Our Glorious Gospel

Answers For Today ^ | Chuck Smith

[sr4402]

You don't know the history of the conversation.

That doesn't matter, the issue whether God can choose and save Mormons, retarded folks, etc is what Vernon brought up. If he thinks that we are wrong, in that God could choose out of this group, does pertain to Unconditional Election.

If he does believe, that these folks cannot believe and go through the sanctification process would doubt God's choosing them in the first place("for it is God who works in you to will and to act according to his good purpose." Phil 2:13).

I think the Arminian version better preserves other scriptures that reflect free will

Why assume there is no free will in the calvinist position?. Men do "call upon the name of the Lord" and are saved. But we Calvinist say that the Grace of God (Irristable Grace) is more powerful than we comprehend and that there is a lot more before salvation than meets the eye and we find this throughout Scripture. We would say that man's free will cannot save him, but that God can and does use it.

[P-Marlowe]

We would say that man's free will cannot save him, but that God can and does use it.

And undoubtedly we would all agree.

BTW, That statement could qualify you for membership in the High Council of the Order of the Eternal Exclamation Point (with asterik)™.

Interested?

[connectthedots]

Are they a breakoff from CRC?

Not according to the URC website.

[connectthedots]

Your brand of Calvinism is inconsistent with 'Swarm Calvinism'.

[GigaDittos]

Is it me, or should this thread have been moved to religion?

[xzins]

Actually, Vernon didn't bring it up. P-Marlowe brought it up relative to a cousin of his. It helps to know the history of the thread. I believe that both of them say that if a child can be assumed to be automatically saved, then that same logic could hold for a retarded person who remains a child (or less) throughout his/her entire life. I think you understand the logic.

I'm fairly familiar with the calvinist position on lots of things. I'm sure I've got a lot to learn. I don't consider their version of "free will" to truly be free will.

By way of example, if I tell you that you can sit in your chair OR you can go for a walk, but then I put you in a strait jacket and chain you to your chair, do you really have a choice between sitting in your chair or going for a walk?

[The Grammarian]

What will we leave the younger generation that they will see as a wonderful gift/witness?

Lots of money? ;D No? How about lives poured out before God? That would certainly be a collective witness to my generation (and the world at large). As some guy wrote that I read in The Pure In Heart, "Lord, send us more saints."

[Ephesians210]

A quick query, easy one too. It's a yes or no type.

Is belief in the doctrine of the Trinity an essential belief for salvation? Yes, or no?

[Ephesians210]

RE:the issue whether God can choose and save Mormons

God does choose and save Mormons, then they become born again Christians and are no longer Mormons.

[Corin Stormhands]

Is it me, or should this thread have been moved to religion?

Heh...it started out in religion...then it got baaaaaaad...

[CARepubGal]

Exactly!

[Admin Moderator]

Ho hum..... OK, should I just pull this thread, or can you all behave? Up to you.....

[P-Marlowe]

Ho hum..... OK, should I just pull this thread, or can you all behave? Up to you.....

Just to give us all an idea as to what might cause this thread to be pulled, could you post the numbers of the posts that you think might be violative of the spirit of the smokey back room.

That way we can review them and learn what not to do.

thanks

<><

Marlowe

[Vernon]

A quick query, easy one too.

It's a yes or no type. Is belief in the doctrine of the Trinity an essential belief for salvation? Yes, or no?

Read Romans 10:9-10.

[drstevej]

Another proof text?

[P-Marlowe]

The Calvinists all insist that all of these old testament people were somehow regenerated and saved by God's grace even before Jesus ever set foot on the earth, much less died for their sins. I would venture to guess that not one of them believed in the "Trinity" as it is understood in Orthodox Christianity.

So, if it is possible that David and Moses and Abraham and Issac and Jacob were all saved without once mentioning anywhere in their writings or their traditions that God was three-in-one, then I would venture to guess that belief in the "Trinity" is obviously not an essential belief for salvation.

Now if belief in the "Trinity" is an essential element of salvation, then I dare say that none of the old testament people were saved.

[xzins]

The issue is whether belief in the Trinity is part of the plan of salvation.

The jailer says: What must I do to be saved?

Paul Answers:

1. Believe in the trinity
2. Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ

NOW -- If you asked me, "Is belief in the Trinity a necessary mark of a historic Christian Church?" then I would give a resounding, unequivocal "yes."

Eph201, My guess is that you framed your question too loosely.

[P-Marlowe]

Act 4:12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

It is by the NAME of Jesus that we are saved. A general understanding of the Trinity comes with dedication to study of his Word. But if a complete and total understanding of the intricacies of Trinitarian doctrine is necessary for salvation, then I trust few if any would be saved. I can't adequately explain it. So how can I expect someone who has never met the Lord to understand it?

[xzins]

I agree. Being able to explain the trinity is not part of the plan of salvation.

[xzins]

A proof-text and proof-texting are generally considered to be the taking of a single verse out of its biblical context to prove a doctrine.