Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Covenants and Dispensation? | Eph 1:10 | Reformer Joe | 5216 | ||
Thanks for your encouragement, Hank. Of course, the trouble is "shutting off the valve" before I bore everyone to death! By the way, Hank, a personal question for you. You say in your profile that you use both the Ryrie and the MacArthur study Bibles as references. As you undoubtedly know, they have a very big difference of opinion when it comes to the so-called "Free Grace"/"Lordship Salvation" debate. Which one do you side with? --Joe! |
||||||
2 | Covenants and Dispensation? | Eph 1:10 | Hank | 5221 | ||
Joe, I hold with free grace, but not in quite the same sense as I understand some proponents of it to mean. One of the "proof texts" that is frequently cited is Ephesians 2:8-9 in which Paul says we have been saved by grace through faith, not of ourselves; it is a gift of God; not of works lest anyone should boast. But Paul doesn't leave it at that. He says (v.10) that we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good WORKS (emphasis mine). I believe the Bible teaches that salvation is a gift of God and that there is nothing we can do -- no "works" -- to earn it. However, it also teaches that good works are the result of regeneration. James speaks of a faith that is without works as being a dead faith. Not everything which is claimed to be faith is genuine. Thus if someone who claims to have been saved "continues in sin that grace may abound" one can reasonably question whether the claim is valid. You will know them by their fruits. I believe the teaching that God's gift of salvation places no demands on the believer to "walk in newness of life" in obedience to Him is false teaching. It's what Dietrich Bonhoeffer called cheap grace. You make a valid argument that Charles Ryrie and John MacArthur do have some differences of opinion. But then when have we ever seen theologians agree on all points of the Christian faith? Ryrie and MacArthur both agree on the Triunity and salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ. Beyond that, all else is secondary exposition anyway. By the way, I don't prize study Bibles the way some of my friends do. JVH of this Forum, whose postings now top out over 700, said in an e-mail to me recently, "It's amazing how much light the Scriptures shed on study Bibles!" --Hank | ||||||
3 | Covenants and Dispensation? | Eph 1:10 | Reformer Joe | 5231 | ||
I think MacArthur's view does mirror your own (which is also the view I have). One thing you pointed out which a great number of people seem to miss is that we were not merely saved for our sakes. Yes, we do have eternal life, but almost every passage which talks about God's free gift of salvation also mentions our PURPOSE (glorification of God), such as Eph. 2:10 or 1 Peter 2:9,10 or 2 Corinthians 2:17-20. So many people are fond of quoting the "we are saved by grace through faith" without showing that we are indeed saved unto good works. I think that the crux of the problem has to do with two aspects of God's salvation. As you mentioned, both parties have the JUSTIFICATION part down, the imputation of Christ's righteousness to our account. What Ryrie and company downplay, in my opinion, is God's REGENERATION, the new birth. It just seems almost impossible to miss that we are not only declared righteous when we are saved, but that we indeed become "new creations." By focusing on justification, many of the Dallas Theological Seminary camp overlook (at least in practice) the supernatural change that is not just a legal declaration, but a true spiritual transformation. Thanks again for your comments! --Joe! |
||||||