Results 1 - 11 of 11
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Is Salvation lump sum? | Heb 7:25 | Beja | 220000 | ||
1 Tim 4:10 "because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe." If we are to understand this passage rightly we are going to have to think carefully. First, lets honestly observe what is said. It says that God is a savior. This is qualified by all men, certainly. But at the end of the day it does NOT specifically say, that all men are saved. It simply affirms that God is a savior, and that of all men. Now, the question we must then try to answer is: In what sense is God the savior of all men? It is very important that you understand what I've just said. The verse rightly leads us to this question, and we must strive to answer it, but we must also be honest enough to say that it has not explicitely told us. It has affirmed that God is a Savior of all men, but not how so. Second, whatever interpretation we come up with, it must be in a different sense or in a different degree than how God is a savior to believers. If not, then we render the phrase "especially of those that believe" to be meaningless. So we will not be surprised when we come to a conclusion that does not see unbelievers with the same blissful rewards that accompany believers. Now, consider that for many times and places the name of the LORD was not known. In how many tragedies, and in how many sea voyages, and in how many battles in such places and times have men cried out to heaven to be delivered from their temporal and immediate plights? How many people, who have sternly denied the existence of God, has in those moments found themselves crying out to heaven in hopes that they were wrong, and somebody was hearing who was able to deliver them? Now, who has answered them if we are thinking according to the Christian view? Whether any man ever, has cried out to the name of some strange God, or has cried out with no name but only a desperate hope that "maybe somebody hears," if any deliverance has ever been granted from above to any man of any time, that deliverance has came only from the One True God. Now, don't leap to fast to insert this into the passage, but first contemplate it. From this can we not all here today agree that in this sense God is indeed the savior of all men everywhere of all time. You may think this is not the intent of what Paul is saying here, but if I was to say that God is the savior of all men, and if I meant it in this sense, would you disagree? I would expect most wouldn't. Now, if I were to make such an assertion, that God was in this way the savior of all men. I would then be making a statement about God being a savior, without making any statement of the eternal destiny of those being saved in this fashion. Which is all that we know for certain the text is saying. That God is a savior. But, then we assert that God is much more than just a savior from our temporary plights! To those that believe God is much more. He is the one who saves for all eternity from the wrath of that terrible day of the Lord, in which all men are judged. He is the one who washes us clean of our sin. So not only is He the savior of all men from their temporal plights, He is much more in a special way the savior of those who believe. Now, I find this to be a reading of the text that fits all the pieces of the puzzle. If we claim this is the proper reading we have robbed or slighted no portion of what Paul has stated. But at the end of the day, let us at least admit that what assures us that a reading of this type is the proper one is the rule of faith. What I mean that ofcourse there are other possiblities that while would seem to fit this passage just fine, those readings do make this passage the enemy and at odds with the rest of scripture. Therefore, if we have two possible interpretations of a single passage and both of them are equally fitting yet one contradicts the whole of scripture and one is in harmony with all of scripture, are we not bound to choose the interpretation in harmoney with scripture? In Christ, Beja |
||||||
2 | Is Salvation lump sum? | Heb 7:25 | dodoy | 220005 | ||
1 Timothy 4:9-11 (NASB) 9 It is a trustworthy statement deserving full acceptance. 10 For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers. 11 Prescribe and teach these things. In what context did Paul say God is the Savior (NOT just a Savior) of all men? 1 Timothy 1:15 (NASB) It is a trustworthy statement, deserving full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, among whom I am foremost of all. I believe there are no gray areas here. God is the Savior of all men in the context of saving sinners. Has anyone got a problem with this? I don't think so. Let Scripture interpret itself. Sola Scriptura. The danger with assertions is in fact mentioned by Paul in this same letter to Timothy (verses 5 - 7) |
||||||
3 | Is Salvation lump sum? | Heb 7:25 | Beja | 220006 | ||
Dodoy, A few points. 1. Unless I missunderstand what you've posted, you didn't actually engage or interact with anything I said. You simply stated that I was wrong. Perhaps I didn't follow what you said well enough. 2. If you will allow me to paraphrase what I'm suggesting the passage says: Verse 10: For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, (Who is the only hope of any salvation for any man), especially of believers who he saves in the greatest of possible ways, from eternal judgement. Now, I you may certainly think that is not what Paul is saying. All well and good. But, you can not argue with any success that based on only the immediate context and basic grammer, that he can NOT be saying that. 3. Are you actually trying to argue that the Bible CAN NOT be using the word savior in any sense other than of eternal salvation, simply because we know that Christ saves? Simply use any Bible search tool and you will see the word is used to refer to being saved on a smaller scale quite fequently, as in being saved from armies, or disease, or hunger, etc. You can argue that he means otherwise if you wish, but you can't simply say because we know Jesus saves from sins, therefore a reference to God being a savior is only and always limited to that sense. 4. Finally, you said "In what context did Paul say God is teh Savior (NOT just a Savior) of all men?" I'm not sure what you are asking, best I can tell you are asking a rhetorical question that you answer in the following line suggesting the context is 1 Tim 1:15. But are you honestly suggesting that 1 Tim 1:15, something stated three chapters earlier is undeniably what Paul has in mind with no unpacking of the things said in between? And saying that as if it should seal the case with no question? My final point is this. Given the immediate context and grammer alone, and if we read it with no other theology in mind, both are completely possible interpretations of the passage. That being said, I would argue that the wider Biblical context (all of scripture) rules out a universal salvation interpretation. I'm not presumming to convince you of that, however. I'm only trying to argue that my interpretation fits the passage. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
4 | Is Salvation lump sum? | Heb 7:25 | dodoy | 220008 | ||
Hi there, Pastor Beja, Quite a little anxious of what you promised me a couple of days ago. Just reminding. Relative to the topic at hand, this is what I honestly believe, unless proven otherwise: God, through Christ, saved all people from sin, but only the righteous will be rewarded with eternal life. If this is proven Biblically wrong, I have no other choice but to accept what the Bible says. Sincerely in Christ, dodoy |
||||||
5 | Is Salvation lump sum? | Heb 7:25 | Beja | 220017 | ||
Dodoy, I have not forgotten. I've not found time to type it but I have had time to do some thinking on it and to consider what verses to show you and in what order. But it would help me if you could explain what you just said a little better. Grasping what you believe would help me select scripture. 1.) In what sense can any person be "saved from sin" yet not receive eternal life. The very term "saved" is understood as being saved from something. That thing they are being "saved" from is a guilty verdict from God on the day of judgement. So when we say the word "saved" we are talking about being spared on that day the Lord judges all the earth. So in what sense are they saved, and yet judged on that day? In short, can you explain your terminology. 2. When you say only the righteous will be rewarded with eternal life, can you define what you mean by "the righteous." Do you mean that only those who through their deeds are righteous will receive eternal life, or do you mean only those who receive the righteousness of Christ counted for them through faith? Helping me understand these things will help me know which scriptures to present you with. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
6 | Is Salvation lump sum? | Heb 7:25 | dodoy | 220024 | ||
Dear Pastor Beja, Sorry to have just shown up. I need to rush my brother to the hospital and have just come home. Well anyway, thanks for what you posted. The following would hopefully explain what you want me to explain: 1. On why a person can be saved from sin yet not receive eternal life. Salvation from sin is God's work FOR man, that He accomplished through Christ. This is purely grace (Eph 2:4-9); not an iota of man's participation. Pls note that when man sinned, sin separated man from God (Isa 59:2), because before sin came man is not separated from God. There is then a need to remove what separates man from God, so that man might be reunited with God again. This, man can not do, so God took the initiative (Rom 5:2) and reconciled the world to Himself through Christ(2 Cor 5: 18,19). Because of that death on the cross, the sin-problem had been absolutely solved for all men (2 Cor 5:14, 15; Rom 6:7). All men are now part of the body of Christ (Eph 2:11-19). Unless removed by Christ Himself, man can not get his own self detached from being part of the body of Christ (John 10:28,29). Unless detached from Christ's body, man is bound to spend eternity with God. But is there a possibility that a man might be removed by Christ from being part of His body? Yes. Christ Himself mentioned in Rev 3:5 that only the names of overcomers will not be blotted out from the book of life. Blotting out of any name from the book of life can not occur if that name is not initially in the book of life. Rev 17:8 suggests that, with the exception of beast-worshippers, the writing of names in the book of life was from the foundation of the world. This has to be because Christ is the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world (1 Peter 1:19,20). The blotting out of a man's name from the book of life effectively removes him as part of the body of Christ. To recapitulate, man was saved from sin through Christ, became part of His body with his name written in the book of life from the foundation of the world. Bur if Christ blots his name from the book of life, he no longer is a part of Christ's body, and he will not inherit eternal life, instead his final destiny is the lake of fire (Rev 20:15). I hope this answers question #1. 2. On Question #2. Let me first quote Romans 2:3-11 (NASB): "3 And do you suppose this, O man, when you pass judgment upon those who practice such things and do the same yourself, that you will escape the judgment of God? 4 Or do you think lightly of the riches of His kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance? 5 But because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, 6 who will render to every man according to his deeds: 7 to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life; 8 but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation. 9 There will be tribulation and distress for every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek, 10 but glory and honor and peace to every man who does good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 11 For there is no partiality with God." These verses fully explain what I mean. But to be just specific relative to your question, yes, our righteousnes is not our own. It is counted to us through faith. A true believer is one who overcomes evil with good (John 14:12). The strength to overcome, the will to overcome, the opportunity to overcome - all these are from God. Our part is in using what God has given. Overcoming is the result of our positive response to God's work IN man (Phil 2:12, 13). This is in contrast to man's being saved from sin, which is God's work FOR man. Sincerely, dodoy |
||||||
7 | Is Salvation lump sum? | Heb 7:25 | BradK | 220027 | ||
Hello dodoy, So then, you appear to be postulating a "works based salvation" that's not really eternal in that one can never truly know he's saved? At what point does one merit eternal life, and conversely, a what point does one's actions cause them to be blotted out of the Book of Life? Understanding a bit of your background (SDA), I can see why you hold to the position you do. However, in this there is absolutely no assurance, and is ultimately based on the sum total of our good works! A works-based race to the end...essentially. Rom 11:6 "But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace." (NASB) Have a Happy Hew Year BradK |
||||||
8 | Is Salvation lump sum? | Heb 7:25 | dodoy | 220046 | ||
Thanks BradK for the time spent in browsing over my post for Pastor Beja. Salvation from sin is God's work FOR man, for all men, all kinds of men. All grace, no work from man. After being saved from sin, God works IN man, both "to will and to work for His good pleasure" (Phil 2:12). Only those who positively respond will NOT be blotted out by Christ Himself from the Book of Life. Since it is God who works IN us, it is NOT "ultimately based on the sum total of our good works". I understand you as telling me that based on what I posted "there is absolutely no assurance" of salvation. Please study the whole chapter of Romans 11 again. I'll just quote verses 22 and 23. "22 Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God's kindness, if you continue in His kindness; otherwise you also will be cut off. 23 And they also, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in; for God is able to graft them in again."(NASB) On my part, I quite notice the similarity of cutting off of grafted branches with the blotting out of names from the book of life. Did you notice it, too? How would you correlate these verses with the assurance of salvation? I do appreciate what others in this forum tell me. But if I am wrong, please show me from Scriptures. Show me that my use of Scriptures is improper, if need be. Show me please, NOT just tell me. Sincerely, dodoy |
||||||
9 | Is Salvation lump sum? | Heb 7:25 | BradK | 220048 | ||
Hello dodoy, Here's a few brief observations: 1. I understand Phil. 2:12-13. These verses constitute one complete sentence in the Greek. The emphasis in the last half of this sentence is entirely on what God does! God is the one working(energon) in you. It literally means, "working in", "producing in", "accomplishing in" you. The present participle means God is the One continuosly energizing in you! 2. Rev. 3:5 does not say, "Only those who positively respond will NOT be blotted out by Christ Himself from the Book of Life." It is dealing with yet future events- and addressed specifically to the Church in Sardis. Where does the rest of Scripture teach that a believer can have his name blotted out of the Book of Life? If one can effectively loose his salvation, i.e. have his name blotted out, then salvation is not wholly dependent upon God, but on what WE ultimately do! I think both an understanding of Faith and justification are being left out of this equation! 3. Rom. 11:22-23 is not dealing with or addressing loss of salvation! In these verses Paul is referring to the Jews, the natural branches, who have been broken off. Severity is upon those who have fallen, i.e., upon the jews who have been cut off, left in their unbelief, and who reject the Person of Jesus Christ! I would see the unregenerate (unbeliever) under the severity of God, and those who are genuine believers under the kindness of God. Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
10 | Is Salvation lump sum? | Heb 7:25 | dodoy | 220051 | ||
Hi, BradK, Thanks for your post. This is my response to your observations: 1. I agree with your observation No. 1; that's actually what I understand those verses mean. 2. Correct me if I am wrong, but I understand you as saying that the blotting or erasing of names from [or the retention of names in] the book of life only applies to the Church in Sardis. I can not agree, based on: a. If I agree, then I must also agree that only those of the Church in Ephesus can eat of the tree of life (Rev 2:1-7); b. If I agree, then I must also agree that only those from the Church in Smyrna can not be hurt by the second death (Rev 2:8-11). Salvation from sin can not be lost. It has been accomplished by God FOR man. What the Infinite has done can not be undone by finite man. If a man losts something, the 'act of losing' is his own act. Erasing of names from the book of life is Christ's act, not man's. Therefore,erasing of names from the book of life is NOT man's losing his salvation from sin; it is Christ's act that effectively disallows the non-overcomer from inheriting eternal life. 3. Don't take this against anyone, but please take another time to study Romans 11 again. Sincerely, dodoy |
||||||
11 | Is Salvation lump sum? | Heb 7:25 | BradK | 220052 | ||
OK | ||||||