Salvation is a Free Gift.

[Magenta]

We are saved by grace, not faith.

Saved by grace through faith... They work in tandem .

 

[Cameron143]

Saved by grace through faith... They work in tandem .

They work in succession. Grace is the cause of faith. Faith is never the cause of grace.

 

[Magenta]

They work in succession. Grace is the cause of faith. Faith is never the cause of grace.

Yes, grace always comes first. But grace does work with faith, and/or vice versa.

 

[Cameron143]

Yes, grace always comes first. But grace does work with faith, and/or vice versa.

Grace employs a variety of means. It employs faith particularly in salvation. But grace also employs circumstances and relationships, even nature itself. Grace is limited only by the imagination of God.

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

Cameron said the conception of women was increased in Gen 3.

The reason he suggested is "to introduce the election". When I asked what that means, he said -

Cameron143 said:
Really? I'm not coining a new phrase. Surely you know what an introduction is and the term elect engenders.
There was no need to preserve a chosen people for Christ until after sin. Had Adam been successful, all humanity would have inherited life through him. Instead, all died in Adam. Hence, the need for a second Adam.
God chose Adam as a representative for all mankind...in him. God also chose those in Christ...in Him. All the choosing was before the foundation of the world.

I still don't understand why electing people for whatever purpose in Gen 3 required an increase in the birth rate.

First of all, it's most likely Cameron's answers generally relate to his own personal beliefs and he will force that view upon any scripture presented. But let's look at Chapter 3 where God even mentions child birth.

16 Unto the woman He said: 'I will greatly multiply thy pain and thy travail; in pain thou shalt bring forth children.

That's it, that is all that God said and nothing about increase in conception whatsoever nor anything about Election.

Even when we read the next chapters we do not see anything that refers to such an idealism either.

We do not even see Election in Enoch or Noah.

God see's this continuous evil in the world and only one family is thinking about God.

Noah, Great Grandson of Enoch, is literally fulfilling Acts 17 like Enoch did:

26 And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place,

27 that they should seek God (Noah was seeking God)

And we read in Genesis 6:8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of HaShem.


Personally, you see what the Bible claims and then you are seeing what some doctrine interjects into what the Bible claims.
If the doctrine doesn't align with what the Bible claims then you automatically know what's going on.
I have also found it interesting that the Reformed typically refuses Theological interpretation almost 100% of the time.
They have 100 verses out of almost 30,000 verses they live by.
So they basically reject 99.7% of the rest of the Bible or they interject their beliefs into those verses.
I would love to know what God thinks about that even though it's between them and God.

 

[Magenta]

Grace employs a variety of means. It employs faith particularly in salvation. But grace also employs circumstances and relationships, even nature itself. Grace is limited only by the imagination of God.

I would not say that God's imagination is limited... But I will continue to say that grace works in tandem with faith 🥰

 

[Cameron143]

I would not say that God's imagination is limited... But I will continue to say that grace works in tandem with faith 🥰

I never meant by what I posted to suggest that God's imagination is limited. I was suggesting the opposite.
I was merely suggesting that grace engenders far more than faith.

 

[Magenta]

I never meant by what I posted to suggest that God's imagination is limited. I was suggesting the opposite.
I was merely suggesting that grace engenders far more than faith.

I never said otherwise 😄 But you did seem to be arguing with the idea that grace works in tandem with faith. Grace and peace to you Cameron...

 

[selahsays]

Grace employs a variety of means. It employs faith particularly in salvation. But grace also employs circumstances and relationships, even nature itself. Grace is limited only by the imagination of God.

I agree. It’s GRACE alone that saves us. He gave us JESUS.

 

[Cameron143]

I never said otherwise 😄 But you did seem to be arguing with the idea that grace works in tandem with faith. Grace and peace to you Cameron...

I'm merely pointing out that in tandem suggests there is equality in effect. That is, God employs grace and faith to produce salvation. But God only employs grace to save, and grace employs faith.
God in His grace has chosen to save, and the means of His grace is faith. But God could have chosen to exercise His grace in salvation anyway He wanted. He could have said we are saved by grace knowing the name of every star. He chose faith. The means of grace isn't vital. Grace is.
This is one of the reasons I believe there are arguments over whether faith is a work or not. If everyone had to know all the names of the stars, clearly God would have to provide this information supernaturally, and the argument would be rendered moot.

 

[ThewindBlows]

What does Gal. 2:16-18, especially 17-18, mean, ThewindBlows?

16. Knowing that a man is not justified by works of the lw, but by the faithfulness of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faithfulness of Christ, and not by wrks of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
17. But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves are also found to be sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid.
18. For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself and transgressor."

Romans 5:9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.

Here is an example below where if it doesn't take away your sin, you would still be a sinner

Jesus atonement by His death is not enough to save anyone.

it takes away the sense of enmity between God and us. But it does not save us from the power of sin in our life.

 

[ThewindBlows]

Yeah I sort of concluded last time it’s just a waste of time to argue back and forth over things that are plain

Nothing is plain, it's all very important, As an example water doesn't wash away your sin

2 Corinthians 13:5 Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?

 

[Pilgrimshope]

Nothing is plain, it's all very important, Water doesn't wash away your sin

2 Corinthians 13:5 Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?

Can I be frank with you ? i like discussing the Bible with other people alot . Even when we don’t agree .

But when they are so persistent that trusting in Jesus and his gospel is somehow off track and then need to explain something else to me I’ll listen a few times but then when I’m sure o don’t need what they are selling I sort of , like o did with you before three times say “ well we should part peacefully because it’s wasting my time and your time here and just creating a foolish circle “



then if they don’t catch my drift peacefully parting with blessing each other and a that point I start to consider putting them on ignore where I can’t see a thing they say . And won’t have to keep explaining why I don’t want to keep contending when you aren’t reading my posts or at least letting the scriptures sink in

honestly I don’t really care about your view of baptism that’s for you I’ve heers the doctrine regarding it and know why I was baptized now so what I’m meaning to say is not to be rude but I’ve tried dropping clues that I don’t really want to continue debating baptism with you I already said everything I had to say and we don’t agree so it’s okay with me

God bless you though and I hope you understand im Just trying to be more clear I really think we’ll have a lot of disagreement after the past few days of reading your posts and wouldn’t accept some of your teachings ot would be wasting your time

I’m like an old hound dog named blue once you teach him you aren’t gonna then later get him to abandon it and learn a new path . Sort of stubborn that way like an old dog bit I’m stubborn on the things Jesus said and his apostles clearly taught us I really don’t now need another teacher I believer they taught what we need to learn

You may want the teaching and pastor forum here

 

[ThewindBlows]

Can I be frank with you ? i like discussing the Bible with other people alot . Even when we don’t agree .

But when they are so persistent that trusting in Jesus and his gospel is somehow off track and then need to explain something else to me I’ll listen a few times but then when I’m sure o don’t need what they are selling I sort of , like o did with you before three times say “ well we should part peacefully because it’s wasting my time and your time here and just creating a foolish circle “



then if they don’t catch my drift peacefully parting with blessing each other and a that point I start to consider putting them on ignore where I can’t see a thing they say . And won’t have to keep explaining why I don’t want to keep contending when you aren’t reading my posts or at least letting the scriptures sink in

honestly I don’t really care about your view of baptism that’s for you I’ve heers the doctrine regarding it and know why I was baptized now so what I’m meaning to say is not to be rude but I’ve tried dropping clues that I don’t really want to continue debating baptism with you I already said everything I had to say and we don’t agree so it’s okay with me

God bless you though and I hope you understand im Just trying to be more clear I really think we’ll have a lot of disagreement after the past few days of reading your posts and wouldn’t accept some of your teachings ot would be wasting your time

I’m like an old hound dog named blue once you teach him you aren’t gonna then later get him to abandon it and learn a new path . Sort of stubborn that way like an old dog bit I’m stubborn on the things Jesus said and his apostles clearly taught us I really don’t now need another teacher I believer they taught what we need to learn

You may want the teaching and pastor forum here

It's ok you came in talking to me, and I said I'm happy to keep talking to you as long as you reply, The main problem with having a discussion with you is you don't like to answer questions its more like a hit and run, I think the main difference is I think these points are crucial, and you don't really care where you stand even if I show you scriptures that should clear up your confusion, If you can't say you have received Jesus and you think water washed away your sins then im going to keep showing you scriptures as long as you keep responding. on a Christian forum, I thought you talk about Chrsitianity.

 

[Pilgrimshope]

It's ok you came in talking to me, and I said I'm happy to keep talking to you as long as you reply, The main problem with having a discussion with you is you don't like to answer questions its more like a hit and run, I think the main difference is I think these points are crucial, and you don't really care where you stand even if I show you scriptures that should clear up your confusion, If you can't say you have received Jesus and you think water washed away your sins then im going to keep showing you scriptures as long as you keep responding. on a Christian forum, I thought you talk about Chrsitianity.

Yes that’s what people do here talk about the Bible . My point again is that we’ve already debated baptism I’ve already stated my case and what you’re saying doesn’t agree with what I’m saying . So now we’re going in a very unproductive circle. You asked me if I was talking about “ water baptism “ and I showed you why I believe water is involved in baptism in the Bible

i dont want to now bicker and argue you’ve also made your case against what I believe we’re finished is all i mean

theres no reason to go in the foolish circle . Find other people here that maybe will understand you better and agree I’m like a mule

That’s all I’m saying discuss all you want teach other people what your saying it’s not for me and you didn’t see what I was saying either so

at some point we should call er and go on peace with Jesus

 

[Magenta]

I'm merely pointing out that in tandem suggests there is equality in effect. That is, God employs
grace and faith to produce salvation. But God only employs grace to save, and grace employs faith.
God in His grace has chosen to save, and the means of His grace is faith. But God could have
chosen to exercise His grace in salvation anyway He wanted. He could have said we are saved
by grace knowing the name of every star. He chose faith. The means of grace isn't vital. Grace is.
This is one of the reasons I believe there are arguments over whether faith is a work or not.
If everyone had to know all the names of the stars, clearly God would have to provide this
information supernaturally, and the argument would be rendered moot.

I do not see equality of effect in any definition of the word tandem. It simply
means one following or behind the other, and/or working in conjunction with.

 

[Magenta]

I do realize also that there are those who say we are saved apart from faith. However, I do
not believe that Scripture actually teaches that, since we are sealed with the promise of the
Holy Spirit upon belief, which encompasses faith... Who is the pledge of our inheritance
until the redemption of those who are God’s possession, to the praise of His glory.

@Cameron143

 

[selahsays]

I do realize also that there are those who say we are saved apart from faith. However, I do
not believe that Scripture actually teaches that, since we are sealed with the promise of the
Holy Spirit upon belief, which encompasses faith... Who is the pledge of our inheritance
until the redemption of those who are God’s possession, to the praise of His glory.

@Cameron143

When a person believes in what Jesus did on that Cross, that’s faith.

 

[PaulThomson]

PaulThomson said:
What does Gal. 2:16-18, especially 17-18, mean, ThewindBlows?

16. Knowing that a man is not justified by works of the lw, but by the faithfulness of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faithfulness of Christ, and not by wrks of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
17. But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves are also found to be sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid.
18. For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself and transgressor."

Romans 5:9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.

Here is an example below where if it doesn't take away your sin, you would still be a sinner

You didn't answer the question.
PaulThomson said:
What does Gal. 2:16-18, especially 17-18, mean, ThewindBlows?

16. Knowing that a man is not justified by works of the lw, but by the faithfulness of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faithfulness of Christ, and not by wrks of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
17. But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves are also found to be sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid.
18. For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself and transgressor."

 

[Cameron143]

I do realize also that there are those who say we are saved apart from faith. However, I do
not believe that Scripture actually teaches that, since we are sealed with the promise of the
Holy Spirit upon belief, which encompasses faith... Who is the pledge of our inheritance
until the redemption of those who are God’s possession, to the praise of His glory.

@Cameron143

I wasn't opposing what you said, but expanding upon it and nuancing it. I would do the same with what you just shared, but am not wanting to cause dissent.