Saved, which means what?
- Thread starter amadeus
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
I was hoping not, but since you were speaking to me, I presumed... in error it seems.! Sorry!
Lots of very good words, as I understand them. The one point that bothers me is this, "Jesus' blood means I am pure, despite my sinful nature". At a moment walking in Christ I may also pure, but if as He checks me out and as I check myself out and rough places and places in error are encountered the purity is found to be not so pure after all. Back to the laver one more time! The ladies' looking glasses are there for that reason. Help us dear Lord!
This is a reference to justification by grace through faith. It does not mean that sanctification is unnecessary, but it does mean that God has saved a soul purely by His grace, and applied the blood of Christ to that soul to wash away all previous sins and guilt. This also corresponds to the remission of sins.
Waiting on him
Well-Known Member
Waiting on him
Well-Known Member
We are spiritualy seated in Heavenly places, this is a seat that cannot be lost due to the fact that This is secured through Christ.
To be saved simply means to have faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ. For we are saved by grace through faith not works lest any man should boast.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChAqSWHSJWENIzJAmDPW7JQ
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChAqSWHSJWENIzJAmDPW7JQ
Stumpmaster
Well-Known Member
Salvation is never by works, always by grace through faith.
1Pe 1:1-9 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, (2) Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied. (3) Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy has begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, (4) To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fades not away, reserved in heaven for you, (5) Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time. (6) Wherein you greatly rejoice, though now for a season, if need be, you are in heaviness through manifold temptations: (7) That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perishes, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ: (8) Whom having not seen, you love; in whom, though now you see him not, yet believing, you rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory: (9) Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls.
Of course scriptures doesn't find fault in scriptures. The error is with the reader, when he attempts to understand the written word concerning the things of the Spirit of God not by spiritual discernment but by his natural human means of discerning. And when he uses his own human wisdom, reasoning, and thinking in determining what is the truth that scriptures reveals and teaches.
You said "So I do not think it’s a mistake to say 'through charity the rich are saved,' ommitting the assumption of also having true faith and relying on God's Grace." As I said, the Christian, especially one who teaches, must be careful in what he says. Saying "through charity the rich are saved" is a mistake in that may mislead many, even the baby Christian, into thinking that charity is a way to get saved, which takes him away from the truth that there is no other way, that is, through Jesus Christ, and that salvation is through faith. Even still, such statement, not only effectively take away the glory from God, but effectively transfer it to man.
The Christian should remember, rich and poor, young and old, male and female, sick or healthy alike, are by grace saved, through faith (in the Lord Jesus Christ), ccording to the will, purpose, pleasure, and glory of God, and not by anything or anyone else.
Tong
R1059
Well yes, I disagree, in that, we are talking about an effectively dead person. And one who is effectively dead can't effectively do what you say there he ought to do. So, how then could an effectively dead one save himself or get himself saved? He just effectively can't. As I have pointed out, unless one is born from above (born again) he cannot see nor can he do anything in that regard. Now, it is God who saves and He is the one who chooses the people who will be His people. And to those whom God had chosen from every nation, place, and generation, God goes out to them, in His perfect time, and works out to save them, recreating them by rebirth, and ultimately transform them to conform to the image of the Son, Jesus Christ.
Tong
R1060
What differences, may I ask? If differences in one's person and in the situation in this earthly life we are in, then my answer to your question is, Yes.
Tong
R1061
marksman
My eldest granddaughter showing the result of her
Having lectured in Bible College I can assure you by the standards of normal exegesis you are not logical and you read into the text.
I agree, except for the part where you said that they were unclean beast. For they are man and not beast. Perhaps, what you mean to say is that after they disobeyed God, they were no longer clean and were as beast or like beast which does not have the "Life".
I am not aware of any "beast nature" of man taught nor spoken in scriptures, such as that which pushes a man to go against God.
Tong
R1062
And so you say and claim, even with a degree of certainty. That sounds like some self-exaltation, at least concerning the material and carnal and based on standards set by man. Having been a lecturer, perhaps you can put up a brief lecture to show how was I not logical and have read into the text, instead of just merely mouthing out an accusation. That would be a good thing, right?
Tong
R1063
marksman
My eldest granddaughter showing the result of her
What would be a good thing is for you to stop giving the impression that you are always right and everyone else is always wrong.
Well, the impression on a poster rest on the reader. Posting one's view either for or against a post is all over this forum and is allowed. Now, it is incumbent upon anyone who post an argument against another's post, and proper for him to provide scriptural references in support of his position, specially when requested by the other party whose post he is refuting by his argument. And also, it is unbecoming for a Christian, to respond by ad hominem or just simply mouth out an accusation based on opinion.
So, please go ahead and show how I was illogical and was reading into the text.
Tong
R1064
CadyandZoe
Well-Known Member
The fact that we have a choice is indisputable. The more interesting question, in my opinion, is why we choose the alternatives we do. If we have freedom of the will, why is sin inevitable? It seems to me that a doctrine of salvation must address the inevitability of sin. Jesus had freewill and yet he was without sin. I would love it if, someday, God could cause it so that I never sin again. What a glorious blessing. To truly have freedom of the will, always doing what we know is right.
Webers_Home
Well-Known Member
.
It was impossible for Jesus to sin because he was born God's progeny.
● 1John 3:9 . . No one who is born of God practices sin, because His seed
abides in him; and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.
It only stands to reason that if God is an intrinsically sinless being; then
were He to reproduce, His offspring would be an intrinsically sinless being
like Himself, i.e. like begets like.
_
It was impossible for Jesus to sin because he was born God's progeny.
● 1John 3:9 . . No one who is born of God practices sin, because His seed
abides in him; and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.
It only stands to reason that if God is an intrinsically sinless being; then
were He to reproduce, His offspring would be an intrinsically sinless being
like Himself, i.e. like begets like.
_
Last edited:
marksman
My eldest granddaughter showing the result of her
Not when you have been trained in psychologically reading another person. This means your posts which ALWAYS give the impression you are right and we are wrong is a dead giveaway. But I guess you will reply with a trite answer to the fact that you ARE always right and we are always wrong.
An appeal to such reasoning does not prove anything nor thus it give justice to your accusation. It is safe to assume that everyone here post something which they think is what is right and that no one here would post something he thinks is wrong. Be that as it may, every poster is responsible for what he/she post and must be ready to give a defense or explain when asked. Anyway, if you choose not to, which is your right, no one can force you to nor is there anything that one can do about that. But then, that would be making the impression that there is no proof or defense that you can show.
Tong
R1065
Similar threads
