Does Understanding Eschatology Prove You Are Saved?

[Spiritual Israelite]

I disagree with at least a couple things that are said on the Arminian side in that comparison. I don't know for sure if these things truly reflect Arminianism or not, but they don't reflect what I believe personally.

At the end of the first point of the "Five Points of Arminianism", it says "Faith is the sinner's gift to God; it is man's contribution to salvation.". That's not my understanding of faith. My understanding of faith is that it involves humbling oneself and acknowledging that he or she is a lost sinner and can't save him or herself while putting his or her trust in Christ to save them instead while submitting to Him as his or her Lord (Master, God). In my view faith is not something someone does to try to earn salvation, but rather something someone does to show they can't save themselves and need God to save them.

If a person is in an upper level of a building that is on fire and their only way out is to jump out of a window, but then a fireman on a firetruck ladder is brought up to them to give them a chance to be rescued, can it be said that the person's trust in the fireman is their gift to the fireman and their contribution to their rescue and physical salvation if they take the fireman's hand to be brought onto the ladder to be rescued? No, that's silly. All they did was take the fireman's hand, but the fireman is the one who made it possible for them to be saved and actually saved them. The person who was rescued can't take any credit in that case. This is how I understand faith and salvation, which, apparently, is different from Arminianism.

I also disagree with the last statement made under the second point of the five points of Arminianism (Conditional Election). It says "Thus the sinner's choice of Christ, not God's choice of the sinner, is the ultimate cause of salvation.". No, salvation is only possible because of what God did in the first place by sending His Son to die for the sins of the whole world (1 John 2:1-2). So, the primary cause of salvation is Christ's death and resurrection. But, in order for what Jesus did to save someone, they must repent of the sins that Jesus died for in their place and put their trust in Him as their personal Lord and Savior. That doesn't mean they alone caused their salvation. They accepted what Jesus did to cause them to have the opportunity to be saved. Jesus did all the work. God requires man to accept what only Jesus could do.

@TribulationSigns Why are you foolishly applying a laughing emoji to this post? You think it's funny for me to show how foolish you are by trying to dictate what others believe, as if everyone either fully agrees with everything relating to Arminianism or to Calvinism? As if there can't be any variations to what those systems of doctrine teach? You are so naive. Grow up.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Right, but this is not something Arminius actually said, but rather the unavoidable implication of what he did say regarding this "point," or rather, in this first objection of his. And now yours.

LOL. You are truly a comedian. No, this is the (apparently) unavoidable misrepresentation of what I believe, which you and TribulationSigns specialize in doing.

Well good, but it is the implication of your understanding.

It is not. You clearly have no understanding of what I believe, as you have proven many times before as well.

Having this faith is what causes... enables... us to in and of ourselves freely and willingly humble ourselves and acknowledge these things and put our trust in Christ. Having this assurance given to us ~ and this new spirit in us ~ is, again, what causes us to willingly humble ourselves and acknowledge these things and put our trust in Christ.

To what you say, here... Humbling oneself, and acknowledging those things and putting his or her trust in Christ and submitting to God, are things we do, Christians, anyway ~ and one is only a Christian if he or she is born again of the Spirit ~ and therefore works of man. And, as you agree (because you have agreed) faith is not a work of man, although somehow you refute your own assertion in saying faith is not the gift of God. Surely you see this inconsistency in your own thoughts and words.

Same old gibberish from you. Why do you ignore the fact that Paul contrasts faith with works in Ephesians 2:8-9? He said salvation IS through faith but NOT by works. If faith was a work of the type of works that salvation does not come by, then he would not have made that contrast and would not have said that salvation is through faith. James also contrasted faith with works in James 2. So, while there is a sense in which faith and trust in Christ is something we do, it's not the type of work that scripture says no one can do to be saved.

And so, you believe that faith ~ which, yet again, by definition, is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen (Hebrews 11:1) ~ is... in your own words here... something someone does," which is to make it out to be a work of man, which is not the case, and even that is according your own words. So, you contradict yourself... again and again and again.

Clearly, to be consistent with your beliefs, you could not possibly answer the question "what must I do to be saved" the way Paul and Silas did when the jailer asked them that question.

Acts 16:30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? 31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

Your answer to this question, if you answered it honestly, would have to be something like "There is nothing you can do to be saved because salvation is not by your own works. God does everything to make someone saved and you can do nothing but hope that some day He gives you repentance and faith in Jesus Christ unto salvation.".

Yet you continue to ~ inadvertently... you don't mean to, but you do ~ insinuate otherwise.

Nope. You have no ability to dictate what I'm supposedly meaning to do. I will tell you what I mean because you obviously don't know.

And in so doing, you at least inadvertently refute... all the passages of Scripture I noted in post #164.

Meaningless comment. You can't back it up.

And in saying this, you are attributing at least some small part of man's salvation to himself. Salvation is of God and God alone.

If that's how you want to think of choosing to accept a gift, then so be it. I don't care. Do you credit yourself for all of the gifts you receive? I doubt it. But, somehow man accepting God's gift attributes salvation to himself. Okay, sure.

And now you're lying about lying...


I didn't; I was only making a point about what you did say. Which you know.


You did not; what you did was quite different than what I did, even the opposite.

LOL. Pathetic. If you insist on using your free will to choose to be delusional about this, then there isn't anything I can do about that.

Again, the opposite of what I said, which you knew, which undeniably means you were lying. It is absolutely true what they say: "Lies beget lies..." But by all means, keep going, if you so choose...

Thanks for sharing your wrong opinion, liar.

 

[TribulationSigns]

@TribulationSigns Why are you foolishly applying a laughing emoji to this post? You think it's funny for me to show how foolish you are by trying to dictate what others believe, as if everyone either fully agrees with everything relating to Arminianism or to Calvinism? As if there can't be any variations to what those systems of doctrine teach? You are so naive. Grow up.

Oh, I see...pointing out the actual Five Articles of Remonstrance is now ‘dictating beliefs.’ Fascinating. So historical facts are negotiable depending on personal opinion, and calling that out makes me ‘naive.’ Thanks for clarifying how ‘growing up’ now means ignoring the very definitions people wrote down centuries ago. Truly enlightening.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Oh, I see...pointing out the actual Five Articles of Remonstrance is now ‘dictating beliefs.’ Fascinating.

You made light of it when I simply showed how I disagree with a couple of the things said about Arminianism. I didn't say those things didn't properly represent Arminianism or anything like that. I'm just saying I don't personally agree fully with the description of Arminianism that was shown on that website. I think it most likely was an accurate description of it, but I haven't read much of anything written by Arminius himself to know if it all agrees with what he taught.

So historical facts are negotiable depending on personal opinion, and calling that out makes me ‘naive.’ Thanks for clarifying how ‘growing up’ now means ignoring the very definitions people wrote down centuries ago. Truly enlightening.

Your reading comprehension skills are truly horrendous. You are acting as if I'm arguing that what was written about Arminianism on that site is not accurate. No, I'm not saying that at all. I'm just pointing out that not everyone believes everything related to either Arminianism or Calvinism as you're trying to claim. At least that's how you came across, that everyone either agrees with everything written there about Arminianism or everything written there about Calvinism. I'm just pointing out that that is not necessarily the case.

 

[TribulationSigns]

Your reading comprehension skills are truly horrendous.

LOL.

False accusations don’t improve your argument. My reading comprehension is fine—I’m simply pointing out what is actually written, not what you wish it said. If you can’t handle the text as it stands, that’s on you, not on my understanding.

You are acting as if I'm arguing that what was written about Arminianism on that site is not accurate. No, I'm not saying that at all. I'm just pointing out that not everyone believes everything related to either Arminianism or Calvinism as you're trying to claim.

LOL. You’re still an Arminian, after all—wrong on everything concerning salvation.

And sure! You, an Amillennialist who conveniently rejects all of Preterism, think it’s perfectly fine to impose your personal interpretations on portions of the Olivet Discourse and Daniel 9 -- completely ignoring that it concerns the Preterist view of the physical city in 70 AD.

Clearly, this thread isn’t bringing you any closer to the Truth, so I’m done here. I’ll move on—and leave you to wrestle with your own misunderstandings and help dig a deeper hole of delusion with full preterists and Premillennialists.

 

[soberxp]

3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

Eschatology is perish, perish in the not believe in the son of God.

The world will be perish in the hand of unbelievers.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

LOL.

False accusations don’t improve your argument. My reading comprehension is fine—I’m simply pointing out what is actually written, not what you wish it said. If you can’t handle the text as it stands, that’s on you, not on my understanding.

LOL. You're pointing out something that has nothing to do with what I believe personally, which is what I was talking about. You want to try to tell me what I believe instead of me telling you what I believe. You want to dictate what everyone believes, as if every person either fully agrees with everything about Arminianism or everything about Calvinism with no in between. Ridiculous. LOL.

LOL. You’re still an Arminian, after all—wrong on everything concerning salvation.

You have utterly failed to refute anything I've said concerning salvation.

And sure! You, an Amillennialist

Hey, you acknowledge that I'm an Amillennialist. I'm a true Amillennialist, at that, according to the definition given by your idol Tony Warren which did not include anything about believing that a prophecy was fulfilled in 70 AD not making you a true Amillennialist.

who conveniently rejects all of Preterism,

LOL. What does this even mean? I reject a lot of what preterists claim, such as that Jesus returned in 70 AD, that there was a resurrection at that time, that the imaginary "old covenant age" ended at that time, and so on. But, just because I believe the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple buildings was prophesied in the Bible and was fulfilled in 70 AD just as prophesied, somehow means I'm not a true Amillennialist in your mind. Even your hero Tony Warren does not define Amillennialism that way, so you should follow suit.

think it’s perfectly fine to impose your personal interpretations on portions of the Olivet Discourse and Daniel 9 -- completely ignoring that it concerns the Preterist view of the physical city in 70 AD.

As if your interpretations are not your personal interpretations? I don't know why you're so hung up about insisting that the Bible does not prophesy about that significant event of Jerusalem and the temple buildings being physically destroyed, but it does.

Clearly, this thread isn’t bringing you any closer to the Truth, so I’m done here.

Well, your nonsense certainly doesn't help anyone get closer to the Truth. I won't lose any sleep over you being done here and I look forward to the time when you are done on this forum altogether.

I’ll move on—and leave you to wrestle with your own misunderstandings and help dig a deeper hole of delusion with full preterists and Premillennialists.

LOL. I disagree with a vast majority of what full preterists and Premillennialists believe, but you still want to lump me in with them. You are not to be taken seriously.

 

[Davidpt]

LOL. You're pointing out something that has nothing to do with what I believe personally, which is what I was talking about. You want to try to tell me what I believe instead of me telling you what I believe. You want to dictate what everyone believes, as if every person either fully agrees with everything

You mean like how you do sometimes yourself, for example, Zechariah 14? Where I already plainly told you that I do not even remotely believe that animal sacrificing resumes, especially after Christ returns. Nor do I believe it resumes at any time, period. Yet, in spite of that you keep telling me what I believe, that if I apply anything in Zechariah 14 post the 2nd coming this means I believe animal sacrificing resumes after Christ returns.

In your mind then, why do you think it is ok for you to tell others what they believe, regardless others already told you it is not what they believe, but then when it comes to someone doing somthing like that to you, now things like this are an issue? But only in your case. Who cares about in anyone else's case, right? What you do to others at times, this doesn't matter, this doesn't count. It only matters and counts when others are doing to you what you do to others at times. You really play fair, don't you? Apparently, in your mind, you are the poster child for one that plays fair at all times.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You mean like how you do sometimes yourself, for example, Zechariah 14? Where I already plainly told you that I do not even remotely believe that animal sacrificing resumes, especially after Christ returns. Nor do I believe it resumes at any time, period. Yet, in spite of that you keep telling me what I believe, that if I apply anything in Zechariah 14 post the 2nd coming this means I believe animal sacrificing resumes after Christ returns.

David, you make up a lot of things in your imagination. I do not say that you personally believe that animal sacrifices will resume after Christ returns. I may have said that long ago in the past before you clarified that you don't believe that, but I have not said that about you at any time for at least several years.

In your mind then, why do you think it is ok for you to tell others what they believe, regardless others already told you it is not what they believe, but then when it comes to someone doing somthing like that to you, now things like this are an issue?

LOL. I don't do that.

But only in your case. Who cares about in anyone else's case, right? What you do to others at times, this doesn't matter, this doesn't count. It only matters and counts when others are doing to you what you do to others at times. You really play fair, don't you? Apparently, in your mind, you are the poster child for one that plays fair at all times.

Your whining here has no basis. I do not tell others what they believe. I will show people the implications of what they believe sometimes, but I do not try to tell others what they believe. I do not claim that you believe animal sacrifices will be reinstated when Christ returns. If I said that at some point, so what? It would have been long ago before you clarified how you interpret Zechariah 14. Many Premils do interpret Zechariah 14 to be about future animal sacrifices, but I know that not all do.

 

[PinSeeker]

Why do you ignore the fact that Paul contrasts faith with works in Ephesians 2:8-9?

Faith and works are not opposites of each other; the former is the reason for the latter, the... oh, let's say catalyst... for the latter. We are moved... motivated... compelled to do good works because we are assured ~ by God, of course ~ of our being in Christ and thus saved. It is in this way that our will becomes to do the will of the Father. The faith we are given, the assurance of God, is what moves us to... well, die unto ourselves and live unto God, to love and serve Him. We love because God first loved us. Prior to being born again of the Spirit, of course, not so much.

And I don't mean for this comment to be insulting, but it's ironic that you ask this question at all, because... Well, just look at Ephesians 2:8 alone for a second:

"For by (God's) grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God..."​

Paul speaks of absolutely nothing that we did in salvation. Just before this, he does speak of what we did before salvation ~ that we "all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind" ~ but absolutely nothing in achieving salvation; the silence on that is deafening. He does speak of the result of salvation, what we will do in having salvation given to us and being assured of it, but again nothing ~ even believing; there is nothing there of us doing anything ~ to achieve salvation. The fact is that we would have continued "in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and mind" if we had not been born again of the Spirit and given this faith (assurance).

And when Paul says there, "this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God," the word 'this' modifies the entire first part of that verse... "you have been saved through faith." In how you understand that verse, in what you are saying about it, you are separating "faith" back out of that verse completely. Which just cannot be done. I mean, you can, but it's just wrong. Giving us this faith, which again is God's assurance, is an act of God, not of man. Once we are given it, we are then compelled in and of ourselves to act on it... because of it.

He said salvation IS through faith but NOT by works.

Right, but by saying, as you did, faith is (our) believing and trusting in Him, you not only turn the very definition of faith (Hebrews 11:1) on it's ear, you make it into something we do, which is to make it a work of our own. As I said directly above, you only apply the second half of Ephesians 2:8, "(a)nd this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God," to the first part of the first half of Ephesians 2:8 "by grace you have been saved," and separate out what comes immediately after that, "through faith." I get loud and clear that is not your intention, and that being told that even repulses you, but it is what it is.

Clearly, to be consistent with your beliefs, you could not possibly answer the question "what must I do to be saved" the way Paul and Silas did when the jailer asked them that question.

They answer that question, SI, in the same context of what this same Paul says to the Philippians in Philippians 2:13. We can "make our calling and election sure"... which is that we can make it outwardly evident to all, even to ourselves by affirming what is really already a reality ~ that we have been born again of the Spirit ~ if we do so ~ believe on the Lord Jesus Christ ~ because "it is God who works in us, both to will and to work for His good pleasure." So, yes, I could and would answer in the very same way as Paul and Silas. We do nothing to "make our salvation happen" or to "push our salvation across the finish line" or to deserve it in any way. It is by God's grace... His unmerited favor.

Do you credit yourself for all of the gifts you receive?

No offense, but that question misses the point... Making that receiving part of the gift is the issue. I know, I know, you will say you're not doing that, but... <smile>

Grace and peace to you.