Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | Romans 1:16 ¶ For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | Romans 1:16 ¶ I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation [from His wrath and punishment] to everyone who believes [in Christ as Savior], to the Jew first and also to the Greek. |
Subject: Clarification from John Reformed...? |
Bible Note: Part 2 -- My other question is regarding the following statements "Saving faith is a gift from God bestowed upon those He has chosen from before the foundation of the world... This view of God "Almighty" is the view held by the fathers of the Protestant faith, and was based on the Scripture alone. The modern popular view that places salvation in the hands of fallen mankind is dead wrong." What I perceive as a difference here may be simply my reading into your words based on identifying certain catch phrases directly with Calvin's teachings. I don't think that the Scriptures directly state anywhere that God "predestinated" to belief but rather to conformity to Christ. There is a certain mystery still present (until eternity) in revelation surrounding what actually takes place between the initiation of the Holy Spirit and the faith that is produced. The mystery (as yet unrevealed secret) results in various theories that can greatly influence one's theology but are not central to salvation. I believe we have a difference here in the definition of "almighty" and-or "sovereign" that significantly affects our theology but doesn't change the primary focus on the depravity of man, the holiness of God, the necessity of Christ's intervention, and the centrality of the Spirit's work; nor is there any question of the truth of the Trinity here. While we would both use the term, I don't believe God's power, authority, or sovereignty are compromised by His deliberate setting the limits to which His Spirit would go in terms of irresistability but still making salvation theoretically available to every person (while knowing in advance who would be rendered poor in spirit by His persistent conviction and proof through the Spirit and who would blaspheme His Spirit). I know this brings up the question of the meaning of the term "knowledge" -- as you brought out in your post on the other thread. However, it's late, and that will have to wait until there is more time. (Based on my schedule, it may be some time, but I will do my best to respond when I can sit down long enough to prayerfully and clearly synthesize study and consideration since my last posting to Kalos on that.) Finally, I need to clarify who you meant when you used the phrase, "the view held by the fathers of the Protestant faith, and was based on the Scripture alone" in your posting. I guess I'm assuming that "Calvin and those who associated themselves with him" would be an accurate rendering. Are you including Martin Luther? Do you include Jacobus Arminius (certainly not a 'modern' by any stretch but not quite an exact contemporary of Calvin, and certainly expunged from any list of Calvin's followers once he began to think that there may have been potential errors within Calvin's Institutes)? I was a little uncomfortable with the sub-phrase "based on the Scripture alone" and wanted clarification as well. Were you referring to certain statements of Calvin as being wholly unpolluted with the reasoning of man, or simply comparing them to heresies that brought in superstitions, false religions, and-or false revelations of some other kind? There's certainly a sense in which the purity of some statement is apparently being compared with the impurity and corruption of something else. |