What Must I Do To Be Saved?

Worthynews.com ^ | July 11th, 1875 | D. L. Moody

[Quix]

Yup.

What explanation do you have that

OVERT LEGALISM and PHARISEEISM--I emphasize--OVERT flavors of such (I think non-overt such is present in all groups older than a year and a half)

But why is OVERT LEGALISM and PHARISEEISM seemingly

sooooooooooooooooooo abundantly present, persistent, common, the rule etc. in the more intense Calvinist groups? I have some psychodynamic explanations but I'm interested in your perspective.

[Quix]

I've never read a concise explanation which gets around that logical block much at all--especially not well--to me.

So, I think I agree with opus86.

[xzins]

Nowhere in that poorly written work of misdirection is the word Calvinist or Calvin written.

Me: Arminius always claimed the name calvinist.

To correct by expansion my earlier short message to ftD, it would have been better to say that Arminius' claimed to be reformed....and to the extent that the reformers called themselves "calvinist," he would have been found doing the same.

Similarly, if I were to say that Ronald Reagan "claimed the name ' U.S. Citizen.;" and then gave you a copy of his final speech, you might not find the expression "U.S. Citizen" specifically used. You would, however, find plenty of evidence to support the claim. Your final bit of evidence would be the closing of the speech with, "And may God Bless America."

[fortheDeclaration]

I have read that before.

I reread it.

It is an excellent treatise.

Yet, the word Calvinism never appears in it (that I saw).

Arminius is rejecting the Supra and Infra views on Predestination and taking a third view.

That view is a conditional one and cannot be seen as Calvinistic.

What am I missing?

[diamond6]

You crack me up!

[diamond6]

Obey God's laws, love your neighbor, and die in a state of grace. Period.

[opus86]

Yes, your understanding is incomplete.

Perhaps, but I'd love to know how.

[fortheDeclaration]

http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/wesley.htm

In his letter to Wesley, Whitfield associates Unlimited Atonment with Universal Redemption and rejection of reprobation.

Also, Whitfield believes in unconditional election and that the Gospel is only the means with which election is realized.

However, If the Holy Spirit has to regenerate someone before hearing the Gospel, the Gospel cannot be the means of election, but only incidental to it.

What this would mean is that the person is no longer spiritually dead but yet not in Christ.

He is in some sort of spiritual limbo, neither in the first nor second Adam

[fortheDeclaration]

I think claiming the name of Calvinist as a standing for Reformed may be the problem.

Luther, Zwingli, and Melanchton fall in the Reformed school, yet are not Calvinistic.

[fortheDeclaration]

I associate Legalism in Calvinism due to their view of Perservance of the saints.

It is an attempt to ensure, by legal requirements, that one is truly one of the elect.

Arminians can also fall into this trap by working to stay saved.

All works must be done in the power of the Spirit because one is saved

[fortheDeclaration]

Amen! Excellent post.

[xzins]

You are missing that Arminius does not consider himself outside the boundaries of a host of confessions; nor does he ever claim to have left the reformation or claim to be part of any counter-reformation. His assumption throughout is that the reformation had formerly been broad enough to include him. He always appears to be assuming himself as a part of the group. Since this is a collection that was published approx 6 months before his death, then we can say with assurance that he never felt he was outside the group.

[xzins]

I posted it 10 days ago...where've you been? It's here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1320030/posts


He was hardly an agent of the counter-reformation: he considered the Papacy the antichrist, and that was a firm position since his own mother, brother, and sister were murdered in the massacres of Oudewater by the King of Spain's counter-reformation troops.

The "On Predestination" thread is one of his final writings near the end of his life published approx. one-half year before he died.

[fortheDeclaration]

You are putting your preconceived doctrinal beliefs into the Scripture. There is one Gospel. And you are seriously trying to tell me that Ananias, who was sent to Paul by God, gave the wrong speech to Paul? That would mean that God messed up, which is blasphemy. Step away from your preconceived ideas and read the Scriptures for what they are, the true Word of the living God.

No, Ananias did not give the wrong speech to Paul, he gave the one that was still at that time in effect.

However, in Acts 10-11 Cornileus is saved before he is baptized.

That opened Peter's eyes to the fact that the Gentiles were now being saved like the Jews had been and that spirit Baptism was on the basis of faith, with water being a sign of that faith. (1Pet.3:21)

Baptism is seen as a figure.

A figure of what?

The death,burial and Resurrection of Christ, who paid for our sins.(1Cor.15)

Acts 2 is dealing with Christ death as a Son of David and that is what Peter preached thinking Christ was going to return to set up His Davidic Kingdom (which He will someday).

Nowhere do you see Christ dying for anyone's sins in Acts 2.

That was the Kingdom Gospel preached by Christ (Mk.1:14,Matt.4:17, Lk.4:43) and the basis for John the Baptist baptism.

I hope, my friend, you are not trusting anything but the shed blood of Christ for your salvation, including water Baptism which cannot wash away any sins.

[thoughtomator]

I thought a little humor would be good on another endless theological debate thread. Who needs the Vatican? We have all the theologists one could need, right here on FR!

[fortheDeclaration]

No, but neither did Luther, Zwingli nor Melancthon, who would ascribe to what most of what those Councils stated.

What makes a Calvinist a Calvinist is their emphasis on unconditional election.

You might say that the Calvinists, by making it the central issue of salvation, left the Reformed school, and Arminius was saying that it was the Calvinists who were outside the sphere of Reformed theology, not the other way around.

[fortheDeclaration]

Nowhere in that poorly written work of misdirection is the word Calvinist or Calvin written.

Actually I think it was very well written and accurate.

But I did not find the word Calvinist in there either.

I think we are really discussing Reformed theology that has come to be dominated by Calvinistic views.

[RnMomof7]

we can say with assurance that he never felt he was outside the group.

Since when is truth determined by FEELINGS ?

Feelings are not evidence of anything .Remember this? "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, 'Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name? 'And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!"

That guy FELT he was saved

Joseph Smith felt he was a prophet of god ..

The truth of that mans doctrine is not what HE FELT, it is what he believed... and he did not believe the doctrines of grace as taught by the Reformation

[RnMomof7]

, If the Holy Spirit has to regenerate someone before hearing the Gospel, the Gospel cannot be the means of election, but only incidental to it.

Regeneration is not salvation... it is the quickening spoken of in Eph 2...

One is quickened so one can hear the gospel and repent and believe.

Regeneration___> Hearing_______>Repentance and Faith _______>salvation

[RnMomof7]

We work for the same Boss :>)