Results 1 - 5 of 5
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | "ONCE SAVED ALWAYS SAVED"!!! | Matt 22:37 | yokefellow | 30307 | ||
Hello Art, Your analysis of the parable of the prodigal son is correct. The key to the parable is the passage that you quoted in Luke 15:24, "For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found." The "once saved always saved" doctrine is a false teaching brought down from John Calvin. Calvin was born in 1509. At the age of fourteen, he went to Paris to study the classics. He was so austere that his fellow students nicknamed him “The Accusative Case.” In 1529, he commenced the study of civil law. Presently, though, Calvin became intrigued with the teachings of the German reformers and so gave himself to the study of religion. To a significant degree, Calvin’s views, which were developed from the writings of Augustine – a “bishop” in northern Africa (A.D. 353-430), have formed the doctrinal basis of much of modern Protestantism. His ideas are circulated in several denominations, and, tragically, have found their way into the thinking many people. One of Calvin’s prominent errors was the notion that man is born totally depraved, having inherited both the effects and the guilt of Adam’s original sin. Even infants, therefore, have in them the seed of sin; indeed, their whole nature is a sort of a sin-seed, so that they cannot be anything other than corrupt before God hence all men stand in need of the Lord’s grace. From this fundamental error others spring. Limited Grace One of the corner-stones of Calvin’s theology was the dogma of predestination. This is the notion that, consistent with his own sovereignty, God, before the foundation of the world, pre-determined who would be saved and who would be lost. In view of this, when Christ died, his death was efficacious only for the “elect.” This concept of “limited atonement,” hence, limited grace, is so foreign to the teaching of the Scriptures that it is difficult to see how anyone with an elementary knowledge of the New Testament could accept it. Hear the testimony of Paul: “For the grace of God hath appeared, bringing salvation to all men . . .” (Tit. 2:11). Because God loved the entire world (Jn. 3:16), and so, wants all men to be saved (1 Tim. 2:4), and not a single one to perish (2 Pet. 3:9), Christ died to be the propitiation for sins – not just for the “elect,” but potentially for the entire world as well (1 Jn. 2:2). Irresistible grace Calvinism argues that by a secret and special operation of the Holy Spirit, God’s grace is poured forth upon the elect. Since the extension of this grace is an act of divine power, it cannot be resisted – any more than the original creation could have resisted the creative might of the Lord. But the fact is, though God’s grace is generously offered, it must be received by the sinner. "We then, as workers together with him, beseech you also that ye receive not the grace of God in vain" (2 Cor. 6:1). It is certainly possible to “receive not” that which is offered (John 1:11). Unconditional grace Calvinists argue that grace is given to the elect unconditionally. If such is the case, then there is absolutely nothing that one must do in order to receive salvation – not even believe. Paul declares that we have “access by faith into this grace” (Rom. 5:2). In his discussion of grace in Titus 3, the inspired apostle states that God, “according to his mercy, saved us through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit . . . being justified by his grace” (5-7). Paul equates being saved by the washing of regeneration with being justified by grace. The “washing” is an allusion to man’s response to God by submitting to baptism. Grace is supplied by the Lord – independent of any merit on our part. Clearly, though, the “washing of regeneration” is a condition of our redemption. But is that expression an allusion to baptism? Even Calvin admitted that he had “no doubt’ that Paul was alluding to baptism – though he denied the connection between baptism and salvation. Irrevocable grace Calvin maintained that the elect could be certain that God would never allow them to fall away from the faith. They would thus persevere unto the end. A sizable segment of Protestantism has adopted the doctrine to some degree or another. But the New Testament teaches otherwise. A child of God can fall from grace (Gal. 5:4), or fail, i.e., fall back from, the Lord’s favor (Heb. 12:15 - ASV). It is possible to deny the Master who bought you and so be destroyed (2 Pet. 2:1). Thus, we must keep ourselves in God’s love (Jude 21), and give diligence to make our calling and election sure (2 Pet. 1:10), lest our reception of divine grace be in vain (2 Cor. 6:1). Conclusion: While we acknowledge that John Calvin taught some truth, we must also recognize that he advocated much error, and that error must be rejected. May the Lord bless you as you continue to study His Word and make application of it. Mike |
||||||
2 | "ONCE SAVED ALWAYS SAVED"!!! | Matt 22:37 | kalos | 30345 | ||
You would do well to label your opinion as opinion. Otherwise, someone who doesn't know any better might erroneously take your opinion as fact. Also, Art's analysis of the parable of the prodigal son is not based on sound principles of Biblical interpretation. Clearly the principle of *analogia scriptura* (comparing scripture with scripture) was not followed by him. Nor was the principle of considering the context in which the passage appears. Lastly, you write: 'The "once saved always saved" doctrine is a false teaching.' Anyone with Internet access can assert anything. But merely asserting a thing does not make it true. |
||||||
3 | "ONCE SAVED ALWAYS SAVED"!!! | Matt 22:37 | Rom831 | 30480 | ||
Please show me where oyu assertain that my "Art's analysis of the parable of the prodigal son is not based on sound principles of Biblical interpretation". Excuse me? Just because you refuse to accept what Jesus point blank says, does not ditract from my Biblical intrepretation. The father is God. The son was a a son, he had an inheritance from God. what we inherit is the kingdom of God (Mat 25:34). Therefore he was saved because that is how we get an "inheritance" (1Pet1). God then says he became dead to God. when he returned to God, there was a celebration. Why? The parable before shows us why, because the sinner epented and came to God. Alive, dead, alive. Where else is this supported? Heb 6:4-6 shows we CAN fall away. Mark 9:42 shows we can cause others (little ones) to sin. Romans 11:22-23 show that some people fell yet if they discontinue their unbelife, they can be grafted back in (sorry, it uses "those" and "you" which imply people, not nations). In Galatians 5, Paul is talking to the church, to believers and in verse 4 says by trying to follow the law, some have fallen away. And on and on. Furthermore, The parable in question is one of three righ there about the same topic - Jesus saving the lost. Not about pharasies grumbling. You have not showen once where the other two relate to the pharasies grumbling to establish the contxt you are trying to force this parable into. Instead, I have shown where my intrepretation fit into the context of the other parables Jesus was giving at the same time. Remember, there are two other parables between where the pharasies "grumble" and this one. BOTH of those speak to Jesus coming to save and say NOTHING about the pharasies "grumblings". Why pray tell are you so certain Jesus would speak twice of salvation, then stop speaking of salvation to wander back and make suck a weak statment against the pharasies grumbling? No, sorry, Jesus was speaking of saving thelost in the parable of the sheep, then in the parable of the coin, then in this parable as well. But if you do not ignore Jesus words, you clearly see this lost person He is saving WAS savd before. So please, show me where I am not comparing scripture to scripture. Show me where my intrepretation is out of context with the rest of what Jesus is saying in that lesson. Oterwise, believe Jesus' own words and not the doctrine you hold so firmly to. Bless...ArtS |
||||||
4 | "ONCE SAVED ALWAYS SAVED"!!! | Matt 22:37 | kalos | 30485 | ||
Rom831: For starters, in your note to which I am replying, I count 22 misspellings and/or typing errors that you made. Are you as careless in your Bible reading and studying as you are in your spelling and typing? With your attitude I don't think anyone can show you anything. Several other people have repeatedly shown where you are wrong. It's obvious you have no comprehension of what others are saying. Apparently you are incapable of understanding their posts. Let's just end this thread because all you are demonstrating (very publicly, I might add) is that you simply do not know what you are talking about. Feel free to counter with another mixed-up argument if you wish, but I am done... "The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, But a wise man is he who listens to counsel." --Proverbs 12:15 kalos |
||||||
5 | "ONCE SAVED ALWAYS SAVED"!!! | Matt 22:37 | Rom831 | 30616 | ||
Once again, you attack me and not what I say. You do not address the verses I use to support what I say, instead attack splling to defend your view. My arguments are sound and supported as I have shown. Feel free to hang onto your stubborn refusal of the words of Jesus and grasp on to your doctrine if it makes you feel so supperior. Bless...ArtS |
||||||