What Must I Do To Be Saved?

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

[P-Marlowe]

Jesus Christ is calling you ...

What Must I Do To Be Saved?

Dwight Lyman Moody's Last Sermon in London. Preached in Camberwell Hall, Sunday Evening, July 11th, 1875.

Suppose you do not want to hear a sermon (on this last night) so much as you want to know how to be saved. I want, if I can, to answer that question, "What must I do to be saved?" There is no question that can come before us in this world that is so important; and I think that there is not a man in this audience to-night who does not feel interested in it.

I heard a man, when he was going out the other night, saying: "I do not believe in sudden conversion. I do not believe what the preacher said to-night, that a man could come in here a sinner, and go out a Christian." Now, I want to say that I do not believe in any other conversion. I do not believe that there ever has been a conversion in the world that was not instantaneous, and I want you to mark this: not but what many cannot tell the day nor the hour when they were converted. I will admit that: they may not know the time; but that does not change the great fact that there was a time when they passed from death unto life; that there was a time when they were born [ABCOG: begotten] into the kingdom of God. There must have been a minute when their name was written in the Book of Life. There must have been a time when they were ere lost, and a time when they were saved; but we may not be conscious when the change takes place. I believe the conversion of some is like the rising of the sun, and of others like the flashing of a meteor. But both are instantaneous, really, in the sight of God. There must be a time when life begins to rise; when the dead soul begins to live.

Now, this evening I want to take up some of the Bible illustrations. In the first place, there is the ark. There was a minute when Noah was outside of the ark, and another minute when he was inside. And, bear in mind, it was the ark that saved Noah: it was not his righteousness; it was not his feelings; it was not his tears; it was not his prayers. It was the ark that saved him. If he had tried to make an ark of his feelings, or of his prayers, or of his life, he would have been swept away: he would have been drowned with the rest. But, you see, it was the ark that saved him.

When I was in Manchester, I went into the gallery one Sunday night to have a talk with a few inquirers; and while I was talking, a business man came in, and took his seat on the outskirts of the audience. I think, at first, he had come merely to criticize, and that he was a little skeptical. At last I saw he was in tears. I turned to him, and said, " My friend, what is your difficulty?" "Well," he said, "Mr. Moody, the fact is, I cannot tell." I said, "Do you believe you are a sinner?" He said, "Yes; I know that." I said, "Christ is able to save you"; and I used one illustration after another, but he did not see it. At last I thought of the ark, and I said: "Was it Noah's feelings that saved him? Was it Noah's righteousness that saved him, or was it the ark?" "I see it, now," said he; "I see it." He got up and shook hands with me, and said: "Good-night: I must go. I have to go away by the train to-night; but I was determined to be saved before I went. I see it now."

A few days after, he came and touched me on the shoulder, and said, "Do you know me? " I said, "I know your face, but do not remember where I have seen you." He said, "Do you not remember the illustration of the ark? I said, " Yes." "It has been all light ever since," said he. "I understand it now. Christ is the Ark; He saves me; and I must get inside Him." When I went down to Manchester again, and talked to the young friends there, I found he was the brightest light among them.

Let me take another illustration. There was the blood in Goshen. God says, "When I see the blood I will pass over you." Now He does not say, "When I see Moses' feelings, or the feelings of the people, I will pass over you"; or, "When I see you praying and weeping, I will pass over you"; but, "When I see the blood I will pass over you." It was the blood that saved them, not their righteousness. And a little child by that blood in Goshen was just as safe as Moses or Aaron or Joshua or Caleb. It was the blood that saved them. Look! there is the Jew taking the hyssop. He dips it in the blood, and strikes it on the doorpost. One minute it is not there: the next it is there. The moment the blood is there they are saved. God says, "When I see the blood I will pass over you." Some people say, "If I were only as good as that minister I should feel so safe" or, "If I were only as good as that mother in Israel who has been praying fifty years for the poor and unfortunate, should I not feel very safe? " My friends, if you are behind the blood, you are as safe as any man or woman who has been praying for fifty years. It is not their righteousness and good works that are going to save them. They never saved any one. God says, "When I see the blood I will pass over you." [ABCOG: Moody understands "pass over" to mean "bypass". It can also mean "hover over to protect"] And when I am sheltered behind the blood, then I am saved; and if I am not sheltered behind the blood, I am not saved. That was instantaneous, was not it? God says, "When I see the blood, it shall be a token, and I will not enter." Death came down and passed over Egypt; and where the blood was on the doorpost he passed by; but where the blood could not be found, in he went and took the victim away. The great palaces could not keep out death; wealth and position could not keep out death. He went and took the Crown Prince of Egypt; he took the richest and the poorest, the highest and the lowest. Death makes no distinction, except a man is behind the blood.

My friends, be wise to-night, and get behind the blood. The blood has been shed. The blood is on the mercy-seat; and while it is there you can be saved. God is imputing to His Son your trespasses and sins. He says, "I will look at the blood on the mercy-seat." Press in, my friends; make haste and get in tonight; for the Master of the house will rise up by-and-by and shut to the door, and then there will be no hope.

Take another case. When Israel went over Jordan, God told Joshua to have six cities of refuge; three on each side of Jordan. They were to be built on a hill, where they could be seen at a great distance, and the gates were to be kept open day and night. All obstacles were to be kept out of the way, the highway was to be kept in repair, the bridges and everything in good condition, so that nothing should hinder a poor man flying to the city of refuge. If a man killed another in those days, it was considered a great disgrace if the nearest relative did not take vengeance. "An eye for an eye, and a booth for a tooth." If a man killed another, the next kinsman was bound to put him to death. But if he could escape to a city of refuge he was tried, and if it was found he had not intentionally killed the man, he might live.

Now for my illustration. Suppose I have killed a man. I am out away in the woods working, and my axe slips out of my hand, and kills the man working with me. I know that his kinsman, his brother, is not far away. The news will soon reach him that I have killed his brother. What shall I do? I start for the city of refuge, over there away on the hill, ten miles off. I run - and we are told that in those days there used to be signposts with the word " Refuge," written in great red letters, so that a man might read as he ran; he need not stop. I have been told that there was a finger pointing towards the city, and a man who could not read might see the hand. A man does not have to learn to read before he can be saved. I see that hand; it is pointing to the city of refuge. The gate is wide open, but it is ten miles away. I leap over the highway. I do not look behind, to the right hand or to the left. I do not listen to this man or to that man, but, like John Bunyan, I put my fingers in my ears. The avenger has drawn his sword, and is on my track. I leap over into the highway; and, pretty soon, I can hear him behind me, Away I go, over that bridge, across that stream, up that mountain, along that valley, - but I can hear him coming nearer and nearer. There is the watchman; I can see him on the wall of the city. He gives notice to the inhabitants that a refugee is coming. I see the citizens on the wall of the city watching, and when I get near I hear them calling, "Run, run! Escape, escape! He is very near you! Run! escape!" I press on; leap through the gate of the city; and at last I am safe. One minute I am outside, and the next I am inside. One minute I am exposed to that sword; it may come down upon me at any minute: the next minute I am safe. Do I feel any difference? I feel I am behind the walls: that is the difference. It is a fact. There I am. The avenger can come up to the gates of the city, but he cannot come in. He cannot lay his sword upon me. The law of the land shields me now. I am under the protection of that city; I have saved my life; but I had no time for lingering.

A great many of you are trying to get into the city of refuge, and there are enemies trying to stop you, But do not listen to them. Your friends tell you to escape. Make haste! Delay not for a single moment!

In our country, before the war, when we had slavery, the slaves used to keep their eye on the north star. If a slave escaped to the Northern States, his old master could come and take him back into slavery. But there was another flag on American soil, and if they could only get under that flag they were for ever free. It is called the Union Jack. If they could only get as far north as Canada they were free; therefore they kept looking towards the north star. But they knew if they only got into the Northern States, there might be some one ready to take them back. So it is with every poor sinner who wants to come to Christ. Many men do all they can to hinder him; others will cheer him on. Let us help every man towards the north star. A man has escaped: perhaps he swims across the Mississippi river, or crosses the Ohio river in a little canoe. The master hears of it, and he takes his hounds and sets them on his track, and begins to hunt him down. The slave hears the hounds; and he knows that his master is coming to take him back to slavery. The line is a mile or two away. He escapes as fast as he can. He runs with all his might for the frontier, over hedges and ditches and rivers; away he goes for Canada. By-and-by he comes in sight of Canada. He can see that flag floating in front of him; and he knows that if he can only cross the line before his master and the hounds overtake him, he will be free for ever.

How the poor black man runs! leaping and bounding along; and at last, with one bound, he goes over the line. He is free! One minute he is a slave; the next minute he is a free man, under the flag of Queen Victoria, the British flag! (cheers [ABCOG: by British crowd]) - don't cheer, my friends, but come to Christ - and your laws say that no man under that flag shall be a slave. One minute he is a slave; the next minute he is a free man. One minute it is possible for his old master to drag him back; the next minute he shouts, "Free!"

If Christ tells us that we are free, we are free. My friends, Christ is calling to-night. Get out of the devil's territory as quick as you can. No slave in the Southern States had so hard a master as yours, nor so mean a master as Satan. Take my advice tonight, and escape for the liberty of your soul.

I can imagine some of you saying "I do not see how a man is really going to be converted all at once." Let me give you another illustration. Look down there. There are two soldiers. Now, if you bring those soldiers up to this platform, and ask them how they became soldiers, they will tell you this - that one moment they were citizens, and the next minute soldiers. What was it that made them soldiers? It was when they took the Queen's shilling. The moment they received that shilling they ceased to be citizens, and they became soldiers. Before they received that shilling they could go where they pleased; the next minute they came under the government and under the regulations of the army, and they must go where Queen Victoria sends them. They did not have to wait for the uniform. The minute they received the shilling they became soldiers. What made them soldiers? Receiving the shilling. What makes a man a Christian? Receiving Christ. "He came unto His own, and His own received Him not: but as many as received Him, to them gave He power to become the sons of God."

Now, the gift of God is eternal life. Who will have the gift to-night? When I was down in Manchester I asked that question, and a man shouted in the meeting, "I will! " Who will have it now? Is not there some man here in London, as there was in Manchester, who will say that he will have the gift? Is it not a wonder to have to plead with so many to take the gift? "The wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life." Who will have the gift now? (Many responses of "I will"; "I will.")

I can imagine one man down there who says "How about repentance? How about getting into the ark or the city of refuge before repentance?" My friend, let me ask you what is repentance? It is right-about-face! I think these soldiers understand that expression. Some one has said that every one is born with his back to God, and that conversion turns him right round. If you want to be converted, and want to repent, I will tell you what you should do. Just get out of Satan's service, and get into the Lord's. Leave your old friends, and unite yourself with God's people.

In a few days, if nothing happens, I expect to go to Liverpool. If, when I am in the train, my friend Mr. Shipton says, "Moody, you are going in the wrong train, - that train is going to Edinburgh" - I should say, "Mr. Shipton, you have made a great mistake; somebody told me the train was going to Liverpool. You are wrong, Mr. Shipton; I am sure you are wrong." Then Mr. Shipton would say, "Moody, I have lived here forty years, and I know all about the trains. He must have been very ignorant or very vicious who told you that train goes to Liverpool." Mr. Shipton at last convinces me, and I get out of that train and get into the one going to Liverpool.

Repentance is getting out of one train and getting into the other. You are in the wrong train; you are in the broad path that takes you down to the pit of hell. Get out of it to-night. Right-about-face! Who will turn his feet towards God? "Turn ye, for why will ye die?" In the Old Testament the word is "turn." In the New Testament the word is "repent." "Turn ye, for why will ye die, O house of Israel?" God does not want any man in this audience to perish, but He wants all to be saved. You can be saved now if you will.

There is another illustration I wish I had time to dwell upon and that is about looking. There is that serpent in the wilderness. "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man also be lifted up, that whosoever believeth on Him should not perish, but have everlasting life." Look here! Just give me your attention for a few minutes. "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ." How long does it take a man to believe? Or, if you will, how long does it take a man to look? Some people say they believe in educating people to be Christians. How long do you educate children to look? You hear the mother say, "Look," and the little child looks. It does not take a child three months to learn to look. Look and live! You need not go to college to learn how to look. There is not a child here but knows how to look. Christ says, "Look unto me; for I am [ABCOG: the way to] God, and there is none else."

There is the brazen serpent on the pole. God says to the children of Israel, who are dying of the bite of the fiery serpents - "Look, and live!"

Now, there is nothing in looking at a piece of brass which can cure the bite of a serpent. It is God who cures it, and the looking is the condition. It is obedience; and that is what God will have.

One moment the poor sufferer is dying; the next there comes a thrill of life through his veins, and he lives: he is well. My friends, look to Christ, and not to yourselves. That is what is the matter with a great many sinners; instead of looking to Christ, they are looking at the bite.

It is not looking to the wound; it is looking to the remedy. Christ is the remedy of sin. What you want is to look from the wound to the remedy - to Jesus, the Author and Finisher of our faith. Who will look tonight, and live? Turn your eye to Calvary; believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and be saved.

[fortheDeclaration]

And one is ordained to eternal life because God saw who would believe and who would not (1Pet.1:2) If that is so, then God owes it to them to ordain them to eternal life, because of their faith, which is implied that they themselves made the choice.

God is the one who set the requirment for salvation, which is by faith.

Faith is not a work, so God is not in debt to anyone who meets this requirement (as is implied by the way you phrase the statement).

Those who believe in Christ are doing the work of God (Jn.6:29).

Ignoring in Acts 17:30 that all men are commanded to repent. God has commanded many things that man does not do. Many things that man is incapable of doing apart from Christ. God has the Sovereign right to set forth His standards, regardless of man's ability or inability to keep them. This does not add to your case, nor does it detract from mine. God commands men everywhere to repent. Most don't. To whose detriment is that? Not God's! When men don't obey God, they only confirm the Righteousness of His Judgment against them, which is to His Glory.

So then, according to Calvinism God is a liar, since man is unable to repent, not that he will not.

God never commands anything that we are unable to do, only unwilling

Those who will believe are predestinated to be in Christ, and those who do not, are following the destiny they chose, to remain in spiritual death and stand in their works. This is nothing more than God rewarding right actions, foreseen before time. How is this different that what James says in his Epistle?: James is speaking of progressive sanctification, not salvation sanctification.

For growing, you must choose to walk by faith (2Cor.5:7) and that is a process.

You must choose to yield to the Spirit (Rom.6:16),

You must choose not to grieve or quench the Holy Spirit (1Thess.5,Eph.4)

If you do sin, you must choose to confess it (1Jn.1:9)

And you will be rewarded in the Judgement seat of Christ for your correct choices (Rom.14:10, 2Cor.5:10)

Now, after salvation the believer has an awful lot of choices to make, so it would appear that God is not threatened by man having a choice.

Morevover, even in our choosing it is still of all grace, since it is all of God doing the work (bearing the fruit-Gal.5)

Now, if you reject any of what I just said regarding the believer's walk with God, then it is God who is responsible for your sins, and His exhortations not to sin, to confess them when you do, and to yield are also untrue, even though they are scriptural.

My brothers, do not have the faith of our Lord Christ, the Lord of glory, with respecter of faces. For if there comes a gold-fingered man in fancy clothing into your assembly, and if there also comes in a poor man in shabby clothing, and if you have respect to him who has the fancy clothing and say to him, You sit here in a good place, and say to the poor, You stand there, or sit here under my footstool; Did you not make a difference among yourselves and became judges with evil thoughts? (Jam 2:1-4) Or, what Jesus Himself stated: For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more [than others]? do not even the publicans so? Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect. (Mat 5:46-48) Jesus specifically warned against acting in that fashion, and by stating the the Father in Heaven is perfect, shows that the Father DOES NOT act in that fashion with regard to men. Yet you say that the Father chooses the Elect based on their foreseen actions, in contravention of Jesus own teaching, and James teaching regarding respecting of persons, and showing deferrential treatment to certain people.

Thats correct God is not a respector of anyone,everyone is a sinner in His eyes, so, why would He happen to pick one over the other?

Funny how no Calvinist can answer that but will talk about God being Just since the Calvinist is not the one going to Hell for missing out on the cosmic lottery.

What the Calvinist wants you to believe is that since God is fair (and he is) that since God chose them there had to be a fair reason for doing so.

You talk about begging the question!

A respecter of persons deals with others based on what they have done to benefit him, or what they might potentially do to benefit him, if he shows them special treatment. The Bible specifically says that God is NOT a respecter of persons. Therefore, God's choice, while based on Foreknowledge, is NOT based on Foreknowledge as YOU define it, i.e. foreseen actions, or foreseen faith. Your defiinition makes Him a respecter of persons. Foreknowledge is the intimate love that God has for the objects of His choosing, based not on them, but on God's Will, which He purposed beforehand. That you can't fathom why He would do so, if not for what He foresees them doing, does not give you the right to redefine the terms.

A respector of persons deals with people based on what those people are and how they can benefit of them.

God is not a respector of persons if a person meets His requirement for salvation (faith in His Son) no more then if He rewards those who obey Him in their Christian walk (1Cor.3)

You must let God be God. He has not revealed His reasons. I can accept that, and thank God that He chose me, not for my actions, not for my faith, but because He set His love on me, and chose me IN SPITE of what is in me. I KNOW I don't deserve it. And knowing that, there is NO WAY that I can then believe that He chose me because He saw I would believe. Such belief is a contradiction, not only of the Nature of God, but of the nature of man.

Well, that is very nice, but it really does not meet the scriptural standards that God has set for Himself.

God desires all men to be saved (1Tim.2:4), He died for all (Heb.2:9, 1Jn.2:2), takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked (Ezek.33:11), Draws all men to him (Jn.12:32), and states that the only requirement for salvation is faith in the person and work of Christ (Acts.16:31)

Anything added to this (which Calvin described as the Gospel in his comments on 2Pet.3:9, and had to state that there was a 'secret will') is additional philosphical speculation and in violation of sound scriptural reading (Col.2:8)

[fortheDeclaration]

In fairness to the Lutherans, I think they had more to do with that then did the Calvinists. Luther was a student of Augustine...Augustine believed in election and predestination and so did Luther . In fact Luther believed in DOUBLE predestination .So as I said, you would still be going to mass were it not for Calvinists

Believing in Predestination does not make one a Calvinist.

The Lutherans would take great exception as being described as such.

The tenet that started the Reformation was justification by faith alone.

Predestination had nothing to do with it, even though the Reformers believed in it.

[thePilgrim]

***So then, according to Calvinism God is a liar, since man is unable to repent, not that he will not.

God never commands anything that we are unable to do, only unwilling.***

Wrong. That is, unless you think that a man who was crippled and unable to get up was just being lazy. Still, we do record the Lord commanding the man to get up.

Also, we do have the command "Be ye therefore perfect" as well. So, just to get this straight you think that man naturally possesses the ability to be perfect as the Father but man just doesn't want to be perfect?

And you wonder why Arminians get accused by the Calvinists of being Pelagians.

In the service of the Lord,
Christian.

P.S. Now might be a good time to hit another mulligan and accuse me of distoring your Arminian theology.

[Corin Stormhands]

I sure don't. But, then, I'm no longer Arminian and I don't think like one anymore so I don't know what is so problematic for an Arminian with the assertion that "man is saved by his own choice to trust God."

Well, kudos to you for correcting your earlier statements that you understand Arminianism better than the Arminians.

[nobdysfool]

So then, according to Calvinism God is a liar, since man is unable to repent, not that he will not. God never commands anything that we are unable to do, only unwilling

Sorry, that is the error of Pelagius. God most certainly does command things that mankind is UNABLE to do. God says "Be ye holy, for I am Holy." That is a commandment that Man cannot ever do, by his own ability. EVER! Man not only will not repent of his sins, he cannot repent, because repentance is a gift from God (2 Cor. 7:9-10, Rom. 2:4, 2tim. 2:25) . Man cannot work up within himself a Godly sorrow for sins, which is what true repentance is.

Now, after salvation the believer has an awful lot of choices to make, so it would appear that God is not threatened by man having a choice.

Salvation is monergistic, sanctification is synergistic. Never said otherwise. This is the distinction you refuse to see. Certainly the Christian has many choices to make, but becoming one is not a choice he can make on his own.

Thats correct God is not a respector of anyone,everyone is a sinner in His eyes, so, why would He happen to pick one over the other? Funny how no Calvinist can answer that but will talk about God being Just since the Calvinist is not the one going to Hell for missing out on the cosmic lottery. What the Calvinist wants you to believe is that since God is fair (and he is) that since God chose them there had to be a fair reason for doing so. You talk about begging the question!

You better go back and read what I said again, because you completely missed my point. And it is you who begs the question, saying ***everyone is a sinner in His eyes, so, why would He happen to pick one over the other?***, and then answering by saying that he chose them because He foresaw them choosing Him. That's a circular argument, assuming your premise in the conclusion. You can't stand not knowing why, so you invent a reason which makes God a respecter of persons. That is the logical conclusion of your circular argument. He chose those whom He saw choosing Him. "Since you will choose Me, I choose you." How utterly unbiblical!

God desires all men to be saved (1Tim.2:4), He died for all (Heb.2:9, 1Jn.2:2), takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked (Ezek.33:11), Draws all men to him (Jn.12:32), and states that the only requirement for salvation is faith in the person and work of Christ (Acts.16:31) Anything added to this (which Calvin described as the Gospel in his comments on 2Pet.3:9, and had to state that there was a 'secret will') is additional philosphical speculation and in violation of sound scriptural reading (Col.2:8)

For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall fully know even as I also am fully known. (1Co 13:12)

The secret things belong to Jehovah our God, but the revealed things belong to us and to our sons forever, so that we may do all the words of this Law. (Deu 29:29)

Where is it written that God has revealed every last reason for His choices? That seems to be something that drives the Arminian nuts, that God would withhold all the counsel of His Will. God does not have to reveal all His reasons for us to obey and accept what He HAS revealed. If God has chosen to hide from man the reason He chooses one and not another, who is man to try to redefine and reword God's Word to come up with an explanation which in reality exalts man's abilities, and negates the depth of his depravity and the wickedness of his heart?

[fortheDeclaration]

***No, not really,an honest man would deal with the analogy as given and not pretend that it was saying something it wasn't.*** Hellllooooo! This is exactly what you said: "I put a million dollars in your bank account."

Yes, and in your post (#621)

Ah, but the man is a millionare whether or not he takes out a single penny. In fact, the bankers would call the funny farm on him if he walked into the bank and accepted his own money to become a millionare.

The point is that the man is a millionare whether or not he takes out a single penny, but if he doesn't draw on that money in the account, even though he is a millionare, it is not helping him any.

the money is Come on, this isn't hard. In order for your analogy to be better, you would need to have the man walk into the bank and tell the teller that he is here for his promised million.

OK, and that is what a saved man would do, he goes to the bank and asks for the million.

Now, you aparently realize that such an analogy would teach a universalism so you needed a mulligan to change your analogy.

No, not at all.

Two men have a million dollars placed in their account but only ones goes to the bank and claims it as his.

I can't help it if you either really don't know what you believe or are unable to find an analogy to fit your theology. I can't help it if you need several milligans. But, accusing me of not dealing with the analogy as give just makes you look weak.

No, you showed that you were not interesting in an honest discussion.

***By their fruits will you know them!*** Exactly. Quit hiding and just admit that you needed to change your analogy and take a mulligan.

Not at all, my 'analogy' is based on scripture (Heb.2:9, 1Jn.2:2, Rom.5:18),you should try reading the Bible sometime,it will clear up alot of your confusion.

You have said some pretty outrageous things on this thread and made some rather serious accusations without merit. Sadly, this is what I usually expect from Arminians when whey get hopelessly cornered by the things they say.

You really are faint of heart!

You should have been around on FR when we had some serious flame wars on these threads.

Now what Arminian church did you say you came from again?

[RnMomof7]

The idea that repentance is tied to the remission of sins, and baptism is not, is a bogus one. The "and" in that passage between "Repent" and "be baptized", which as you must know is a conjunction, ties them together. The conjunction "and" never separates two things, always joins them. The Greek word here is "kai" and it has the meaning I just described. Even if you wanted to tie only one of the verbs to remission of sins, it would be baptism the way the sentence is structured. However, that is not the case since the Bible clearly teaches that repentance is necessary for salvation.

If this is a scriptural teaching , please post all the scripture here so we can see it

[RnMomof7]

This verse says that God gives grace to those who are humble and submit themselves to the elders. In the verses preceding this one, Peter tells the elders to watch over their flock and continue to teach them. If grace is unconditional as you say, then why does Peter say just the opposite here. Is he "mistaken" yet again as you said he was in Acts 2:38, even though the Holy Spirit guided the writers of the Scriptures?

So then grace is not unmerited favor? Or something that God gives to the unworthy ?

You can earn grace by how you behave and what you do? So then if you are saved by grace it is because you earned it? It is not a "free gift" of God. It is a wage for acting/behaving correctly

So then Salvation is by your reckoning not of grace... so lets move on to Mercy

If one is rewarded for acting correctly or behaving correctly then one is also not save by mercy?

I am sure you agree the word "mercy" is very narrow. For instance it would not apply to a "good time" release of a prisoner.. because he earned that time by " being good"

Now if the Governor looks at the record of a murderer and says , I am going to let him free ... that would be mercy . The man was judged guilty , and another in authority decided to release him from the sentence he deserved.. Mercy

So the salvation that you talk about and teach is a salvation of works . You make your self humble and get grace, you behave properly and you get grace, act correctly and preform certain acts and then you are freed, probation for "good time" no mercy needed . You have done it all yourself .

Romans 11:6And if by Grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise Grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more Grace: otherwise work is no more work.

Grace = a Gift – Received – At – Christ’s – Expense.

You teach a "purchased gift" That is not what the scriptures teach

Romans 6: 23 “The free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord,”

The Greek word charis, translated "grace", means the divine influence upon the heart, and its reflection in one's life, including gratitude. The word is translated variously in the Bible as 'acceptable, benefit, favour, gift, grace(-ious), joy, liberality, pleasure, thank(s), thank(s)(-worthy)' (Strong's Concordance.)

JK , This letter was written to the saints.. it was not written to the unsaved. It is written to the church about submission to authority, that is the humility that it speaks to . Only a saved man can be truly humble. God gives grace after grace to the saved, but it is never a "reward" or payment

The saved man boasts not in his works to earn his salvation... but in the work of God. Humility follows salvation, it is a part of the work of the Holy Spirit in us . God loves when His people honor Him. Grace is always grace.

[RnMomof7]

I would never suggest that God is limited. I am only saying what the Bible says, which is God's Word. Logically speaking, grace must be either universal, or there must be some conditions.

Just give me something to prove that . It is contrary to every thing in the Bible. From the beginning God select to whom to give grace. The person was singled out through no merit of his own . Read Deut 7:6-7.

I believe God does give a universal "common grace" that we see around us.. but the grace that saves is spoken of as free and not of works over and over

If you have scripture that indicates saving grace must be either universal or have some self merit to it I would consider it. But I do not believe it exists.

Do you understand that almost all of professing Christianity would say that anyone that needs to add a work to the work of Christ is most likely unsaved? So this is a very serious discussion we are having here

[thePilgrim]

***The point is that the man is a millionare whether or not he takes out a single penny, but if he doesn't draw on that money in the account, even though he is a millionare, it is not helping him any.***

Ok, so first, you declare that the million is in my account, then you declare that the million is NOT in my account, and now, the million is back in my account.

IS THAT YOUR FINAL ANSWER?

The only reason I ask is that you have been accusing me of not dealing honestly with what you are saying. The only problem is that I need a play by play announcer to even know whether you are currently flipping or flopping.

Oh, well, I can only deal with what you claim is the analogy now. And, obviously, you have no clue about the benefits of having a large sum of money in your account. First of all, taking the money out of your account and spending it as a requirement for salvation is silly for the fact that it portrays grace as nothing more than a tool which man uses to improve his estate. Frankly, and I already know how Arminians tend to deal with grace, I find that highly irreverent. Remember, we are talking about the grace in salvation, which means we are talking about the Person of Christ.

Titus 2:11 The grace of God that brings salvation has appeared...

I tend to treat the shed grace of God and the Person of Christ with far more reverence than presuming that Christ is a kind of barter which I must withdrawal from a bank account and then spend. Frankly, it reminds me more of something I might have seen at the "Vanity Fair" than anything which can be found in the Bible.

Secondly, the idea of spending the Lord Jesus more than a little bit reminds me of Simon and his irreverent attitude toward the saving graces of God. As I recall, he was cursed with the following words: "Your money perish with you, because you thought that the gift of God could be purchased with money!" Highly irreverent indeed.

To be quite honest, I do find it highly disturbing that you regard the saving grace of God as some kind of liquid asset that you must withdrawal and spend.

***No, you showed that you were not interesting in an honest discussion.***

Well, who can have an honest discussion when you keep changing your analogy? It's in my account, then it is not in my account, and now, POOF, it is back to being in my account. Like I said:

IS THAT YOUR FINAL ANSWER?

***Not at all, my 'analogy' is based on scripture (Heb.2:9, 1Jn.2:2, Rom.5:18),you should try reading the Bible sometime,it will clear up alot of your confusion.***

I'm sorry, but none of those scriptures you referenced even remotely come close to presenting this bank analogy that you used. Like I said, I find it highly disturbing that you think the grace of God is something to be used as barter.

***You should have been around on FR when we had some serious flame wars on these threads.***

Well, I'm sure that you are real proud of the flames you've started. From what I've seen, you don't seem to be to bashful of personally slamming your opponents even today. I take it as a compliment. When my opponents can manage nothing but personal accusations, it means that they no longer have the ability to counter the arguments rationally.

***Now what Arminian church did you say you came from again?***

Speaking of, I happened to visit a nice little Arminian Baptist church yesterday and was presented with the idea that all we have to do to have a Harley is to pray to God to get it and then listen for the answer on how to get it. It reminded me strongly of our current discussion about bartering the graces of God. It was name it claim it garbage at its worst. Instead of closing with the normal prayer, he decided that he would listen to our prayers about what we would like to have. I was sorely tempted to pray for him using such interesting verses as this one:

James 4:3 You ask and do not receive, because you ask amiss, that you may spend it on your pleasures.

I wonder how that would go with his interesting interpretation of the verse he used.

In the service of the Lord,
Christian.

[HarleyD]

I have a lot going on today and hopefully I'll get back to your comments soon. But this did leap out at me:

"God never commands anything that we are unable to do, only unwilling"

I would suggest you review what Paul has to say about the Law (e.g 10 COMMANDMENTS) in Romans.

[xzins]

man naturally possesses the ability to be perfect

BTW, another strawman you've constructed...putting words in ftD's mouth that he didn't even marginally utter.

First, the issue you seem to stumble over with both faith and perfection is the word "natural," as you've stated again above. I don't think ftD ever used the word "natural." However, God doesn't command totally depraved man NOT to murder because He thinks they cannot obey that command. He thinks they can.

So far as I know, there are many who have not murdered. You are probably one of them.

The command to be "perfect" is a legitimate command, but as you might guess, no being except God will ever attain to the perfection of God.

I surmise from that that I must look for some other meaning regarding God's intent, since I think we're not held accountable for what we are totally unable to do anything about.

[thePilgrim]

***The command to be "perfect" is a legitimate command, but as you might guess, no being except God will ever attain to the perfection of God.***

Well, take your complaint up with fortheDeclaration. He is the one who thinks that it is unfair: "God never commands anything that we are unable to do, only unwilling."

Perhaps you Arminians might ought to huddle up and figure out what is fair and what is not fair. Obviously, some of you think that, because God commanded it that man must be able to do it, in this case, be perfect as the Father in heaven is perfect. Of course, that is the very heart of Pelagius' error. He, too, thought that man followed Adam's example into sin and thought that man could obey God's commands, which is exactly what this belief of some of you Arminians leads to.

In the service of the Lord,
Christian.

[HarleyD]

”Verse 39 is speaking of security, and vs 40 of the Father's will of who should be saved. That is very clear from the scriptures themselves.

With all due respects, verse 32-44 of John 6 talks about the will of the Father.

”Joh 15:16 … he was speaking of the apostles he had chosen, which had nothing to do with salvation. “

Well, this is in the middle of one of Jesus’ most famous text; “I am the vine you are the vinedresser”. If Jesus was talking just to his apostles you might as well ripped John 15 out of your Bible. For that matter didn’t Jesus just talked to His disciples all the time? Sorry, this is a poor interpretation of scripture in my mind.

”actually it says, ordained. And one is ordained to eternal life because God saw who would believe and who would not (1Pet.1:2)”

Ordained like the other eight times this word is used in the New Testament: Mat_28:16, “Into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them”; that is, previously appointed - before his death; Luk_7:8, “For I also am a man set under authority”; appointed, or designated as a soldier, to be under the authority of another; Act_15:2, “They determined that Paul and Barnabas, etc., should go to Jerusalem”; Act_22:10, “It shall be told thee of all things which are appointed for thee to do”; Act_23:23, “And when they appointed him a day,” etc.: Rom_13:1, “the powers that be are ordained of God; 1Co_16:15?

I’ve read several Arminians commentaries tonight on this verse trying to explain it away. Some say Luke used the wrong term here. Others said it was a poor choice of words. None of them did a very good job.

Well, you have given the typical calvinist proof-texts. Ignoring Jn.12:32 where it says that Christ will draw all men to him. Ignoring in Acts 17:30 that all men are commanded to repent. No, imagine Peter telling the Lord Jesus that God really didn't want all men to be saved (2Pet.3:9) and that in fact, God does take pleasure in the death of the wicked (Ezek.33:11, Jonah 4)

I think I have an easier time explaining these few verses then you’ll ever have explaining chapters (even books) of the Old Testament where God commanded the people to slaughter the inhabitants, God rained fire up cities, God flooded the earth, God sent plagues upon the people, and where God says:

Zep 1:12 "It will come about at that time That I will search Jerusalem with lamps, And I will punish the men Who are stagnant in spirit, Who say in their hearts, 'The LORD will not do good or evil!'

This is the "God of Love" that is identified in scripture. You focus on a part and ignore the whole. Doesn’t seem in my mind God wants all men saved since He didn't tell Joshua to go into the promise land and convert the heathens. Don’t you think He would do so if He really wanted it? It’s God’s sovereignty that the Arminians ignore.

[xzins]

You apparently missed my follow-on thought about no being attaining to the perfection of God. Ever.

I stated that it must mean otherwise than some take it to mean.

For example, if I had said to George Patton Jr., "Be a soldier, as you Father was a soldier." that could mean "Your father was a 4 Star General, and you should achieve that, too."...."To the same degree be a soldier..."

Or it could mean simply, "Be a soldier, regardless of the rank you attain."...."In the same tradition be a soldier"

[nobdysfool]

I stated that it must mean otherwise than some take it to mean.

Or, it could mean exactly what it says. The point being that by giving commandments that no one can meet on their own, God shuts up man to trusting in God alone, and to put no confidence in the arm of the flesh. The Bible says the heart is deceitful, and desperately wicked. Man will always try to find a "short-cut" if he is allowed to. God will have no flesh glory in His Presence. If His commands do not mean exactly what they say, then God can't be trusted either.

When God says "be ye holy, for I am Holy", He is not saying "be ye relatively holy, for I am Holy." When He says "be ye perfect, as your Father in heaven is perfect", He is not saying "be ye relatively perfect, as your Father in Heaven is perfect."

It is when a man learns that his only hope is to trust in God alone, and to believe His Word, that God declares the man holy and perfect on the basis of Christ's Atoning work, and it is Christ's imputed righteosness, and the spiritual union with Christ that allows us to fulfill His commandments, not on our own, but in Christ. That was what He intended all along. We are counted as righteous, holy and perfect in Christ, and in Christ alone.

[xzins]

Or, it could mean exactly what it says

Yes. I should have been more clear about that.

In terms of what it means, it is necessary to be honest with variations in meaning that actually are present. In the Lord's Prayer it says, "forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us." In English, "as" can mean "time" or "in the same manner (comparative)." It must be sorted out. In some cases, it simply cannot be sorted.

Be ye perfect AS your Father in Heaven is perfect...."as" is used in the comparative sense, but it can mean "in the same manner" or "to the same degree." Unless it is made absolutely clear in the Greek which is meant, then it is open to debate which is meant.

I would suggest that God would not ask us to attain the perfection of God because that simply cannot ever be achieved. There will never be any being other than God with the actual perfection of God.

Some will, of course, go immediately to "imputed righteousness." That is a certainty in terms of salvation.

It is more an open question, though, when we speak of faith or relationship with the Lord or love for the Lord or love for one another.

It is possible that the Lord truly doesn't want one or more of these ever to lapse.

When that which is perfect is come....

[GLENNS]

Whew!

This is getting really wierd.

It's almost like some bastardized Catholic Eucharist thing (with apologies to the Catholics).

"Take a bite out of Christ and claim yer E-ternal RE-ward."

Now, if we take this to its logical conclusion Christ must have some finite sum that the gospel is worth (1 mil x # of people ever born til the second coming). What happens to the unclaimed gospel "dollars"? I also find it interesting how the creature has a claim on the creator and not the other way around.

[nobdysfool]

Be ye perfect AS your Father in Heaven is perfect...."as" is used in the comparative sense, but it can mean "in the same manner" or "to the same degree." Unless it is made absolutely clear in the Greek which is meant, then it is open to debate which is meant.

I did a little checking, and the verse actually says, "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect. (Mat 5:48).

The phrase "even as" carries the idea of "just like" or "exactly like". We know that this is not possible in this life, but the Bible also says that when He appears (the Second Coming), we shall be like Him. That could include perfection, once we have been changed into glorious bodies like unto His own. At that point, we will be free from sin.

There is also this interesting verse in Hebrews: "To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect," (Heb 12:23)

[connectthedots]

Thanks my Elect Brothers in the Lord.

So; are Neeners 'Elect', too? ;-)

Welcome back.

Never understood why you were banned. Personally, I doubt that you would have been restored without the efforts of both some GRPLers and a few Neeners. Seems to me that this is an illustration of God's willingness to change in response to the supplications of men. Can never really say for sure, but your restoration is a bit of evidence.

Just an observation and I will have nothing more to say on the matter.