Posted on 01/21/2005 6:34:28 AM PST by P-Marlowe
Amen!
I'm pinging you to the post above in answer to your question. Noah wasn't saved by anything HE did. The scriptures clearly says "Noah found favor in the eyes of the LORD". It's clearly not anything Noah did to earn the Lord's favor otherwise we would have to conclude Noah earned his salvation which he did not. Why Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord is not defined in scripture but it is clear the Lord had mercy and grace to Noah.
Sorry, guess you already saw it. I need to go back to bed.
Noah found grace in the eyes of God because God foresaw Noah's faith (Heb.11:7).
The same reason that Abraham did.
For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the Lord, to do justice and judgement that the Lord may bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him. (Gen.18:19)
Noah and Abraham found grace because God forsaw that they would have faith.
The same reason anyone finds grace, they do not reject it when it is offered.
That is what Noah's generation did.
***Actually, there are four Gospels and that is where one must 'rightly divide'....***
Yeah, just because your so called "Reference Bible" mentions the warning against 'another gospel' doesn't mean that Scofield was right. The Bible plainly and explicitly says if "we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed."
Does the Scofield Reference Bible says if "we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel other than the 4 square gospels to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed."
***It has many seductive forms, but the test is one--it invariably denies the sufficiency of grace alone to save, keep, and perfect, and mingles with grace some kind of human merit.***
You might ought to warn some of your Arminian friends of this. In the last few days, they were trying to preach to us on the merits of man becoming worthy of salvation.
In the service of the Lord,
Christian.
Well, that's one interpretation. The problem is did God see they would "work" for Him and declared them righteous? Isn't that salvation by works? Besides, faith is a gift from God so whose faith is it anyway?
We once talked about Abraham out on another thread. God appeared to Abraham and swore to make a great nation from him in Genesis 12:1 far before he was made righteous. It was in Genesis 15:6 where it says Abraham believed God and it was credited as righteousness and of course later for Issac where he was credited for works. If Abraham would have die at any time during this timeline would he have still been saved?
The other interpretation of course is that God, for whatever reason, chooses individuals like Abraham and protects them to accomplish His will. Abraham only had one purpose, that God was going to make a great nation through him. In my mind that's pretty amazing considering it is God who initiates the process. God came to Abraham and Noah, not the other way around. The scriptures says this is what happened. There is no indication that God looked down a "time tunnel" to see if they would have faith to the end of their days.
The suggestion is that there was something different about Noah. Why say that?
1 Peter 3:18-20 18 For Christ R177 also died for sins once R178 for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring R179 us to God, having been put to death in R180 the flesh, but made alive in R181 the spirit; F62 19 in which F63 also He went and made proclamation to the spirits now in prison, 20 who once were disobedient, when the patience R182 of God kept R183 waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the R184 ark, in which a few, that is, eight R185 persons, R186 were brought safely through the water. F642 Peter 2:3-6 3 and in their greed R69 they will exploit R70 you with false R71 words; their R72 judgment from long ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep. 4 For if R73 God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed R74 them to pits of darkness, reserved for judgment; 5 and did not spare the R75 ancient world, but preserved Noah, R76 a preacher F12 of righteousness, with seven others, when He brought a flood R77 upon the world of the ungodly; 6 and if He condemned R78 the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to destruction by reducing them to ashes, having made them an example R79 to those who would live R80 ungodly lives thereafter;
Something separated Noah so that he found grace in the eyes of the Lord. Are there any hints above as to what it might have been?
I say this because I simply do not believe that God acts arbitrarily.
***The suggestion is that there was something different about Noah.***
So, what do you think was different about Noah that made him worthy of salvation?
***I say this because I simply do not believe that God acts arbitrarily.***
Well, since you contrast arbitrary with God seeing things which cause him to save people, then what is it that made Noah worthy of salvation?
In the service of the Lord,
Christian.
Not necessarily. You could read that as Noah "received" favor from God. As Christian pointed out, you're interpretation implies Noah did something.
We've been over the "God-is-the-author-of-sin" topic ad nauseum in the past and I thought you'd be tired of it by now. God allowed sin, just as He allows tragedies. God cannot sin, since sin is by definition contrary to God's will. All is for His glory, and even the most horrific disaster brings some greater good that we cannot see. Think of the millions in SE Asia who will hear the Gospel for the first time because of relief efforts of groups like World Vision.
In the passages I pointed out, it seems more to speak of God's displeasure with what the others were doing, both in Noah's world and in the cities of Sodom & Gomorrah.
If Noah had been an active, homosexualizing, murdering, idol worshipper.....would he have found favor in the eyes of the Lord?
Perhaps. Paul & Moses were murderers. Rachel stole household idols. Transforming Christians have proven that homosexuals can leave that lifestyle....agreeing with Paul about some Christians Paul knew who had done the same.
If it isn't the good behavior and it isn't the bad behavior (although the bad behavior above is frowned upon), then it must be something else, since it CANNOT be arbitrary. I don't believe God has a random number generator, and when your number randomly comes up that He says, "OK, favor bestowed on that one."
Upon reading your words, and the words of Zuriel which exlicted them, I'm having some difficulty understanding the matter under discussion. If it is of baptism as necessary for salvation, I can share Luther's position, which is that it was not the absense of baptism that condemns, but the absense of faith. Said another way, the lack of baptism does not condemn, but the despising of the same does.
***Not necessarily. You could read that as Noah "received" favor from God. As Christian pointed out, you're interpretation implies Noah did something.***
Actually, the Arminians have changed the definition of grace to make their arguments. We have always understood grace to be UNMERITED favor. Under whatever definition they have for grace, Noah has obviously done something to merit favor.
In the service of the Lord,
Christian.
Excellent line!
Is that Luther's or your own?
***If it isn't the good behavior and it isn't the bad behavior (although the bad behavior above is frowned upon), then it must be something else, since it CANNOT be arbitrary. I don't believe God has a random number generator, and when your number randomly comes up that He says, "OK, favor bestowed on that one."***
I'm happy for you that you don't believe God to be a "random number generator."
"(for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls),"
I believe as the Bible teaches. Men are called according to the purpose of God and his good pleasure. If you wish to label that as arbitrary and a random number generator, then that is fine with me.
However, since you acknowledge that the calling of God is according to neither good works nor evil works, then perhaps, you have go the route of genetics. Maybe God has a master race. Or, you could reveal that men find favor with God based upon something they do. Some of your Arminian friends here have gone that route in determining what makes man worthy of salvation.
BTW, do you have a verse which says that God cannot be arbitrary in election? I'm just curious to see if you are imposing your own humanistic presuppositions upon the Scriptures.
In the service of the Lord,
Christian.
Luther's; I could not come up with something like that. I wanted to find the quote for you, but had no success on Google. It was from an audio tape series by Michael Horton.
All that you said is typical back and forth here.
Even if the "reason" is "God's purpose" or "the secret councel of God" it is still a reason....and proof that there is no number generator in the sky.
The bible question is whether there is bible information that discloses what it is.
What do you think it is?
If you find it, please let me know.
It summarizes long posts that I've made here and in the past in just a few short words.
***Even if the "reason" is "God's purpose" or "the secret councel of God" it is still a reason....and proof that there is no number generator in the sky.
The bible question is whether there is bible information that discloses what it is.***
Before I tell you, you have to speak the secret password and show me your ring so I know whether or not you are part of the club where God reveals his secret counsel.
Christian.
Can a person be saved and go to heaven without baptism? First, let us remember that it is God's command that all believers be baptized. That is what should happen, if at all possible. However, if a person believes and has the desire to be baptized, but would die before being baptized, in the mercy of God, we believe that he/she would be saved. Dr. Walter Albrecht, Professor of Dogmatics at Concordia Theological Seminary, Springfield IL, in his 1951 lectures on Francis Pieper's, "Christian Dogmatics," stated, "It is not the absence of Baptism that damns, but the willful rejection of Baptism." This statement is consistent with Jesus words in Mark 16:16, "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned." Clearly it is not believing or the lack of faith that brings God's condemnation.
(emphasis mine). Source: Lutheran Hour Ministries.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.