There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Reformed
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
To a certain extant do you think this is semantics. When an action occurs? God is still looking for cooperation at some point in the process and I think we both agree God has to start the process.
Well, you see…we don’t base justification ON faith. That is, we do not see faith as the grounds of our justification. The ground of our justification is the life and crucifixion of Christ alone. We did nothing to cooperate with the person and work of Christ on behalf of sinners. That is why it is monergistic. Faith is a gift given through the word and Baptism and this is monergistic, too. We can reject it, but cannot accept it. It’s just given.

As for sanctification, this involves prayer, good works, receiving the sacrament, etc. This requires our regenerated will in order to progress in…and I believe the passages you posted are referencing this aspect. If we refuse to cooperate with God in our growth in Christ it can result in a loss/rejection of faith and thus a loss of justification.
 
Well … there was different scripture I was thinking of when I asked the question.

John 15:5-6
[5] I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in me, and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing.
[6] If a man does not abide in me, he is cast forth as a branch and withers; and the branches are gathered, thrown into the fire and burned.

The branches are Christians.
It’s possible for a branch (Christian) to be separated from the vine (cast forth), gathered and thrown in the fire.

A Christian, if no longer abiding (an action word) in Jesus, can still go to hell.

Now who causes the branch to be removed.
Is it from the fault of Jesus or the individual?

God is never a liar.

I don’t see how someone losing their salvation is God’s fault rather than the individual’s.

It’s not Christ’s action that separates the Christian from the vine, it’s the individual that separates himself from the vine.

Scripture didn’t promise once saved always saved.

If this were actually true, then Paul’s letters (to existing churches and people that were already Christians) would have been much shorter … along the lines of “no worries, y’all are good”.

Assurance is not just given, but there is something we must do (actually a lot of to-do’s were listed). There is an ‘if’ to the promise.

Did Paul list things for US to do or for JESUS to do?

michel
The real question is whether Paul gave a list to do FOR or BECAUSE OF our salvation. This is something that can be easily understood by paying attention to little words like, “therefore.”

Notice that there is not a single exhortation in Ephesians until the 4th chapter, and not a substantial exhortation in Romans until the 12th chapter. Why not? Because until the gospel of our salvation is set forth- there are no grounds for good works and no pwer to do them. We do good works out of gratitude - not in hopes of earning something.

Also - John 15 should be properly cross - referenced with other passages of the same nature, perhaps Matthew 15:13 which reads, “But he answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up.”

So the warning is not to those who are truly within the vine of Christ and garden of God - but to those who believe that they planted themselves into Christ and the garden of God.

You said that it was the individual who separates himself from the vine - but this is a pre-mature conclusion base upon an isolated text. This was your inference, for this assertion is nowhere found in Scripture- nor can it be proven. The whole tenor of Scripture testifies that those who perish were never in Christ to begin with - for the Father had not planted them, and 1 John 2:19 said that they never belonged to us. Christ says about these false professor that he “never” knew them- (Matthew 7:23)!

So the question comes again - (getting back to the thread topic)

What is the decisive factor of whether we shall be fully and finally saved or not:

Is it something that we do
OR
Is it what Christ has already accomplished 2000 years ago on Calvary’s tree?

This is the heart of the debate -
 
It seems that sanctification is synergistic in Calvinism as well.

God Bless,
Michael
It is, however, the way of approaching the subject is probably completely different (other than sola fide), I suppose.
 
Well, you see…we don’t base justification ON faith. That is, we do not see faith as the grounds of our justification. The ground of our justification is the life and crucifixion of Christ alone. We did nothing to cooperate with the person and work of Christ on behalf of sinners. That is why it is monergistic. Faith is a gift given through the word and Baptism and this is monergistic, too. We can reject it, but cannot accept it. It’s just given.

As for sanctification, this involves prayer, good works, receiving the sacrament, etc. This requires our regenerated will in order to progress in…and I believe the passages you posted are referencing this aspect. If we refuse to cooperate with God in our growth in Christ it can result in a loss/rejection of faith and thus a loss of justification.
This is a quote from New Advent:

Justification is a divine act where God declares the sinner to be innocent of his sins. It is a legal action in that God declares the sinner righteous – as though he has satisfied the Law of God. This justification is based entirely on the sacrifice of Christ by His shed blood:

How does your thought differ from this?
 
Now let’s look at the Biblical evidence. First we have John 15:1-6, which has been cited often:

**1"I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser.
2"Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit, He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit, He prunes it so that it may bear more fruit.
3"You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you.
4"Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in Me.
5"I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in Me and I in him, he bears much fruit, for apart from Me you can do nothing.
6"If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned. **

First of all, Calvinists want us to believe that when Christ says “every branch in Me”, he means “a person that is a member of My visible body (i.e. the Church) but that has not been spiritually united to Me.” Consequently, they make a distinction between being “in Christ” and being “in His visible body.” There are serious problems with this analysis. First of all, what does Jesus say “the Vine” represents? His visible body? No! He clearly states **“I am **the Vine.” In other words, the Vine represents the person of Christ. Branches are logically united to the vine and thus this metaphoric branch must be united to the person of Christ. That is the logical conclusion one draws without doing violence to the text. Otherwise, Jesus would not have referred to the person as a “branch,” since a branch – by definition – is an appendage of a plant (vine, tree, etc.).
Second of all, in every instance we find “in me” or a variant (i.e. “in him”, “in the Son”, etc.), it means a spiritual and salvific union with Christ.

1 John 2:24

24As for you, let that abide in you which you heard from the beginning If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, you also will abide in the Son and in the Father.

1 John 2:28

28Now, little children, abide in Him, so that when He appears, we may have confidence and not shrink away from Him in shame at His coming.

1 John 3:24

24The one who keeps His commandments abides in Him, and He in him We know by this that He abides in us, by the Spirit whom He has given us.

See also John 6:56. Calvinists even admit that all the other uses of “in me” in John 15 (highlighted above in blue) refer to a spiritual and salvific union with Christ. So then why do they suddenly break away from the standard definition and use – by Christ and John - of “in Me” when it comes to John 15:2, making it the only exception of this established rule? Because they realize that it will contradict their theology.

The third problem is that the “false professor” arguments contradicts Jesus’s own words. False professors can fool Christians, but they can never fool Christ. The “branch” in question is not the one identifying himself as being “in Christ” or having spiritual union with Christ. It is Christ Himself who identifies this person as being “in Me.” Christ knows those who are His and I would highly doubt He would identify a false professor as being “in Him,” a phrase that He and the Bible always uses as a reference to those who are genuinely saved.
Fourth of all, lets take another look at John 15:6:

6If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned

The word “abide” - in Greek meno – means to remain, to stay, or to continue. bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/…06&version=kjv We find a variant of this same Greek word (epimeno) in Romans 11:22-23, which has a similar theme and clearly refers to true Christians:

22Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in (epimeno) His kindness; otherwise you also will be cut off. 23And they also, if they do not continue in (epimeno) their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again.

So in essence, what John 15:6 is saying is “If a man does not continue in me….” How can you continue in something that you were never a part of in the first place? Moreover, notice the order of events given by Jesus in this verse:
1)cast forth
2)withered
3)burned
The withering is a result of the casting off, not vice versa. This makes sense because once a branch is cut off from a vine, it withers because it no longer partakes of the life giving sap of the vine. Moroever, the fact that this person “withers” after being cut off means that it was once alive. Obviously, the “withering” does not refer to physical death, but spiritual death. The life in question is thus spiritual life and its origin is in the spiritual Vine (i.e. Christ). Therefore, this person once partook of the spiritual life that is found in Christ, but he was cut off and thus no longer partakes of this life and dies. Moreover, this is the same exegesis of John 15 given by the Council of Orange:

**CANON 24. Concerning the branches of the vine. The branches on the vine do not give life to the vine, but receive life from it; thus the vine is related to its branches in such a way that it supplies them with what they need to live, and does not take this from them. Thus it is to the advantage of the disciples, not Christ, both to have Christ abiding in them and to abide in Christ. For if the vine is cut down another can shoot up from the live root; but one who is cut off from the vine cannot live without the root (John 15:5ff). **

God Bless,
Michael
 
This is a quote from New Advent:

Justification is a divine act where God declares the sinner to be innocent of his sins. It is a legal action in that God declares the sinner righteous – as though he has satisfied the Law of God. This justification is based entirely on the sacrifice of Christ by His shed blood:

How does your thought differ from this?
Not at all. God did this for the whole world at the cross, 2000 years ago (this differs markedly from Calvinism). It is an objective action that applies to all men at all times in all places. This objective act of justification is appropriated through faith alone subjectively.
 
Well, you see…we don’t base justification ON faith. That is, we do not see faith as the grounds of our justification. The ground of our justification is the life and crucifixion of Christ alone. We did nothing to cooperate with the person and work of Christ on behalf of sinners. That is why it is monergistic. Faith is a gift given through the word and Baptism and this is monergistic, too. We can reject it, but cannot accept it. It’s just given.

As for sanctification, this involves prayer, good works, receiving the sacrament, etc. This requires our regenerated will in order to progress in…and I believe the passages you posted are referencing this aspect. If we refuse to cooperate with God in our growth in Christ it can result in a loss/rejection of faith and thus a loss of justification.
What if some one CHOOSES not to accept faith?
 
If free will does not exists, then we are not responsible for sins. If we are not responsible for our sins, then it would be unjust for God to punish anyone in hell. God is not unjust, therefore, free will must exist.
 
If free will does not exists, then we are not responsible for sins. If we are not responsible for our sins, then it would be unjust for God to punish anyone in hell. God is not unjust, therefore, free will must exist.
You are using a different definition of free will then I (and probably Calvinists) would use. It really should be addressed as moral will, not free will. A lack of free will would mean the person doesn’t control their choices. That’s a more humanistic/philosophical concept.
 
That would be the same as rejecting the gospel. Man can reject faith, but he cannot accept it. He receives it as a gift.
Then you reject the doctrine of free will. What if we decide not to recieve it? I think you are playing word games.
 
40.png
ralphinal:
Sandusky,

You hold to once saved always saved? That there is nothing we can do to lose salvation? Or are you in the predestination or double predestination camp?
Predestination either to salvation, or to condemnation, and that those predestined to salvation cannot be lost because perseverance is inherent in the predestination, but most important, they cannot be lost because God cannot fail in His purpose to save them.
 
Then you reject the doctrine of free will. What if we decide not to recieve it? I think you are playing word games.
I don’t think he’s playing word games. The Lutheran understanding is just complex. 🙂

God Bless,
Michael
 
Predestination either to salvation, or to condemnation, and that those predestined to salvation cannot be lost because perseverance is inherent in the predestination, but most important, they cannot be lost because God cannot fail in His purpose to save them.
Do you believe in double predestination?

Are you above giving a defination or your belief?
 
Then you reject the doctrine of free will. What if we decide not to recieve it? I think you are playing word games.
Nope, no word games. We can reject it, but because we’re dead in sins and trespasses we do not have the moral capability to accept the gospel. God must give us faith.
 
40.png
PerryJ:
The Bible shows that man can work with God and that there is a synergy “work with” between the two. The Bible uses this exact phrase several times.

Romans 8:28 “in everything God works for good with (sunergei eis agathon) those who love him, who are called according to his purpose.”
That’s an inaccurate translation. panta sunergei references ton theon; IOW, it’s God who’s working all (and that’s comprehensive) of the circumstances which come at the believer, those in “category good,” as well as those in “category bad,” for the believer’s good. That’s found in both the preceding, and succeeding contexts (cf vv18-28 and 28 -39).

Here’s an accurate translation from the NASB: And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose.
40.png
Perry:
2 Cor 6:1 “Working together with (sunergountes) him, then, we entreat you not to accept the grace of God in vain.”
The key point is the reception of grace, and that not in vain; in context, the Corinthians were not to let their response to the Gospel be marred by entertaining criticisms either of the Gospel or the one who brought it to them (cf vv2-10).

Working with grace is great; however, I don’t believe works contribute to salvation.
40.png
Perry:
It is freely given; however, God is not looking for a puppet. God wants an individual that freely choses him. If we do not freely chose him do we truly love him?
🤷 You’re statement in the “blue” introduces a straw man."

Calvinists believe that the one God choose to save not only must, but will, freely choose
to love God.
 
That’s an inaccurate translation. panta sunergei references ton theon; IOW, it’s God who’s working all (and that’s comprehensive) of the circumstances which come at the believer, those in “category good,” as well as those in “category bad,” for the believer’s good. That’s found in both the preceding, and succeeding contexts (cf vv18-28 and 28 -39).

Here’s an accurate translation from the NASB: And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose.

The key point is the reception of grace, and that not in vain; in context, the Corinthians were not to let their response to the Gospel be marred by entertaining criticisms either of the Gospel or the one who brought it to them (cf vv2-10).

Working with grace is great; however, I don’t believe works contribute to salvation.

🤷 You’re statement in the “blue” introduces a straw man."

Calvinists believe that the one God choose to save not only must, but will, freely choose
to love God.
So you do believe in Calvinist thought and double predestination. In your thought God has created beings that not only he knows; but, has actually created to go to Hell. He controls all aspects of the universe and as such controls evil. He controls the evil of men and so not only knows; but, creates the environment that a man is damned. From the beginning of time he designed that Adam would fall and he would create Joe smith to go to Hell. Is this your theology?
 
40.png
PerryJ:
So you do believe in Calvinist thought and double predestination.
Yes, according to my understanding, and no, according to what I believe to be your understanding.
40.png
PerryJ:
In your thought God has created beings that not only he knows; but, has actually created to go to Hell.
God only created one man.
40.png
PerryJ:
He controls all aspects of the universe and as such controls evil.
If He doesn’t, everyone is in trouble, and evil is meaningless and without purpose.
40.png
PerryJ:
He controls the evil of men and so not only knows; but, creates the environment that a man is damned.
The scriptural statement is that men damn themselves.
40.png
PerryJ:
From the beginning of time he designed that Adam would fall and he would create Joe smith to go to Hell. Is this your theology?
From before time. If Adam’s transgression is outside of God’s decree, then God is not sovereign, but contingent, and God does not have exhaustive foreknowledge as the Christian believes, and God is not in control of everything, but only some things, and He’s not worthy of the Christian’s trust.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top