to confront the serious post-modern challenge of uncertainty.

I certainly do not buy into a post-modern Relativist view that there is only perception of reality. I sincerely believe we can have knowledge of the world around us. The one thing we can not have is an objective verification that our knowledge of the world around us, being based as it is on our subjective perception and understanding, is in fact true. Only God has direct access to objective truths. On the other hand, our knowledge is always gained subjectively through what is presented to us through our senses and how we perceive and interpret such sensations. It could be our senses are misportraying reality, for example, consider a colour-blind person. Are they seeing reality correctly, or are we? Could we both be wrong about what the reality of colours we experience? Yet, that does not mean reality of colour does not exist, but it does show our perceptions need to be aligned in such a way that they provide with an accurate view of reality. Now when our belief aligns with objective reality, then I see we have uncovered and possess true knowledge.

Now "absolute certainty" is logically impossible for us empirically since everything is based on our subjective experience and interpretation of those experiences. On the other hand, "absolute certainty" is also quite subjective. I can be absolutely certain of something being true, and yet be wrong. I see it as dishonest or unlearned for someone to claim they have an objective take of reality. This is God's domain, for it is God who created the reality we experiences, so I see only God can objectively know in a direct manner what is true and what is not.

Now reflecting upon the issue of assurance in my position, you may as well just argue I can not have assurance of anything given my epistemological beliefs. And I would strongly disagree. One can take seriously that we can not objectively verify our subjective perception of reality is correct, but this does not mean such a person can not feel assured that their knowledge is correct.

But let's just run this out a step further: even IF I concede your point (and I most definitely don't), I still don't see by your own logic how you can know that you have faith. It sounds as if you are saying, "Well, I personally believe that I believe based on my intuitive knowledge of myself. Now, it is true that intuitive knowledge of the self has proven to be absolutely worthless so far as a justification of self-knowledge goes, but because I am not in the shoes of those whose intuition was wrong, that rule doesn't apply to me. So I'm still sure I believe just because I'm still sure I believe."

Work with your own beliefs Jac. Why am I not allowed to say that my experience of who I am is as foundational as Scripture is to you? And so in the same way you are absolutely certain in your interpretation of Scripture which you accept as foundational, I am likewise absolutely certain in my interpretation of who I am based on a direct awareness of who I am which I accept as foundational.

I repeatedly get back to the same point: What makes you different from Graham, Ehrman, Templeton, Barker, or any of the other hundreds of people who believed at one point and then stopped believing? Semantics aside (I think I've shown I understand your position), how do you know you will not stop believing? How do you know who you are when we have demonstrated that self-intuition is unreliable? And what do you do with all the verses I previously sited in which God says that we cannot know ourselves?

As I keep saying, what do others have to do with me knowing who I am? I am not claiming to know whether they knew who they were. I am claiming to know I know who I am. On the other hand, you need to argue I can not know any real part of the person I will develop into, and I see no reason for this at all especially when who I am now forms one part of the continuum in who I will be later. Surely there is a semblance of who I am now which holds true to the person I will develop into. And I claim to know foundationally that part of me which has faith in Christ, just as you claim to know foundationally based on Scripture that you are saved by accepting Christ's promise. There is really no difference besides the accepted sources used as foundations for our beliefs.

So my two arguments were this:

1. In light of the fact that individuals have "stopped believing," on what grounds can you say that you know you believe that is different from their own grounds?

I do not need to answer why others has stopped believing to justify I know myself. I am not claiming to have a direct knowledge of others, I am claiming to have a direct knowledge of myself. As I mentioned previously, you face a similar question if you like. On what grounds can you say that what you foundationally believe as being absolutely true is different from say that of the Mormon, Muslim or some other faith who believe what they do as being foundationally true. They are wrong in their beliefs, so does that mean we are wrong in ours? Of course not. Perhaps our believing we have absolute truth may be made suspect by others being wrong, but we can certainly still be assured that our beliefs are true don't you think?

2. How is a fallen man--complete in his ontologically fallen self--supposed to establish an ongoing relationship with Christ?

I do not understand. Relationships involve an "ongoingness" and God allows us to come into relationship with Himself.

And as an aside, when, in your view, is a person born again? Or do you even believe that people are born again?

Of course I believe a person is born again. I believe I am born again. I see the moment one truly changes in response to Christ, is the moment a spiritual perception of God is reinstated (that is, reinstated since the fall of humanity). It is the moment we ourselves are spiritually born and our perception of God and everything appears to change and become more clear.

[Fortigurn]

Thank you Fortigurn for being an objective lessen for my post. You clearly demonstrated disdain for God's word and absolute ignorance about the bible when in runs contrary to your particular belief system.

Thanks for the abuse, but I'd rather stay with the subject. Let's look at your claims:

* You claimed the passage spoke explicitly of the Holy Spirit, and quoted a Greek text which contained the words '῾Αγ߁ου, πνευματικοῖς', when in fact the Greek text does not (and nor did the English text you quoted). So you quoted a Greek text which didn't agree with the English text you quoted, and you didn't realise that the Greek text you did quote isn't supported by the best textual evidence and is rejected by standard textual criticism.

* You claim I think the Bible was written only to the 1st century believers and therefore none of it applies for us, despite the fact that I have never said any such thing, and I do not believe any such thing.

* You reassert your claim that 1 Corinthians 2:12-16 'is in clear reference to the Holy Spirit', without providing any evidence for your claim. If it was so clear, the text wouldn't have been altered later to include the words '῾Αγ߁ου', which was clearly a theologically motivated corruption.

* I am not arguing that only the Bereans are allowed to search the Scriptures. All of us have to do that. We compare spiritual things with spiritual things. This means comparing Scripture with Scripture. It's a pity the Reformers only paid lip service to Sola Scriptura.

I have never said 'The bible must spell out pure logic and state factual specific terms to understand it', and nor do I believe it.

* Incredibly, you identify my use of logic in reading the Bible as a bad thing, apparently preferring that the Bible be read without using logic. I can't agree.

* Your comparison of 1 Corinthians 2:12 and Matthew 28:19 doesn't do anything for your argument. I have never claimed that the words 'Holy Spirit' are not in the Bible. I claimed that they are not in the passage you said they were.

[Jac3510]

It seems like it places an 'unimportant importance' upon the role of faith. It seems to me that you are saying that a person can lose faith easily to apathy, ignorance, or even fiery trials. Yet at the same time you state faith is important but however not necessary. Does faith then have no more importance than cow dung? Cow dung is good for fertilizer and making methane gas. Other than that, it can produce nothing else. Such faith has an 'unimportant importance' to it and basically is not needed so why bother?

Why bother??????? Why bother?!?!?!?!??!?!?!

1) Without faith, we cannot be born again. God saves BY grace THROUGH faith. So, I should "bother" because it means I get to spend eternity with Christ.

2) Without faith it is impossible to please God. Everything I do in life should be for His glory, which means that I have to believe in Him. I have to have faith. I should "bother" because it means I get to please God.

3) The chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever. I should "bother" with faith because it is through faith that I bring God glory.

4) To lose faith dishonors God because it calls God a liar. I should "bother" with faith because it means that I bring Him glory!

5) To lose faith results in discipline in this life. I should "bother" with faith because a faithless Christian is a Christian under wrath.

6) We are called to bring others to the knowledge of God in Christ. That is impossible if we don't believe it ourselves. I should "bother" with faith because it is the only way another human being will hear the Gospel.

Should I continue? I could provide dozens and dozens of reasons. Faith is VERY important. Just because I don't see continuous faith as necessary to go to Heaven doesn't mean I don't see it as extremely valuable.

Is that what you are trying to get at? Just believe but beware that this belief in Christ may most likely fail in due course of time, but however, you'll remain saved just because you assented to Christological facts about Jesus' work upon the cross and resurrection? Such trivialization of faith in God leads to an apathetic attitude — after all why bother with faith at all?

When did I say that faith in Christ was "most likely" to fail? Did I ever even IMPLY that the chances are better that faith would fail than that it would not? Of course not. This thread is not about the frequency of failed faith and its causes, but about the POSSIBILITY of failed faith. Second, don't you dare assume that my believing God's testimony about who He says Jesus is cause me to have an apathetic attitude. How could you even begin to make such a judgment call? I easily have ten times more evangelistic zeal now than I did when I believe that faith alone was not enough. I have an entire congregation of people who simply "assented to Christological facts about Jesus' work upon the cross and resurrection" and I can't keep them out of the church. They hunger for the Word like no one I know. Why? Because they have seen God's grace for what it is--TOTALLY non meritorious.

What good is such simple believism? You miss what salvation is all about and what eternal life is, John 17:3. Is having such unimportant important faith in his word mere gas and wind? Where does such faith lead you too — most likely apathy, ignorance, falling away when the season gets rough hmmm - the same state that much of modern Christendom is finding itself in?

What GOOD is simple believism?????? Are you really asking me these questions? How about the fact that I can KNOW that I am saved? How about the fact that this knowledge spurs me on in gratitude to serve the God who graciously saved me? How about the fact I am no longer under bondage, but for the first time know true freedom to serve my God to the best He gives me ability? How about the fact that I don't have to live in fear and sit by my bed night by night, looking at the sin in my life, fearing that I haven't given up enough to Him so that I could be saved? How about the fact that I can KNOW I am in proper fellowship with God?

Again, how dare you imply that the glorious grace of God to save those who believe His testimony concerning His Son leads to apathy? It is that understanding that has kept me alive and has lit me and dozens that I personally know on fire in a way I have never experienced, nor even personally seen, in my own life.

A tree is known by its fruit. God has another way — a plan, a purpose, for you and I and that is to learn from and of him and become transformed into a new man in Christ, to arrive, takes faith. God's Grace is what saves us, not our faith, yet our faith is energized by such grace! Faith is needed and extremely important, not as the means to stay saved, but rather how one becomes transformed by the power of God!

Where have I said that a tree was not known by its fruit? And where does the Bible say that our faith is energized by grace? I am not disagreeing that it is. I don't even know what that statement means. It certainly doesn't come directly from Scripture. But again, where have I said that faith was not important? You say you understand my position, and yet you believe that I think that faith is not important? BW, the just are to LIVE by faith!!! Without faith, I can do NOTHING. How can you even THINK that I would believe faith is unimportant?

Note what the word of God says in 1 Peter 1:3-9, “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy has begotten us again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, 4 to an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled and that does not fade away, reserved in heaven for you, 5 who are kept by the power of God through faith for salvation ready to be revealed in the last time. 6 In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while, if need be, you have been grieved by various trials, 7 that the genuineness of your faith, being much more precious than gold that perishes, though it is tested by fire, may be found to praise, honor, and glory at the revelation of Jesus Christ, 8 whom having not seen you love. Though now you do not see Him, yet believing, you rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory, 9 receiving the end of your faith—the salvation of your souls.” NKJV

Yes, this is a beautiful verse, but it doesn't say that we are guaranteed to persevere in faith until we die. It says that we are guaranteed to be saved, and that salvation will be revealed in the Kingdom.

Faith in God develops within us loyalty, dependability, complete assurance/trust in and fidelity too the Lord. Without such faith how do you learn of the Lord and to know him? This development of our faith through the various means God uses is more value to him than all the gold and silver in the universe — such tested — purified faith is priceless to God! Why? That such faith praises, brings honor, and shines glory that revels who Jesus Christ is and all he does cementing one to the salvation Christ Jesus paid for on that old rugged cross.

Of course faith does those things. Where have I denied that? Where, BW? You can't make these claims that I believe such garbage without backing them up. So, yes, faith brings about growth in the Christian life. But does that mean faith is GUARANTEED TO LAST in our lives? No, it does not. That means that growth is not guaranteed.

What do I mean by 'cementing us to the Lord' is this: You will not rebel in heaven because faith refined and purified love toward the Lord through various living lesson learned during this mortal life that draw you near and dear to God. The Lord paid a priceless gift and this gift begins the journey of living priceless faith that the Lord will develop in all his children. This living faith is priceless and not manure.

Of course we won't rebel in Heaven. Where have I ever said otherwise? I have argued forcefully that when we are in Heaven, being glorified, we will no longer have a sin nature. And where did I say that faith was manure? That is your word, not mine. I would NEVER call such an important part of the Christian life "manure." Do you REALLY think I look at faith that way? Have you even been reading me?

You cannot lose faith through apathy because God will use ones very apathy in such a manner that his child is shaken out of it to return to God. Such is the love of God! He spares no rest to seek that which strayed!

Scripture please? Where does the Bible say that God will use our apathy to guarantee our return to Himself? Assertions are useless without Scripture to back them up.

You cannot lose faith through fiery trials because God will shine through somethow and restore your soul. Ask Corrie ten Boom as well as a host of others who thought they lost faith but instead discovered it anew! Such is the love of God! He spares no expense to seek and restore a wayward soul trapped in desperate despair!

Scripture, please? I am fully aware that God uses the rough times in our life to grow us closer to Himself, but show me where we are GUARANTEED such a result. It does not exist. In times of trial, we have a choice. We can submit to God and allow Him to work on our behalf, or we can rebel and yes lose our faith. Again, look at the Hebrew Christians. They fell away from the faith because of their persecution.

You will say that people who fall away during hard times never believed in the first place. So AGAIN I ask, how do you know that YOUR faith is any better? How do you know that YOUR faith will survive? What if you lost your wife and children, reputation, friends, future, and all bodily functions? How do you know that you REALLY BELIEVE ENOUGH to make it through? Do you not agree that people have suffered such agony and turned on God in their anger? What makes you think you are so much better than they?

You cannot lose faith through ignorance because God will use that ignorance in such a way that drives his child to seek his wisdom! Such is the love of God! He spares no expense to educate his child!

Scripture, please? Show me the guarantee. It doesn't exist.

You cannot just lose such priceless faith by just walking away as God will turn such child around in due course of time. He will address the reason for such turning away in a manner that brings them back to the fold. You doubt God? You no not God — the Lord with such love that makes the angry, restless soul finally find rest.

Where does the Bible say that you can't lose your faith by walking away from God? I can show you where its says that you cannot lose your SALVATION by walking away from God. But where does it say that we can't lose our faith. BW, show me ONE VERSE that says our faith is invincible.

Now, you are so busy telling me ways that one cannot lose faith. Fine. Tell me the ways that one can. Tell me how Billy Graham lost his faith. Tell me how Ehrman lost his. Tell me how Flew, Barker, Templeton, and the host of others lost of their faiths. You tell me, BW. How did it happen? And how can you be SO SURE it won't happen to you?

Yet there are those that claim they are or were Christians but who never were as word of God proved their faith to be in themselves, other things, ideas, they had no roots to endure the storms, statically stuck upon the worries and cares of this life, and such is snatched away by the evil one.

So Graham's faith was never real. Then how do you know that YOUR faith is real? And what do you do with the fact that JESUS HIMSELF says that some people believe for a while, and then they stop believing (Luke 8:13)?

Do not confuse these with God's real children. Whose faith is being refined by various means! You may not even be able to distinguish between the two so judge-not, pray, and seek the Lord on you role that he would have you play regarding them. You might be the instrument that the Lord uses to restore living faith to the wayward or the axe that divides the sheep from the goats, note 2 John 1:9.

How can you contradict yourself so blatantly? I am not to confuse the false professor with the true believer, but yet I am not able to distinguish between the two? Regardless, where, AGAIN, have I said that our faith is not refined? Where, BW? Where have I made these claims you keep insisting I am making? Why do you feel the need to invent such outlandish, non-biblical extrapolations and then put them in my mouth as if I myself advocate them?

In conclusion, 1 Peter 1:3-9 states, “receiving the end of your faith—the salvation of your souls.” NKJV

That is why it is priceless tfor God to refine and purify your faith in him through it all, He will lead you home, he will never leave you nor forsake you. Such is the great love of God and the price he paid to make sure you arrive, intact, purified, sanctified, justified, new, and whole again!Romans 8:29

And have I EVER said that God will forsake us? Have I EVER said He will leave us? No, just the opposite. I have said that even when we leave God, He will not leave us. For the last time, I BELIEVE IN ETERNAL SECURITY. Once I am saved, I am saved for all time. God will NEVER leave me. All the Scripture you provide simply guarantees my salvation. Show me a verse that guarantees my faith, BW.

Jac, are stating that a person can lose something that God pricelessly spends time to develop in order to transform us from the kingdom of darkness into his kingdom of light? Then if so, God would have to deny himself here in these very passages as well as all throughout his word — all his words that increase and restore ones faith in him would be denied as impossible for God to perform!

Again, where is our development guaranteed? So long as we abide in Christ, we will grow. If we do not abide in Christ, we will not grow. We will not mature. We must maintain our faith. For salvation? No, of course not. For growth. For rewards. This passage does not say that God guarantees our faith. You need a passage that says God guarantees our faith. It doesn't exist because God makes no such promise.

BW, think about that. You are saying God made a promise He DID NOT MAKE. You have repeatedly put words in my mouth. Would you put them in God's mouth, too?

God's grace saves us and activates either 'living faith' or static faith and if living faith, it is refined through various living processes to complete our faith in him. He who began a good work in you will complete in until the day of Christ! Philippians 1:6.

BW - I HAVE DEALT WITH PHIL 1:6 TWICE NOW. If you are not going to respond to clarifications and arguments, why are you even discussing the issue? Are you even reading my words? Are you paying attention to what I am saying at all?

But if 'static faith' is found, these tares will be allowed to grow together with the wheat as even they may have a role to play to strengthen the wheat, Matthew 13:37-43.

Where does Matt 13 talk about static faith? It doesn't. It talks about tares and wheat that grow together. You can't tell the difference by external appearance. THAT MEANS THAT BEHAVIOR IS NO INDICATOR OF FAITH. So all your talk of love and peace and development as a Christian means nothing, because Jesus says that you can't tell the difference in a believer and a non-believer by their behavior. Yet you insist on importing the exact opposite meaning into the text.

All you have to do is show me ONE verse in which God guarantees our faith. Where is it, BW? Where is that one verse?

You know a tree by its fruit Jesus said. What doctrine increases and builds faith in God? A doctrine that explains that the Lord will never let you go, will see you through to the end, will never leave you nor will ever forsake you because of his great Grace? That He will help you and provide help and aid in time of need and see you through all life's storms? Try to walk away and He will go after you and bring you home from where you have strayed? God Loves and he will never let you go.

I talked about this in the last reply . . .

Or a doctrine that says, oh yes you are saved by God's Grace however you can expect to lose your faith as faith is a fickle human thing. After all, Faith is not all that necessary for salvation. You are really saved by just accepting it as simple fact and then just forget about it, no hassle, no worry, no offense whatsoever. So why not sin, since such great grace that saved us abounds! What is to stop you? - you are saved!"

Where did I say you can EXPECT to lose your faith? I said it is POSSIBLE to lose your faith. On the other hand, where does the Bible say that we are guaranteed to continue in faith? And where did I say that we can forget about the Gospel? WHERE HAVE I SAID THAT? Romans 6:1 says otherwise. How DARE you say that I believe we can go on and sin because "such great grace that saves us abounds"???

In fact, BW, you prove my position with that question. Do you realize what you have just said? BW - THAT IS THE SAME ARGUMENT THE JUDAIZERS USED AGAINST PAUL. In fact, it is the same argument that ALL legalists use when they are confronted with the grace of God! Consider your company. Paul had to defend himself against the very same claim I am being forced to defend myself against. Think about that, BW. You are in the company with the men Paul condemned as heretics. Think about that . . .

Which doctrine and profession of God's word will build faith in God and overcome the world? 1 John 5:4. Leading you closer to the Lord and knowing him more and each day?

The one that says that I can believe God's testimony is true.

Now, John 3:16 says, "For God loved the world in this way: He sent His one and only Son, that whoever believes in Him will not perish, but instead has everlasting life." Now, either God was telling the truth about Jesus or He wasn't. I have believed. Therefore, I will NEVER perish, even if I stop believing. Do you believe God's testimony, BW?

[Kurieuo]

To correct the last line, "Therefore, [Jac believes] I can't know I'm really saved because I can't know what type of person I will develop into." Hopefully my last response sheds additional light on this matter, and in particular, that I can know I'm really saved by knowing the person I am (which is a part of the person I will develop into).

But this is my whole point, K. How do you know what kind of person you will develop into? Both the Bible and history teach that there are people who professed belief, just as you and I do now, but who developed into people of no faith. So how do YOU know that YOU won't develop into such a person?

Because my knowledge of who I am is foundational, just as your knowledge of being saved is foundational. I see that everyone if honest is a Fideist when pushed. I am here no different to you.

In order to argue I really do not know, Jac needs to prove that we can not know who we really are at all. I disagree and see no reason for this. Even if who we eventually develop is not set in stone until say the end of our lives, I think we can certainly in the very least know aspects of who we are a lot more strongly than other more uncertain aspects.

That's pretty easy to prove:

1. Who I will be is dependent, in part, on who I am now.
2. I cannot be certain who I will be when I die.
3. Therefore, I cannot be certain of who I am now.

Why don't you just argue I can't be certain of anything according to my epistemological beliefs? Your objections do not seem to be a matter of my position on faith, belief in Christ or what have you, but your issue is with my epistemology. Even if I accepted your position on faith in Christ, I am sure you can not see how I could never assured given I take the epistemological position that I may be wrong.

You see, there are no certain aspects. Forget faith in Christ for a minute. Let's say your favorite color is blue. That is part of who you are. But how do you know that when you die that your favorite color will still be blue? Or that you will still loved mashed potatoes. Or that your favorite band will still be The Who? You don't know any of those things will still be true. Therefore, by your logic, you don't know if they are true now.

You see it is the more abstract things which are harder to know. I know my colour might change according to how I feel. I might like orange or red on a cold day, and blue and a boiling hot day. Furthermore, as my knowledge increases on issues I form new perspectives and positions on things I perhaps did not know even existed. This forms apart of who I am more deeply. Matters of having a relationship with God I see strike at the very core of our being. So such is less likely to change than say my favourite colour or food. And then it is simply of matter of believing one knows parts of themselves which are static and will always remain. My belief in God and Christ is one such part I claim to know. It can not be disproven based on an appeal to others who believed in God and then did not. My knowledge of my faith in Christ being a part of who I truly am can however be disproven if in the end I do not believe in God. At the same time, my knowledge of myself, particularly that part of me which has faith in Christ, can also be shown to be an objective truth if in the end it remains intact. As Scripture says:

• 3Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,
  
  4to obtain an inheritance which is imperishable and undefiled and will not fade away, reserved in heaven for you,
  
  5who are protected by the power of God through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.
  
  6In this you greatly rejoice, even though now for a little while, if necessary, you have been distressed by various trials,
  
  7so that the proof of your faith, being more precious than gold which is perishable, even though tested by fire, may be found to result in praise and glory and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ;
  
  8and though you have not seen Him, you love Him, and though you do not see Him now, but believe in Him, you greatly rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory,
  
  9obtaining as the outcome of your faith the salvation of your souls.

Perhaps I feel my faith has been proven through the many trials in life I have faced. If so there is my justification for believing my faith in Christ is truly apart of who I am for it has remained through thick and thin.

You don't "know" yourself at all. The best you have is a big bag of uncertainties in which you can point to vague shadows of what looks like might be reality. And again, all this without even considering what the Fall has done to our nature . . .

If it makes you feel happier with your position to say as much, then I do not see I can persuade you otherwise. I will leave it up to the reader to judge whether what I have presented shows I can in fact know who I am.

[Kurieuo]

B.W.,

This is in response to your observation of similarities between my beliefs in the Eastern church. Although I do not align myself with any particular church, I find on matters of the nature of humanity that I tend to be aligned very much with Eastern thinking. For example, in relation to the nature of humanity, and particularly the role of this world being used as a tool of God to allow us to grow and transform who we are, I find I am quite Eastern. This largely resolves the "contradiction" as to why a loving God allows bad things to happen since we grow and mature most when given the opportunity to rise to the occasion and persevere through pain and suffering. Such pain and suffering is limited however to this world.

I have gone a bit off the track, but because of what these similarities I am not surprised to hear I end up again sharing other Eastern perspectives especially on matters relating to who we are in relation to God. To comment on particular Eastern beliefs you quoted:

For Orthodox theologians, humans were created in the image of God and made to participate fully in the divine life. The full communion with God that Adam and Eve enjoyed meant complete freedom and true humanity, for humans are most human when they are completely united with God.

I can accept this. I see our being created needs to be seen through God, rather than from us. That is, the way we look at the world around us needs to be theologically centred, even Christologically centred (like Barthian theology), in order to understand. If done so, then the obvious conclusion appears to be we were created by God to participate in Himself. We were created to be in relationship with God. Therefore, although we are human in being (I do not see necessarily agree with a scale being human), we fulfil our truest potential of our nature only in relationship to God.

The result of sin, then, was a blurring of the image of God and a barrier between God and man. The situation in which mankind has been ever since is an unnatural, less human state, which ends in the most unnatural aspect: death. Salvation, then, is a process not of justification or legal pardon, but of reestablishing man's communion with God. This process of repairing the unity of human and divine is sometimes called "deification." This term does not mean that humans become gods but that humans join fully with God's divine life.

I would agree with this, noting many Western theologians get confused or hung up on deification. I mean, I am just now realising what is meant by "deification". I may be wrong, but it seems clear to me that the Eastern church are truly attributing deity to us. Yet, important I think is the distinction that such deity is not imparted or something we become, but rather already exists in us through God's creating us in His image. Thus, while our nature apart from God is dire and would not seek after God, as God's image forms a part of us our nature can never be completely against God, that is, unless it is destroyed or taken from us, which adds an interesting possibility.

One thing I do not believe is that the process of such "deification" is an ongoing process in this life. I see the moment one changes in response to Christ, is the moment their perception of God is reinstated. It is the moment we ourselves are spiritually born and our perception of God and everything appears to change and become more clear. I tend to disagree that a process of "repairing" to the imago Dei is required. Rather the imago Dei exists in us fully whether Christian or not, but in relation to the "blurring" I see the ability for a deeper connectedness to God cannot be expressed without certain spiritual properties being born (being "born again" spiritually). So while I see much similarity from and external perspective, the details on a deeper level appear to differ which I see these as having importance consequences in other theological areas.

The Church believes that Christ enlightens the minds of the people, purifies their hearts and frees their wills from the bondage of the devil. Christ became flesh "to make reconciliation for the sins of the people" (Heb. 2:17). In that respect, the Church fought against two extremes:

1-that in the innate sinfulness of mankind human nature is able to practice virtue by itself, making Christ's sacrifice only a moral example (Pelagianism);
2-the theory that the human soul is totally corrupted, and man's salvation is God's work alone, predestining man to salvation or to perdition (Augustine).

Entirely agree as I read it. Our whole perception changes when we come to Christ and we are freed. As previously mentioned, I just would disagree that this is due to a fixing of the imago Dei, but rather that it is simply our spiritual birth providing us with the capacities to communicate with God and this allows the imago Dei within us to be heightened. See the difference to what I am saying?

The Orthodox Church holds the truths of morality closely with those of faith. The fact is, this Church maintains and practices the theme of the Scripture, "faith which worketh through love" (Gal. 5:6), and this is evident when applied to the intentions and conduct of its members. The Ten Commandments of the Old Testament (cf. Exodus 20:1-17) are considered the minimum of rules for right living, enabling reason and free will to discern right from wrong. For the Orthodox Christian who desires to devote himself to the principles of right living along with right faith, the instructions of the Lord to His disciples are to be studied and practiced, as is recorded in Matthew (chs. 5, 6 and 7), where is found a higher level of life in the Christian society.

In the Orthodox Church, the truths of faith and morals are correlated to such a degree that one cannot exist without the other. The practice of these truths of conduct and morality cannot be achieved without the help, mercy and Grace of Almighty God. This is the reason that faith in and prayer to God are correlated with morality. The Orthodox Christian is assigned by his own faith to be the steward of God's love for God's people who are in need, "the least" not only materially but also spiritually.

Now in what I read here I can not say I agree whole heartedly.

Does "morality" require action or is this just a change is moral desire? I am happy if only the latter, but I detect this is not the case with the Eastern position. By "moral desire" I also mean a desire for what God desires albeit we may still have a conflict with things we desire of the flesh. Faith as I see it does not require any "work" but in its most pure form only change in response. So if one needs to "worketh through love" (truths of morality?) in order to officially have faith, then I would disagree. Yes, action should naturally follow if added to our moral desire are the things of God, but action is by no means necessary. I would be concerned from my external point of view if after some time a person who "came to God" still displayed no care for the things of God (for example, perhaps they simply went through the ritual of "coming to God" to try impress someone they liked?), yet the desire comes first and this is what matters, not any behaviour or works which we would expect to follow.

The thing I find extremely distasteful about asking for action to verify faith is that a person could be going through a massive amount turmoil on the inside with wanting to change their life, but trials keep on coming. To anyone on the outside looking in, such a person may look to have not changed at all for such a person might keep giving into their "fleshly" desires. Yet, on the inside little do we know they are being refined by God. By the same token, morality is not just about we being good, but rather how we treat others and what we do for them. A Christian will often be aroused by another Christian swearing, smoking, or even struggling with drugs, and neglect to see how giving they are to others and willing to be there for them. The person on the outside looking in might miss such qualities, for they are only judging the bad and not the good. God on the other hand knows. As such I see faith in its purest form as only being an internal change, and while external changes should be expected, faith can not always be judged externally.

It can also be mistaken the other way around as well if we change faith based on external actions. As Jesus Himself said: "You are those who justify yourselves in the sight of men, but God knows your hearts; for that which is highly esteemed among men is detestable in the sight of God." (Luke 16:15) External actions do not mean one's heart is right (as Jac correctly pointed out about my reference to Matthew 7:22. So we could judge someone to be a great Christian based on their actions we observe, when the heart of someone struggling with drugs or what have you is known by God to be truer towards Him and more sincere than that of the apparently "great" Christian.

Kind of sums up what Living Faith is about verses Static Faith. Living Faith lives out belief in a Living God by reaching out to learn of Him and grow closer to Him and how to act more Like Him. Living Faith seeks after a living God — Hebrews 11:6. Thus living faith persuades you that 'He Is.' Living faith takes you on a living journey with real life lessons instructing you on the loving-kindness of God, Psalms 107:1-43, which transforms your very soul from sin to newness of life transformed by God Right Hand which is a gift from God - Grace.

Static Faith, on the other hand, has to figure out all the details to become fully persuaded in order to justify ones actions, deeds, reasons, belief system. Static faith is stuck on humanness and human reason. The journey it takes leads to depend on formulas, methods, deeds, to justify human belief in any position human reason leads or chooses to take or create. It transforms your very soul to become a deal maker, tit for tat enthusiast, a workaholic, a person wizard of sorts, sin in the soul remains camouflaged and slavishly justified by religiousness, and therefore the new life in Christ never found: which is mans' gift to God.

To end, I am not sure how all this sits with your "living faith" and "static faith". I am not sure I entirely agree with your definitions which place reason as a static faith, since I see reason very much involves the heart and vice-versa. So I am left kind of unsure about what you see as "static" encompassing (a dead faith?) and what you see as "living" encompassing (a true faith?). If this is all you mean, then I would agree there is a faith we can have that is actually not legitimate. As to what that entails... well I guess a lot of what I wrote above touches on this.

[Kurieuo]

I have not actually kept tabs on Graham so can not really say anything beyond what you have presented. However, if Graham does not believe the Gospel any more, then it was still Graham who preached the Gospel.

You don't have to have kept up with Graham's career to be able to assess whether or not he still believes the Gospel. Hopefully we are both still in this to understand one another's, as well as our own, positions more clearly. There should be nothing preventing you from acknowledging that if someone says that there is salvation outside of Jesus Christ, as Graham stated as per my direct quotation of him, then that person does NOT believe the Gospel however you define it!

Now, you have said that continuous faith is necessary (considering that you tie faith to the identity of a person) to be saved. Graham no longer believes.

I think I would disagree with your assertion that Graham no longer believes, and see it comes down to our distinctions on what belief entails. You see it as affirmation of a certain proposition (or set of propositions) surrounding Christ as belief and faith. I see belief as a deeper relational change in response to Christ.

I have just looked up Graham, and from what I can tell, he still very much has faith in Christ as I understand it. What has changed is that he has softened in his intellectual stance. Since belief for you, at least from our discussions, is attached to an intellectual belief of a proposition or set of propositions surrounding Christ, then I can see how his softening intellectual stance particularly regarding salvation may lead you to conclude Graham no longer believes. Yet, because Graham's heart is still very much Christ-centred, regardless of his softening soteriological and intellectual stances, I still consider him as very much having belief and faith in Christ.

Perhaps I have not read all you have read about Graham. And I understand this has no bearing on the crux of issue, as it can still be postulated what if he changed in his heart against Christ (which I have assumed and responded to in my previous posts). I would however be interested to understand how exactly you see Graham has lost his faith, and like to read up more about his "change", for I am inclined to believe what you see as a loss of faith in Christ is not what I would see as a loss of faith in Christ due to our differences in opinion as to what belief and faith in Christ entails.

[Kurieuo]

To correct the last line, "Therefore, [Jac believes] I can't know I'm really saved because I can't know what type of person I will develop into." Hopefully my last response sheds additional light on this matter, and in particular, that I can know I'm really saved by knowing the person I am (which is a part of the person I will develop into).

But this is my whole point, K. How do you know what kind of person you will develop into? Both the Bible and history teach that there are people who professed belief, just as you and I do now, but who developed into people of no faith. So how do YOU know that YOU won't develop into such a person?

In addition to my last post(s), I want to qualify again that for you faith is more whimsical since it is based on an affirmation of a proposition(s) and intellectual belief. For me, faith is more grounded and harder to change, faith is deeply rooted upon who we are, and so even if someone changes their intellectual understanding, it can still be the case their heart remains firmly planted in Christ. And from what I can tell, Graham's heart is still deeply embedded in Christ, especially when contrasted against Dan Barker.

[Jac3510]

Concerning your "absolute" knowledge of your self, if you want to put that knowledge on the same level as that of revealed Scripture, then be my guest. If I can be a bit rhetorical, I trust what God says about me long before I trust what I say about me

As far as Graham is concerned, the man believes that there is salvation outside of Jesus Christ. If your position allows a person to be saved by believing that Jesus is one of many ways (as Graham does), then we are going to have another huge distinction in our belief systems.

As far as the change of faith is concerned, I don't care how "difficult" it is in your position. My problem is that it is possible. If it is possible, then you can have no assurance that your faith will remain throughout your life. You have repeatedly admitted to the possibility that a person can develop into a person who does not have faith, regardless of their previous beliefs (or so-called beliefs), and yet you further maintain that you are the exception because you really do know yourself. In mind mind, that begs the questions, "but what if you are wrong?" It doesn't do any good for you to ask me the same question because it doesn't apply to me in the same way. First off, I know I have believed because, as I define faith, it is simply being convinced that something is true. I am convinced that God told the Truth about Jesus Christ, that everyone who believes in Him has everlasting life. The only thing I can be wrong about is my interpretation itself. That is what I am not communicating well enough.

It is what I have repeatedly said: the only way for me not to have certainty is if my understanding of reality is wrong. If my understanding of reality is right, then I am saved. Period. You can't say that, because if your understanding of reality is right, there is still the possibility that you may develop into a person of no faith.

The lack of certainty of our own salvation, the idea that our self-knowledge is as authoritative as Scripture, that a fallen person can establish a relationship with Christ, that absolute certainty of anything is impossible, the fact that Jesus' exclusivity is removed from the Gospel, as well as the complete lack of Scriptural or extra-biblical evidence (so far as I'm aware of) for your view of faith . . . it's all just too much for me to swallow. But the idea for the thread is to clarify our positions. I think we are both pretty clear now in what we believe and why . . .

[Kurieuo]

Hi Jac,

Just a forenote before you proceed. I have been more rough edged below, but don't take it personally. I am sure being the veteran discusser you are you won't. I just want to make clear there is nothing personal - I have just been more straight forward with my words here.

Concerning your "absolute" knowledge of your self, if you want to put that knowledge on the same level as that of revealed Scripture, then be my guest. If I can be a bit rhetorical, I trust what God says about me long before I trust what I say about me

You are right, you are being extremely rhetorical. If using persuasive techniques to win an argument is what you want to do, for example challenging whether I truly accept the authority of Scripture to add merit to your position when that is not at all the issue, then fine. I am not interested in winning an argument. You win.

I am interested in soundness and consistency of positions in light of Scripture and reason. And the more I have been able to reason through my position here, the more positive I have felt about it in regards to its explanatory power, consistency and validity.

As far as Graham is concerned, the man believes that there is salvation outside of Jesus Christ. If your position allows a person to be saved by believing that Jesus is one of many ways (as Graham does), then we are going to have another huge distinction in our belief systems.

I have conducted several searches and see no such thing. In fact I read quite the opposite. For example I read:

Now, more than half a century later, he [Graham] is far from questioning the fundamentals of the faith. He is not saying Jesus is just another lifestyle choice, nor is he backtracking on essentials such as the Incarnation or the Atonement. But he is arguing that the Bible is open to interpretation, and fair-minded Christians may disagree or come to different conclusions about specific points. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14204483/si ... ek/page/3/)

The most I could find that comes close to your [mis?]representation of Graham is:

A unifying theme of Graham's new thinking is humility. He is sure and certain of his faith in Jesus as the way to salvation. When asked whether he believes heaven will be closed to good Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus or secular people, though, Graham says: "Those are decisions only the Lord will make. It would be foolish for me to speculate on who will be there and who won't ... I don't want to speculate about all that. I believe the love of God is absolute. He said he gave his son for the whole world, and I think he loves everybody regardless of what label they have." Such an ecumenical spirit may upset some Christian hard-liners, but in Graham's view, only God knows who is going to be saved: "As an evangelist for more than six decades, Mr. Graham has faithfully proclaimed the Bible's Gospel message that Jesus is the only way to Heaven," says Graham spokesman A. Larry Ross. "However, salvation is the work of Almighty God, and only he knows what is in each human heart." (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14204483/si ... ek/page/6/)

According to this it seems to me that Graham still believes it is only by Christ one is saved, and what he sees as required for his salvation is not merely belief in a proposition(s) but rather who a person is in their heart in response to Christ. And so as who Graham is in relation to Christ is a Graham who loves and wants to be with Christ, as far as I am concerned I see that Graham still very much has faith in Christ. In fact, his understand as to what faith entails would appear to largely resemble my own. Perhaps you should pay more attention to listening to his experience and wisdom, rather than having so much confidence in your own intellectual ability which I do not question as being quite bright. Listening and understanding is just as important as talking and asserting one's own beliefs. This is what I see Graham has come to recognise.

On a different note, I find it significant that you appear to strongly pursue your doctrine on faith, since your position is perhaps far more relaxed on salvation than mine, Calvinists, Arminians, Catholics, Eastern, or what have you. For you, if the initial acceptance of Christ has been made in some way then that's that. Graham's saved, I'm saved, whoever makes an initial response is saved, so is there any real point for you in having this discussion with me beyond an intellectual fervour and passion you have for your beliefs? Are we simply have a game of intellect, or does it really matter what we are discussing? Or maybe it matters because perhaps you see I was never really saved because while I trust in Christ, I did not know and believe the "right" set of propositions intellectually as interpreted by you in Scripture.

As far as the change of faith is concerned, I don't care how "difficult" it is in your position. My problem is that it is possible. If it is possible, then you can have no assurance that your faith will remain throughout your life. You have repeatedly admitted to the possibility that a person can develop into a person who does not have faith, regardless of their previous beliefs (or so-called beliefs), and yet you further maintain that you are the exception because you really do know yourself. In mind mind, that begs the questions, "but what if you are wrong?" It doesn't do any good for you to ask me the same question because it doesn't apply to me in the same way. First off, I know I have believed because, as I define faith, it is simply being convinced that something is true. I am convinced that God told the Truth about Jesus Christ, that everyone who believes in Him has everlasting life. The only thing I can be wrong about is my interpretation itself. That is what I am not communicating well enough.

I know I believe and have faith in Christ because I know who I am - simple as that. How I know who I am, is like me asking of you how you know Scripture is right? You just accept Scripture as a foundational source of knowledge, as I accept a direct and immediate experience of myself as a foundational source of knowledge. Perhaps you don't like this response because it makes my position as consistent as yours regarding assurance, but I guess that is a matter you have to come to terms with.

It is what I have repeatedly said: the only way for me not to have certainty is if my understanding of reality is wrong. If my understanding of reality is right, then I am saved. Period. You can't say that, because if your understanding of reality is right, there is still the possibility that you may develop into a person of no faith.

Well such certainty is not a matter of our positions on faith, but rather a matter of epistemology isn't it? As I previously mentioned, even if I accepted your position then according to your reasoning I still could not be assured of my salvation. I do not see that the possibility I may be wrong necessarily leads to uncertainty. One can still be certain in their knowledge even if it is the case they are wrong. In this admittance I am being practical, realistic and intellectually honest with myself and others who may disagree with me. So it still remains I have just as much assurance in my position on a foundational level as I would have if I accepted your position.

The lack of certainty of our own salvation, the idea that our self-knowledge is as authoritative as Scripture, that a fallen person can establish a relationship with Christ, that absolute certainty of anything is impossible, the fact that Jesus' exclusivity is removed from the Gospel, as well as the complete lack of Scriptural or extra-biblical evidence (so far as I'm aware of) for your view of faith . . . it's all just too much for me to swallow. But the idea for the thread is to clarify our positions. I think we are both pretty clear now in what we believe and why . . .

Well I think now you are just treating what I have said quite unfairly and twisting it into something which to me is quite clearly a misrepresentation of the issue. Anyone who has followed my posts will see it is not an issue of "authoritativeness".

Now I find it detrimental to your position that if you can't depend upon your self, then how is it you can depend upon Scripture? For in order to read Scripture, you need to depend upon your perception of what is presented to you and rational capability to interpret and process it correctly. Let me put it this way. You believe what you do because Scripture says so, at least that is what you have presented to me. Yet, in order to understand what Scripture says you need to interpret it. Unless you claim to have an objective understanding of Scripture, where you just know Scripture without having to read or interpret it, then I see you are placing an authority in yourself which is at least on par with Scripture. Perhaps we should be coming to Jac rather than the Bible before we believe something?

To summarise my response here, the issue you raise against me here is not a matter of "authoritativeness" but rather a matter of epistemology and how we can know.

[Pierac]

We are saved by the grace of God, and God alone.

NASB Eph 1:11 also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will,

CEV Eph 1:11 God always does what he plans, and that's why he appointed Christ to choose us.


NASB Pro 16:1 The plans of the heart belong to man, But the answer of the tongue is from the LORD.

CEV Pro 16:1 We humans make plans, but the LORD has the final word.


NASB Pro 16:9 The mind of man plans his way, But the LORD directs his steps.

CEV Pro 16:9 We make our own plans, but the LORD decides where we will go.


NASB Pro 20:24 Man's steps are ordained by the LORD, How then can man understand his way?

CEV Pro 20:24 How can we know what will happen to us when the LORD alone decides?



NASB Isa 46:10 Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things which have not been done, Saying, 'My purpose will be established, And I will accomplish all My good pleasure';

CEV Isa 46:10 From the very beginning, I told what would happen long before it took place. I kept my word



NASB Joh 15:16 "You did not choose Me but I chose you, and appointed you that you would go and bear fruit, and that your fruit would remain, so that whatever you ask of the Father in My name He may give to you.

CEV Joh 15:16 You did not choose me. I chose you and sent you out to produce fruit, the kind of fruit that will last. Then my Father will give you whatever you ask for in my name.



NASB Joh 6:44 "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws (DRAGS) him; and I will raise him up on the last day.

CEV Joh 6:44 No one can come to me, unless the Father who sent me makes them want to come. But if they do come, I will raise them to life on the last day.

NASB Rom 8:28 And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. 29 For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; 30 and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified. 31 What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who is against us?

CEV Rom 8:28 We know that God is always at work for the good of everyone who loves him. They are the ones God has chosen for his purpose, 29 and he has always known who his chosen ones would be. He had decided to let them become like his own Son, so that his Son would be the first of many children. 30 God then accepted the people he had already decided to choose, and he has shared his glory with them. 31 What can we say about all this? If God is on our side, can anyone be against us?



NASB Phi 2:13 for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.

CEV Phi 2:13 God is working in you to make you willing and able to obey him.



NASB Tit 1:1 Paul, a bond-servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ, for the faith of those chosen of God and the knowledge of the truth which is according to godliness,

CEV Tit 1:1 From Paul, a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ. I encourage God's own people to have more faith and to understand the truth about religion.



NASB Eph 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;

CEV Eph 2:8 You were saved by faith in God, who treats us much better than we deserve. This is God's gift to you, and not anything you have done on your own.



NASB Joh 6:65 And He was saying, "For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father."

CEV Joh 6:65 Then Jesus said, "You cannot come to me, unless the Father makes you want to come. That is why I have told these things to all of you."


NASB Psa 115:3 But our God is in the heavens; He does whatever He pleases.

CEV Psa 115:3 Our God is in the heavens, doing as he chooses.

ESV Rom 9:15 For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." 16 So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth." 18 So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills. 19 You will say to me then, "Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?" 20 But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, "Why have you made me like this?" 21 Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? 22 What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory-- 24 even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles? 25 As indeed he says in Hosea, "Those who were not my people I will call 'my people,' and her who was not beloved I will call 'beloved.'"


CEV Rom 9:15 The Lord told Moses that he has pity and mercy on anyone he wants to. 16 Everything then depends on God's mercy and not on what people want or do. 17 In the Scriptures the Lord says to Pharaoh of Egypt, "I let you become king, so that I could show you my power and be praised by all people on earth." 18 Everything depends on what God decides to do, and he can either have pity on people or make them stubborn. 19 Someone may ask, "How can God blame us, if he makes us behave in the way he wants us to?" 20 But, my friend, I ask, "Who do you think you are to question God? Does the clay have the right to ask the potter why he shaped it the way he did? 21 Doesn't a potter have the right to make a fancy bowl and a plain bowl out of the same lump of clay?" 22 God wanted to show his anger and reveal his power against everyone who deserved to be destroyed. But instead, he patiently put up with them. 23 He did this by showing how glorious he is when he has pity on the people he has chosen to share in his glory. 24 Whether Jews or Gentiles, we are those chosen ones, 25 just as the Lord says in the book of Hosea, "Although they are not my people, I will make them my people. I will treat with love those nations that have never been loved.



NASB Isa 45:9 "Woe to the one who quarrels with his Maker-- An earthenware vessel among the vessels of earth! Will the clay say to the potter, 'What are you doing?' Or the thing you are making say, 'He has no hands'? 10 "Woe to him who says to a father,'What are you begetting?' Or to a woman, 'To what are you giving birth?'"


CEV Isa 45:9 Israel, you have no right to argue with your Creator. You are merely a clay pot shaped by a potter. The clay doesn't ask, "Why did you make me this way? Where are the handles?" 10 Children don't have the right to demand of their parents, "What have you done to make us what we are?"




NASB Act 13:48 When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.

CEV Act 13:48 This message made the Gentiles glad, and they praised what they had heard about the Lord. Everyone who had been chosen for eternal life then put their faith in the Lord.




NASB Jer 10:23 I know, O LORD, that a man's way is not in himself, Nor is it in a man who walks to direct his steps.

CEV Jer 10:23 I know, LORD, that we humans are not in control of our own lives.



NASB Mat 22:14 "For many are called, but few are chosen."

CEV Mat 22:14 Many are invited, but only a few are chosen.


NASB Jude 1:4 For certain persons have crept in unnoticed, those who were long beforehand marked out for this condemnation, ungodly persons who turn the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.

KJV Jude 1:4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.


NASB Tit 3:5 He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit,

CEV Tit 3:5 He saved us because of his mercy, and not because of any good things that we have done. God washed us by the power of the Holy Spirit. He gave us new birth and a fresh beginning.

Who's faith are you talking about?

[Kurieuo]

Who's faith are you talking about?

Hi Pierac.

Nice verses there. And it is good to see a new poster dive right in.

If I were to respond to that question in a full manner, I would say the faith of those who God foreknew and predestined to freely choose Him. I see no contradiction between God's predestining us and our freedom to choose.

[bizzt]

Hey K

I totally agree with you on Graham's Position. It does not look like he is concluding that there are multiple Streams to God but he believes there is one in Christ Jesus. But he is choosing that it is God who will be the ultimate Judge whether a Good Jew, Muslim, or Hindu will get into Heaven.

BTW great discussion guys. I am not a big Theology Buff but am throughly enjoying it so far.

[Jac3510]

I don't have time to respond in detail now, but let me just point out that Billy Graham does NOT believe the Gospel. Again, let's look at his own words:

• What God is doing today is calling people out of the world for His name. Whether they come from the Muslim world, or the Buddhist world, or the Christian world, or the non-believing world, they are members of the body of Christ because they've been called by God. They may not even know the name of Jesus, but they know in their hearts they need something that they don't have and they turn to the only light they have and I think they're saved and they're going to be with us in heaven

Undoubtedly, Graham believes that everyone who is saved is saved because of the work of Christ on the cross. Heck, I believe that with reference to OT saints, and I don't believe that the OT saints were trusting in Jesus' finished work! My point is that Graham believes that these people are saved even though they don't believe in the name of Jesus. They just believe in God, or that they have to be better people . . .

See, it comes down to this: what is the Gospel? For Graham, it is believing that you need more. It is believing that only God can save you. For me, it is believing "that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in His name." (John 20:31)

More later. Doing the work thing right now.
edit:

Real quick, look at what Bizzt just said:

But he is choosing that it is God who will be the ultimate Judge whether a Good Jew, Muslim, or Hindu will get into Heaven.

As opposed to bad Jews, Muslims, or Hindus? So a Jew, Muslim, or Hindu can be saved without believing in the name of Jesus?

[Pierac]

Hi Kurieuo,

Thank you for the welcome.

Yes, I understand your thoughts on these verses. The problem is many of the verses exclude us from the choosing process. For example,

NASB John 6:44 "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws (DRAGS) him; and I will raise him up on the last day.
You will note I added the word drag in parentheses because that is the Strong's G1670 word study meaning. The meaning is pretty clear that no one can come to Jesus unless the Father drags him. There is no choice in this verse.

Next we have John 15:16
NASB Joh 15:16 "You did not choose Me but I chose you, and appointed you that you would go and bear fruit, and that your fruit would remain, so that whatever you ask of the Father in My name He may give to you.
Once again there is no choosing on our part or at least on part of the Apostles to whom he was speaking. We/they were chosen and appointed. There is no choice in this verse.

Look at Romans 8:28
NASB Rom 8:28 And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. 29 For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; 30 and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified. 31 What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who is against us?

The words here are action words. Called, predestined, and justified are actions to us and not a response because of us. This understanding fits well with Romans 9:15
ESV Rom 9:15 For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." 16 So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy.

So, Paul tells us it depends not on human will (choices) but on God, who has mercy.

Lets look at Acts 13:18. This is a hard verse indeed!

NASB Act 13:48 When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.

The word appointed is Strong's G5021. It can not be made to mean accepted, as if He accepted our choice/faith. It's means…
Strong's definition: A prolonged form of a primary verb (which latter appears only in certain tenses); to arrange in an orderly manner, that is, assign or dispose (to a certain position or lot): - addict, appoint, determine, ordain, set.
Once again this word is an action word that is not a response from but an action towards. There is no choice in this verse either.

The question is what is eternal life (ζωην αιωνιον)?

The word eternal here is Strong's G166 αἰώνιος aiōnios It is the adjective of the word G165 αἰών aiōn

Our King James version renders aion, together with the adjective aionios as: "age, course, eternal, for ever, evermore, for ever and ever, everlasting, world, beginning of the world, world began, world without end." We have a translational misunderstanding of this word here. This word aion and its adjective form aionios can not mean all the above usages. It is grammatically impossible. Yet this is a whole different topic.


Now, the Calvinist will look at these verses above and see their predestination theology. Yes, I can see the smiles on their faces when reading them. They believe that God predestines his chosen “elect” to heaven and predestines the rest to hell. I find that theology unacceptable. It does not conform to the God of love and His nature as I understand the scriptures to teach. I wish no disrespect to the Calvinist, it's just not my belief.

Next, we have the Arminianist view. They will view these Scriptures in many ways as you have. “I see no contradiction between God's predestining us and our freedom to choose.” I will freely admit, that I disagree with the Calvinist, but I also disagree that these verses imply we have a “choice” in the matter. The verses above clearly teach the opposite of free choice. It is God's calling and mercy that are central here not our choices. So what gives?

Let's switch gears, and take a look at a few other verses that may be a little off-topic but pertinent to this discussion.

ESV Mark 4:10 And when he was alone, those around him with the twelve asked him about the parables. 11 And he said to them, "To you has been given the secret of the kingdom of God, but for those outside everything is in parables, 12 so that "they may indeed see but not perceive, and may indeed hear but not understand, lest they should turn and be forgiven."

Let's contuinue with John:

John 12:39 Therefore they could not believe. For again Isaiah said, 40 "He has blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, lest they see with their eyes, and understand with their heart, and turn, and I would heal them."

Matthew 13:34 All these things Jesus spoke to the crowds in parables, and He did not speak to them without a parable.

Do you understand what Jesus just said here in Mark? It has not been given for them to see or hear, because if they did they would turn (repent) and be forgiven. John continues with He (God) has blinded and hardened them so they would not repent and be saved!

These are hard verses and they are scripture. It is clear that they would have repented if they were not made blind and hardened of the heart from the truth. There are no free choices in these verses.

Let's look at Matthew 11:21 "Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the miracles had occurred in Tyre and Sidon which occurred in you, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes.

Why did God not show the miracles to Tyre and Sidon if he knew they would have repented? Yet He showed them to Chorazin and Bethsaida whom He knew would not repent!

I show you these things to make you think. Read the above scriptures again and know God is Love! God is Love in all contexts! Know this too, He does not predestine people to Hell! Yet we have people in Mark 4:40 who would have repented if only been allowed to see the truth!

These scriptures mean exactly what they say! Most just can't accept them because of their “church” worldview.

So, are the people in Mark 4:11-12 going to hell because He (God) blinded them and hardened their heart? No, indeed! God has a plan for man! It's just not what the majority of the world today thinks it is.

Are you at the point of Job, “Though He slay me, yet will I trust Him.”

My post is getting long, let's continue…later

Paul

[Kurieuo]

Real quick, look at what Bizzt just said:

But he is choosing that it is God who will be the ultimate Judge whether a Good Jew, Muslim, or Hindu will get into Heaven.

As opposed to bad Jews, Muslims, or Hindus? So a Jew, Muslim, or Hindu can be saved without believing in the name of Jesus?

So what of an unborn baby, someone who has never had the opportunity to hear of Christ who would have, or a very young child who never developed beyond the age of three because they died due to extreme sexual and violent abuse by their parents? Is a loving God who really does want all to come to Him, and as such Christ, going to make a decision about whether such people can participate in God's kingdom on the same basis as those who have had the opportunity to believe in Christ but expressly denied Him?

Now certainly the case of Jews, Muslims and Hindus may be different, and lets be clear that no other way explicitly described in the Bible other than to accept Christ. The importance of such acceptance has also only been stressed for the life we live in this world. We do not know whether such an offer will still remain for those who have not heard Christ who would have actually accepted Christ given a valid opportunity. I think it very plausible however, since God after all desires everyone to come to Him. Thus, I do not see one can completely shut the door that an opportunity could be presented to "special cases" post-physical death. I would however not like to be in their shoes for Christ has given us a solid promise in this world, and made no mention of any other chance. Yet, one certainly can't close the door on this matter completely for only Christ is the sole arbitrator of who is His and who is not His. Therefore only Christ knows all who are saved including the "special cases" and not us.

So I see Graham is still consistent with the Gospel message, that Christ has forgiven us and there is no longer a block between us and God. And I see that he rightfully leaves judgement of justification open for special cases and in Christ's jurisdiction where it belongs.