Grace — Forgiveness — Faith — Repentance

[davo]

@DaveB2.0

…that belief is not necessary for salvation…

Dave… give a short definition of how you are using the term “salvation”, then please give your quote as to WHO here is saying as you keep repeating above in relation to your definition; this needs to get sorted.

[Paidion]

@DaveB2.0

I can’t really believe that God has changed, or that unsaved mankind has either. There are things God does not like - unloving behavior, faithlessness, fornication - He’s been very clear about that - and I have to believe that He still has the same attitude. And, the lesson the Israelites learned is still current - sin has to be take responsibility for, repented of, and overcome with good. No hiding behind religion. None of this ‘God doesn’t see your sin’ - of COURSE He does - how can we be delivered from something unless we face it, own up to it, are forgiven for it - and that means addressing those whom we have wronged as well.

I’m a bit hard-headed on this because if we stray from the reality of the human situation, there is no other message of hope and reconciliation to be had.

Well said, Dave! The teachings of Jesus are for those in His day, as well as for all in succeeding generations.

[DaveB2.0]

Repentance is no more than realizing we’ve gone the wrong way, and turning around. As Tom Wright explains, Caesar would approach an enemy town with his message - to REPENT and trust in him. It’s not so much seeing human beings as totally evil, despicable and rotten, as saying: you are going the wrong way in your life, your mind, your morals - and you need to turn around and go toward your Creator.

[Paidion]

@DaveB2.0

Repentance is no more than realizing we’ve gone the wrong way, and turning around.

That’s pretty close to the literal meaning of the Greek word “μετανοια.” The word means “a change of mind.” I like to say, “A change of heart and mind” but I have no real justification for adding “heart.”

[davo]

@DaveB2.0

Repentance is no more than realizing we’ve gone the wrong way, and turning around. As Tom Wright explains, Caesar would approach an enemy town with his message - to REPENT and trust in him. It’s not so much seeing human beings as totally evil, despicable and rotten, as saying: you are going the wrong way in your life, your mind, your morals - and you need to turn around and go toward your Creator.

Thanks for that Dave. Can you also do likewise here…

@DaveB2.0

…that belief is not necessary for salvation…

Dave… can you give a short definition of how you are using the term “salvation”, then please give your quote as to WHO here is saying as you keep repeating above in relation to your definition; this needs to get sorted.

[DaveB2.0]

I also like to think of repentance as ‘intervention’.
Intervention is a powerful tool, if handled wisely, in bringing an addict’s (or other serious misbehavior) mind to reality: “We KNOW and want to HELP, but YOU need to see it and this is the only way we know how to do that.”

Repentance is like that; God’s ‘intervention’ without which we are lost existentially and spiritually. It is an act of great mercy and utterly necessary for those going in the wrong direction.

[pilgrim]

@DaveB2.0
Oh come on Davo, ‘salvation’ (or deliverance) is not a difficult word and I am sure that we all share common ground on its meaning. One thing is for sure, anyone who is fully reconciled to God is secure, delivered, saved and you have stated repeatedly that the whole of humanity is reconciled to God without any need of belief, repentance etc.

Drew to Davo below:

@Drew

Now that you have explained yourself (pretty well in a previous post), why do you continue to butcher the English language regarding reconciliation?

Whilst that question might seem rather pointed, I do believe that it is a very valid and important one.
The obvious conclusion (though not necessarily true - only God knows, and perhaps Davo) is that the ‘butchering’ is essential if Davo is to imagine any coherence in his theology.
The topic of reconciliation is central to the problem.
The dictionary definition and the understanding which almost all of us share is that: for two parties to be reconciled, each party has to feel in harmony with the other.
This is clearly not yet the case between God and the whole of humanity. Whilst God is NOT at enmity with any of His offspring, and has completed His plan of redemption by the death and resurrection of His Son, much of humanity is still at enmity with God and therefore is, at present, refusing (or blind to) God’s offer of reconciliation.
If the whole of humanity had been fully reconciled to God during the first century CE, then we would not have just commemorated the 75th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau.

[davo]

@pilgrim

@DaveB2.0
Oh come on Davo, ‘salvation’ (or deliverance) is not a difficult word and I am sure that we all share common ground on its meaning.

Well you would have thought so… but hmmm, apparently not. Like I’ve asked Dave twice for clarity given his oft repeated factoid… “…that belief is not necessary for salvation…” that he attributes to my position, i.e., he actively posts it on my thread; which is no problem if he would just clarify and or justify it etc. And for someone who is fond of articulating his position I’d have thought not an unreasonable ask, especially given both Bob and qaz seem to affirmed my original request as reasonable. We shall see.

@pilgrim

Drew to Davo below:

@Drew

Now that you have explained yourself (pretty well in a previous post), why do you continue to butcher the English language regarding reconciliation?

Whilst that question might seem rather pointed, I do believe that it is a very valid and important one.

The obvious conclusion (though not necessarily true - only God knows, and perhaps Davo) is that the ‘butchering’ is essential if Davo is to imagine any coherence in his theology.

The topic of reconciliation is central to the problem.

I butchered nothing John… you have a choice: acknowledge and follow the Biblical use of the word or you’re welcome to follow Bing’s use of the word.

As I’ve noted previously…

@davo

When the books tally-up we say they have been “reconciled”, i.e., they align. God has reconciled humanity aligning humanity back to and with Himself… what the first Adam wrecked the last Adam restored. Because of, and subsequent to this, is the imploration… “be ye therefore reconciled to God!” IOW… come and experience the blessedness of this reality.

For some that will be as simple as realigning of their faith and belief towards God, but for others that will take more of a radical mind-shift, i.e., they will need a hefty shove in that direction to where they can repent, i.e., have a change of mind — but as always it is… “the goodness of God that leads you to repentance”.

@pilgrim

If the whole of humanity had been fully reconciled to God during the first century CE, then we would not have just commemorated the 75th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau.

So the CLEAR inference you’re drawing is that wrongdoing proves (in your eyes at least) such as commit wrongdoings have NOT been reconciled to God in Christ; so give us an honest answer John… are you ever a wrongdoer? What might your answer say about your apparent reconciliation?

[Drew]

@davo

So the CLEAR inference you’re drawing is that wrongdoing proves ( in your eyes at least ) such as commit wrongdoings have NOT been reconciled to God in Christ; so give us an honest answer John… are you ever a wrongdoer? What might your answer say about your apparent reconciliation ?

No.

You write as if you believe that reconciliation is a once-in-a-lifetime event.

Biblically, that is nonsense. You continue to ignore scripture passages such as 2 Cor 5:11-21.

In those verses, Paul writes “be reconciled to God” to the Corinthian church. Yet many, if not all, of the Corinthian church had had major reconciliation moments with God through Christ already.

In this life, we often daily/hourly/etc… make poor choices that create a rift between us and God. In those times, Paul would say, “be reconciled to God” through repentance.

[davo]

@Drew

You write as if you believe that reconciliation is a once-in-a-lifetime event.

Of man TO God BY God it was!! — I do indeed believe it!

@Drew

In this life, we often daily/hourly/etc… make poor choices that create a rift between us and God. In those times, Paul would say, “be reconciled to God” through repentance.

So in your life you vacillate constantly in your daily experience between reconciled or not reconciled according to your performance, i.e., whether you’re doing righteously or unrighteously. So… in your estimation, what befalls you IF in your unreconciled state you die; what would be your predicament according to your scenario?

[Drew]

@qaz

Do you do think we ebb and flow between being reconciled and alienated each day/week?

Well…I catch myself feeling alienated from God due to my behaviors from time to time (several times a day?). I then proceed with some soul searching about my actions/thoughts until I come to a resolution of the feelings of alienation from God. The soul searching itself is a way of restoring relationship to God by committing to trying to live in a way that is pleasing to Him.

Is there some underlying point you are trying to make?

[Drew]

@davo

So in your life you vacillate constantly in your daily experience between reconciled or not reconciled according to your performance , i.e., whether you’re doing righteously or unrighteously. So… in your estimation, what befalls you IF in your unreconciled state you die; what would be your predicament according to your scenario?

The judgment of God is His business. BUT, there are a few things that I “know” in faith from the scripture:

1. Those who are written in the book of life at the coming of Christ will get to go straight into the kingdom of heaven (“kingdom of heaven” up to a little interpretation).

2. Those who do go straight into the kingdom will still go through a judgment process.

3. Those not written in the book of life at the coming of Christ will not be allowed in the kingdom initially (see sheep/goats parable perhaps).

4. It appears that a name can be stricken from the book of life during this life. Revelation 3:5 seems to indicate so.

5. BUT, constantly worrying about #4 is pointless. A] As long as a person generally lives a life of faith in Christ, I think they have a decent if not good chance of having their name written in that book of life. B] All will eventually be brought into the kingdom. Jesus condemned worry. It is dumb to worry about whether you will be brought directly into the kingdom. It is wise to trust that God will be ultimately good to all of His creation. Any pain in judgment at the beginning of the afterlife will result in good of some form later in the afterlife. Then again, we should concern ourselves with our salvation to a point. “Work out your salvation with fear and trembling.”

How “unreconciled” would a person have to be to have their name stricken from the book of life? That’s God’s business. I’d assume that He would weight more than “millions of thoughts per second” regarding all kinds of factors in order to come to a judgment on a person.

I doubt that He seemingly arbitrarily adds and removes names from the book hastily.

[Drew]

@qaz

Okay, but that’s not what I asked. Feeling something and being something are not synonymous. Do you think you are alienated each day/week?

Yes - if you understand “alienation” from God similarly to the way I understand it.

My understanding of “alienation” from God:

God’s main goal in existence: provide an overall enjoyable existence to as many of His creatures as possible at each moment in time; the proportion of creatures who are experiencing enjoyment at any given moment should increase, perhaps stochastically, as time passes.

If my actions or thoughts are leading more towards God’s main goal than against God’s main goal, then I could be considered to be “in fellowship” with God.

If my actions or thoughts are leading more away from God’s main goal than towards God’s main goal, then I could be considered to be “alienated” from God.

The above concept requires only “over 50%” of one’s recent thoughts/actions to be in alignment with God’s goals - in order to be “in fellowship” with Him.

As one grows in the faith, the definition of “in fellowship” with God might shift towards 100% of a person’s recent thoughts and actions being in line with God’s goals.

[pilgrim]

@davo

so give us an honest answer John… are you ever a wrongdoer? What might your answer say about your apparent reconciliation ?

I am ‘ever a wrongdoer’ as St Paul himself admitted. I am a sinner saved by grace.

@davo

So the CLEAR inference you’re drawing is that wrongdoing proves ( in your eyes at least ) such as commit wrongdoings have NOT been reconciled to God in Christ

Reconciliation is an element of salvation. When you state that the whole of humanity is reconciled, the ‘CLEAR inference’ is that the whole of humanity has already been saved. You seem to want to pick an argument with Dave for no reason.
Salvation is threefold: spirit, soul and body (or spirit, mind and body to be clear).
When I repented, my spirit was saved and my future is secure with the downpayment of the Holy Spirit enlivening and uniting with mine.
My mind is in the process of BEING saved and on that level I can still alienate myself from reconciliation (having the mind of Christ).
My body has yet to be saved/redeemed.
This does not negate the fact that ‘by their fruit ye shall know them’ and to suggest that those who were guilty of the holocaust were, at that moment in time in harmony (reconciled) to/with the mind of Christ is sheer nonsense. It is either the most bleak and desperate view of what ‘reconciliation’ means or the most bleak and desperate view of the character of God.
In addition it makes a mockery of all the suffering endured on earth as it has no purpose/value and it is made to be irredeemable.

[davo]

@pilgrim

…to suggest that those who were guilty of the holocaust were, at that moment in time in harmony (reconciled) to/with the mind of Christ is sheer nonsense.

That is nothing but knitting with blancmange — total jumbled nonsense. According to your logic… a wrongdoer (by your example, holocaust perpetrators) cannot be in a reconciled state with God YET you openly admit you’re a wrongdoer; can’t you see where that loopy logic lands you?

[davo]

@pilgrim

Reconciliation is an element of salvation. When you state that the whole of humanity is reconciled, the ‘CLEAR inference’ is that the whole of humanity has already been saved.

If “reconciliation is an element of salvation” then that precludes reconciliation being the whole of salvation, thus making your ‘CLEAR inference’ charge “that the whole of humanity has already been saved” as clear as mud.

From the pantelist position you have the cart before the horse, i.e., salvation is in fact an element of reconciliation. All, as Paul says, have been reconciled BY God to Himself — that was His unilateral work in Christ ON BEHALF OF His creation — it IS finished!

BECAUSE God has done it all IN TERMS OF establishing the reconciliation in drawing humanity to Himself individually one can come to find salvation; which is the nub of what Paul goes onto say and means by his imploration… “be ye therefore reconciled!” Here is an example of that very thing where Paul gives this distinction between God’s established reconciliation AND THEN the salvation aka eternal life faith releases one into…

Rom 5:10 For if WHEN we were enemies we WERE reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, HAVING BEEN reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.

Thus Christ’s death (crucifixion) wrought reconciliation for all, period; However… for those exercising faith Christ’s life (resurrection) wrought salvation, i.e., eternal life to those grasping it, that is, actively receiving it, cf vs. 11b. So… salvation is about purpose NOT position it is about service to God in this life and NOT about getting to heaven in the next.

[Paidion]

For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” (Romans 10:13 ESV)

This suggests that everyone who does not call on the name of the Lord will not be saved.
I realize that this does not follow logically from the statement.Yet it is suggested.

The logical equivalent of the statement in Romans 10:13 is “Everyone who will not be saved, does not call on the name of the Lord.”

[Holy-Fool-P-Zombie]

Does grace, forgiveness, faith, and repentance - depend on a particular church structure? Or do they work independently, of the church structure of setting? In other words, can I experience these elements if I attend:

• A Pentecostal church?

• A Roman Catholic church

• An Eastern Orthodox Church?

• Or hypothetically, a Native American Church. Where they blend Christianity, Native American Spirituality and Peyotism.

Native American Church

And I might join them hypothetically, for singing Christian songs - like this one?

[davo]

@Holy-Fool-P-Zombie

Does grace, forgiveness, faith, and repentance - depend on a particular church structure?

Short answer… absolutely NO.

[lancia]

@Paidion

For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” (Romans 10:13 ESV)

Yes, and that means calling on the name of the Lord is a sufficient condition of being saved. That is, a person cannot call on the name of the Lord without also being saved.

This suggests that everyone who does not call on the name of the Lord will not be saved.
I realize that this does not follow logically from the statement.Yet it is suggested.

Yes, it does not follow logically. It would follow logically if calling on the name of the Lord were a necessary condition of being saved. If calling on the name of the Lord were a necessary condition of being saved, then it would follow that a person will not be saved without also calling on the name of the Lord. But Romans 10:13 says nothing about calling on the name of the Lord being a necessary condition of being saved. Given that calling on the Lord is not a necessary condition of being saved, one would conclude that a person would be saved not only by calling on the name of the Lord, but also by some other way or ways.

The logical equivalent of the statement in Romans 10:13 is “Everyone who will not be saved, does not call on the name of the Lord.”

Yes, that is true, again because calling on the name of the Lord is a sufficient condition of being saved. If it is true that a person will be saved if that person calls on the name of the Lord, then it follows that if a person will not be saved, that person has not called on the name of the Lord.

Thus, Romans 10:13 supports the claim that calling on the name of the Lord is a sufficient condition of being saved, but it says nothing about its being a necessary condition of being saved.

A question I have for you is what does call on the name of the Lord mean? Would confessing that Jesus Christ is Lord be calling on the name of the Lord? If the answer is affirmative, then it would follow that Romans 10:13 means that everyone will be saved because everyone will confess that Jesus is Lord, according to Philippians 2:10-11. It would also follow that this syllogism would be valid and its premises would be true.

Premise 1: Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved. (Romans 10:13)
Premise 2: Everyone will call on the name of the Lord. (Philippians 2:10-11)
Conclusion: Everyone will be saved.