Grace only after all we can do?

[Reklaw]

Reklaw are you familiar with the True Salvation Triangle ?.

Never heard it put that way, but doctrinally, yes.

[Tanyan]

Reklaw this is pretty close to LDS Doctrine/Theology -

http://www.questfordestiny.net/?type=artic...lvationtriangle

In His Debt/Grace, Tanyan LDS JEDI KNIGHT.

[Lightbearer]

"we are saved through the atonement of Christ by obedience to the principles and the ordinances of the Gospel of Jesus Christ."This is the essential difference, the bible teaches that we are saved by grace through faith. not obedience."Does this not in effect say that if we sin after receiving the covenant of the Gospel and do not repent then we will be damned?"No what it is saying is no longer is sacrifice an option, the old way of doing things is past. Yes even after receiving Christ as our Lord and Savior, we are still sinners, and yes we should continue to ask forgiveness. but it is not a saved now , not saved, saved now, not saved roller coaster. Christ said once we are in God's grasp, He will not let go, start focusing on God and not man.no teach me the salvation triangle

I do not recall ever reading in the Bible: "we are saved by grace through faith. not obedience." It is true enough our good works alone do not save us and cannot. But it also says that "faith without works is dead" that is in the Bible. Where did Christ say "once we are in God's grasp, He will not let go"? Not in my Bible (KJV) maybe it is in some "new" version. I did not say anything about a "triangle" I was talking about what God requires from us so that He may bless us with His grace. Did He not say to the woman taken in adultery "Go and sin no more"? Also did He not say "If you love me, keep my commandments"? It is the false teachings of men that say that God does not require obedience:

(Hebrews 5:8-9) "Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered; And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;"

Looks like obedience is necessary after all.

[Tanyan]

Website is down above, well hows about in response to Eternal Security/OSAS - Covenant Security by the Early Church ?.

http://www.theearlychurch.com/english/sd06...ntsecurity.html

In His Debt/Grace, Tanyan LDS JEDI Knight.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

It is the false teachings of men that say that God does not require obedience:Looks like obedience is necessary after all.

But you dont get it, we do not have to be obedient to be saved. Lol. Might as well post what the freinds of the church would post.

[so blessed]

Mola here is the scripture:

John 10:25-30 (King James Version)

25Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.

26But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.

27My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:

28And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

29My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.

30I and my Father are one.

[ttribe]

Mola here is the scripture:

John 10:25-30 (King James Version)

25Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.

26But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.

27My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:

28And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

29My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.

30I and my Father are one.

That doesn't say anything about the impact of the individual's own choices.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

That doesn't say anything about the impact of the individual's own choices.

Just what I was going to say. All it says is that no man can effect some one elses salvation. I cannot make you loose your salvation. I cannot pluck you from the Father's hand. It also appears that God can pluck you from his own hand.

[so blessed]

sure, you have a right to believe that. You asked where it says that I showed you.

[ttribe]

sure, you have a right to believe that. You asked where it says that I showed you.

But you didn't answer...it doesn't say what you are trying to imply.

[Doctor Steuss]

Just to add a bit to Reklaw on Pistis (and its variants). The following quotes are from Pierre Briant and Peter Daniels (translator), From Cyrus to Alexander: A History of the Persian Empire (Eisenbrauns: 2006). Any italic is in the original; any bolding is added by me.

All of the characteristics attributed to the kingâ??s men are wrapped up in a single word: â??faithfulnessâ?? (pistis). This is the virture for which Cambyses honored Prexaspes, since he was â??the most trusted (pistotatos) of his Persian Friendsâ? (Herodotus III.30). Likewise Artapates, who was â??the one among Cyrusâ?? chamberlains who was his most faithful (pistatatos followerâ? (Xenophon, Anab. 1.8.28). Cyrus the Younger, to be sure, â??knew how to judge those who were faithful (pistoi)â?¦â? It was also according to their faithfulness (pistotatoi) that Xenophonâ??s Cyrus arranged his men around him in camp (Cyropaedia VIII.5.8 ). In his letter to Artaxerxes II, Orontas reminded him of the constancy of his â??friendship and fidelity (philia kai pistis)â? (Xenophon, Anab. I.6.3)â?¦ We find the word in Aelian: the nobles swore to remain faithful (pistoi) to Darius (VH VI.14).

(Pg. 324)

It then goes on to talk about how this attribute was the reason for such man as Boges and Xerxes receiving â??the highest praise.â?

Now, of course in the spirit of disclosure, the peeps that are referenced here (Herodotus and Xenophon) were both kicking around in the 5th century BCE, so I reckon a feller could argue that they meant something different by â??pistisâ? than people writing in the 1st and 2nd centuries CE.

So, I suppose we should move on (and if one were inclined, they could ignore the aboveâ?¦ which will bum me out because it took a bit to transcribe):

At Gaugamela, the Kinsmen (syggenesis) were placed at the center, close to Darius (Arrian III.5), 10,000 of them who were chosen for courage (andragathia) and for loyalty (pistis)â? (Diodorus XVII.59.3).

(Pg. 780)

Now weâ??re a bit closer to the home of the NT writers. Diodorus was a Greek historian from the 1st century BCE. Page 780 also goes on to quote Arrianâ??s Anabasis about Artabazus and his sons maintaining/receiving an â??honourable [sic] positionâ? from Alexander â??â?¦because of their loyalty (pistis) to Darius.â? Arrianâ??s work is from the 1st century CE. Now weâ??re firmly on home turf.

A few more examples (just for fun):

Herodotus (talking of eunuchs):

â??In eastern countries eunuchs are valued as being especially trustworthy (pistis pase) in every way.â?

(Pg. 272)

And Plutarch (on Cyrus the Youngerâ??s eunuchs):

â??â?¦ the most trusty (pistotatos) of them, Pariscas, wept sitting by his corpse.â?

(Ibid.)

The author also renders the phrase philia kai pistis as â??friendship and loyaltyâ? (just as on page 324) on page 1177 (which, although it is the index, I just like pointing it out that â??pistisâ? is rendered â??loyaltyâ? in this instance).

[edited to remove the "Bubblegum Sunglasses" emoticon that likes to manifest itself if you type an "8" next to a ")"]

[Reklaw]

sure, you have a right to believe that. You asked where it says that I showed you.

And you still haven't responded to my post. But I will point out something in John 10:

Christ describes His sheep as thus: "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand." "Hear" and "follow" are present tense Greek, meaning a continual, habitual action. Only those who continue to hear and follow are considered sheep. This is demonstrated by Matt. 25 in Christ's parable that divides the sheep from the goats based on works. Akouo (Greek "hear") is also at the root of hupakouo (Greek "obey"; not to mention that "hear" was often a synonym for "obey" in the Old Testament. The Hebrew shama meant much more than passively hearing, but denoted an attentive, effective listening and adherance. The Septuagint uses akouo in place of shama). Turning John 10 into some kind of eternal security proof text is incredibly ignorant.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

CFR that Christ said, "Once we are in God's grasp, He will not let go." I cant find that verse in the Bible.

This is what I am looking for as these are your words.

"Once we are in God's grasp, He will not let go."

Were can I find this is scripture. The verse you quoted say nothing about God not letting go. The actually leave that part completly off. I wonder why that is? And no it is not implied that God wont let go other wise He would have said it. God will let go if you rebell against his word.

[Reklaw]

Just to add a bit to Reklaw on Pistis (and its variants). The following quotes are from Pierre Briant and Peter Daniels (translator), From Cyrus to Alexander: A History of the Persian Empire (Eisenbrauns: 2006). Any italic is in the original; any bolding is added by me.

(Pg. 324)

It then goes on to talk about how this attribute was the reason for such man as Boges and Xerxes receiving â??the highest praise.â?

Now, of course in the spirit of disclosure, the peeps that are referenced here (Herodotus and Xenophon) were both kicking around in the 5th century BCE, so I reckon a feller could argue that they meant something different by â??pistisâ? than people writing in the 1st and 2nd centuries CE.

So, I suppose we should move on (and if one were inclined, they could ignore the aboveâ?¦ which will bum me out because it took a bit to transcribe):

(Pg. 780)

Now weâ??re a bit closer to the home of the NT writers. Diodorus was a Greek historian from the 1st century BCE. Page 780 also goes on to quote Arrianâ??s Anabasis about Artabazus and his sons maintaining/receiving an â??honourable [sic] positionâ? from Alexander â??â?¦because of their loyalty (pistis) to Darius.â? Arrianâ??s work is from the 1st century CE. Now weâ??re firmly on home turf.

A few more examples (just for fun):

Herodotus (talking of eunuchs):

(Pg. 272)

And Plutarch (on Cyrus the Youngerâ??s eunuchs):

(Ibid.)

The author also renders the phrase philia kai pistis as â??friendship and loyaltyâ? (just as on page 324) on page 1177 (which, although it is the index, I just like pointing it out that â??pistisâ? is rendered â??loyaltyâ? in this instance.

[edited to remove the "Bubblegum Sunglasses" emoticon that likes to manifest itself if you type an "8" next to a ")"]

Excellent references. Well done.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

And you still haven't responded to my post. But I will point out something in John 10:

Christ describes His sheep as thus: "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:

And here are the relevant parts again just incase any body missed them.

Hoops would claim that Jesus is talking to the Jews and were not in the age of Grace yet.

Hoops also fails to understand that mankind (those that obtain salvation) was always and will always be saved by God's grace, even under that law of Moses was man saved by grace.

[Hoops22]

Hoops would claim that Jesus is talking to the Jews and were not in the age of Grace yet.

Yes, I would.

Hoops also fails to understand that mankind (those that obtain salvation) was always and will always be saved by God's grace,

I understand this completely.

even under that law of Moses was man saved by grace.

Of course.

Really? How could there be Grace without the atonement? Well, there couldn't.

But to put a finer point on it, Jesus preached the gospel of grace to the ot saints in Paradise. Yet, they were not with God until His death/resurrection.

[Tanyan]

Jesus Christ was/is the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

In His Debt/Grace, Tanyan LDS JEDI KNIGHT.

[Earl]

I do not recall ever reading in the Bible: "we are saved by grace through faith. not obedience." It is true enough our good works alone do not save us and cannot. But it also says that "faith without works is dead" that is in the Bible. Where did Christ say "once we are in God's grasp, He will not let go"? Not in my Bible (KJV) maybe it is in some "new" version. I did not say anything about a "triangle" I was talking about what God requires from us so that He may bless us with His grace. Did He not say to the woman taken in adultery "Go and sin no more"? Also did He not say "If you love me, keep my commandments"? It is the false teachings of men that say that God does not require obedience:Looks like obedience is necessary after all.

And so what of Elder Oaks' teachings which I mentioned earlier in this post? Works without the transformation of the soul, without the becoming like Christ... are equally dead... obedience is not enough... It is not what we have done, but who we are...

Earl

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Yes, I would.

I understand this completely.

Of course.

Really? How could there be Grace without the atonement? Well, there couldn't.

But to put a finer point on it, Jesus preached the gospel of grace to the ot saints in Paradise. Yet, they were not with God until His death/resurrection.

I am so glad I got your view correctly this time I really am, so if that "age of grace" had not yet come and all are saved by grace, then it would seem that is a contradiction to some extent because the age or grace was in some form retroactive. So the age of grace is past, present, and future. Tell me how it could not be like that. I understand that no one coould be saved until Christ did what He did, but that doesn't mean the men didn't look forward to that in faith as we now look back in faith taht grace saves us.

I am unaware that the saints went to God after the resurrection. I can only see that they went to paradise. I am unaware that there was any judgments happening until the great and final day.

[Hoops22]

I am so glad I got your view correctly this time I really am, so if that "age of grace" had not yet come and all are saved by grace, then it would seem that is a contradiction to some extent because the age or grace was in some form retroactive. So the age of grace is past, present, and future. Tell me how it could not be like that. I understand that no one coould be saved until Christ did what He did, but that doesn't mean the men didn't look forward to that in faith as we now look back in faith taht grace saves us.

I am unaware that the saints went to God after the resurrection. I can only see that they went to paradise. I am unaware that there was any judgments happening until the great and final day.

Good questions. Give me a 'sec.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Good questions. Give me a 'sec.

Don't worry about the last part in my post, I have concluded that it doesn't matter after my wife and I debated it.

[gmormon]

Have I got this right, I can do nothing to be saved and I can do nothing to fall from grace. So is it just one big lottery. If my number comes up I am saved, if it doesn't I am not saved. Then can I go about robbing, killing, committing adultry etc and hope my number comes up so that I won't want to do those things anymore.

Lottery number 666 has been called ! Is that your number ?

[Hamba Tuhan]

Have I got this right, I can do nothing to be saved and I can do nothing to fall from grace. So is it just one big lottery. If my number comes up I am saved, if it doesn't I am not saved. Then can I go about robbing, killing, committing adultry etc and hope my number comes up so that I won't want to do those things anymore.

For some reason I'm reminded of this brilliant passage from Browning's 'Caliban upon Setebos: Or, Natural Theology in the Island':

'Thinketh, such shows nor right nor wrong in Him,

Nor kind, nor cruel: He is strong and Lord.

'Am strong myself compared to yonder crabs

That march now from the mountain to the sea;

'Let twenty pass, and stone the twenty-first,

Loving not, hating not, just choosing so.

'Say, the first straggler that boasts purple spots

Shall join the file, one pincer twisted off;

'Say, this bruised fellow shall receive a worm,

And two worms he whose nippers end in red;

As it likes me each time, I do: so He.

[Hoops22]

I am so glad I got your view correctly this time I really am, so if that "age of grace" had not yet come and all are saved by grace, then it would seem that is a contradiction to some extent because the age or grace was in some form retroactive.

That's not a terribly bad way to put it. Grace has always been in operations. Without it, the ot "saved" would not be in paradise to hear Christ preaching it.

So the age of grace is past, present, and future. Tell me how it could not be like that.

The difference lies in the fact that now, "He will pour out His grace to all nations."

I understand that no one coould be saved until Christ did what He did, but that doesn't mean the men didn't look forward to that in faith as we now look back in faith taht grace saves us.

Of course.

I am unaware that the saints went to God after the resurrection. I can only see that they went to paradise. I am unaware that there was any judgments happening until the great and final day.

You'll remember in the ot those who went to God went as a result of imputed righteousness - which is what we call exaltation. The work of Christ only gets us to even - sinless. It does not get us righeousness. That occurs for Christians (now) at death - imputed righteousness.

[Hamba Tuhan]

I just wanted to apologize for dropping the ball on this topic. I suffered a miscarriage a few days ago and therefore have been out of the loop. Although it has been some time since I have been a regular poster on this board, those of you who remember me, know that I am pretty good about keeping up with topics. Especially the ones that I start.

I'm sorry I missed this post and so, so sorry for what you've been through. You have all my best wishes!