Those who believe in "imputed righteousness" alone believe that God covers us with Christ's righteousness - that a man (even abiding in Christ) is insufficient to be considered "righteous". Thus, the legal status invented by some. God treats us as His children. Children are not required to be perfect to be loved and rewarded for their actions.
However, the mother was still always in complete control. Such is similar with God.
I still think we can use the cookie analogy here, as well. The Mother IS in "complete control". But she ALLOWS the cookies to be made with her daughter's input. In other words, some of the cookies will be mishapened. Some will be different sized, or funky-looking. Again, the mother ALLOWS this daughter to be a secondary cause of how the cookies turn out. And I believe God does the same with us. He allows us to struggle through life, not fulfilling the Commandments perfectly, but struggling to abide in Him, He accepts this imperfect sacrifice and effort. As a loving Father, He is happy that we are trying to use His gifts, even if they are not used perfectly. He is in control, but He doesn't use that control to overtake our efforts. God is not surprised by what we do, nor does He micromanage us where our efforts count for nothing.
God gives His elect an offer they can't refuse. An offer SO GOOD, that no man can say 'No'. I don't see this as the same thing as "forcing".
God stirs within us the desire for God that is innate in ALL people. Some will react to this differently. However, "an offer they can't refuse"? You are presuming that a person TRUSTS God completely and totally from the get-go. Trust is learned. Honestly, even those who make the Sinner's Prayer, how much do they REALLY trust this "God" who is unseen and virtually undetected in their lives? We learn to trust God in our lives - so this "offer" CAN be refused (but God knows who will and who will not refuse). Scripture says that God's graces can come to us in vain because of us.
Jesus, the man, showed us exactly what our attitude should be. It's OK to say what you think, but always pray that the will of God will be done.
True. But why is it necessary that we pray that the will of God be done, if God's will is ALWAYS done? Consider Jesus' prayer for unity in John's Gospel during the Last Supper. His desire was for unity among His followers, both present and future.
I've said many times that God promises that no one, not even the person himself, can snatch him out of God's hands.
And again, Scripture never makes that claim. It tells us that we CAN fall away. WE. The Devil cannot take us from God. Other powers cannot. But God leaves open the decision of acceptance to us. I do not agree that it is an offer that I cannot refuse. I feel led to continue in the Lord, but I realize there is a voice within me battling and tempting me to "forget about all of this Lent stuff. Why sacrifice? For what?" We will always battle the serpent - and he will try to get us to refuse the Lord. The very idea of temptation makes our acceptance of the Lord valuable and meritorious - not automatic.
I rely on that to know that if I am of the elect today, that I will be 5 years from now.
Well, of course, IF IF IF you are of the elect...You don't know the mind of the Lord on this matter. All you or I can do is HOPE we are of the elect, continuing to work out our salvation in fear and trembling. Anything else is presumption, a sin against God's mercy and justice.
All those who are saved are of the elect and all those of the elect will be saved.
A wonderful circular argument!
"I am of the elect"
"How do you know"?, asks Jo
"Because I am saved".
"Meaning?" asks Jo.
"I am of the elect"
Oh boy... It's all beginning to give me a headache.
We humans can't be absolutely certain about that for other people, but God provides that we may be sure about ourselves
LOL!!! Which Protestant believes that that after saying the Sinner's Prayer, that they are not of the elect? The only one who believes it didn't work are those who judge other people after the fact when a person falls - "He was never saved to begin with" What device did God give that person to indicate that this person would falter?
Through my sanctification I have been able to appropriate God's truth on this matter, so I say that I can have assurance that I am of the elect.
That's only useful for the PRESENT - we don't know what may happen down the road, AND is based on our OWN ideas of salvation. We disagree on some matters of salvation. If you are wrong, your assurance is just delusional, correct? When IF Christ meant that a person must eat His flesh to be saved for eternal life? Have you received the Eucharist as HE implemented it at the Last Supper and practiced by Christians for 2000 years? The point of this is that your assurances are based on presumptions. Presumptions that you will remain faithful until the end, that you will persevere, AND presumptions that your interpretations of Scripture are entirely in line with God's intent.
This is no longer absolute assurance.
I am certain that we will all face a judgment based on our walk in faith. Interestingly, my Pastor preached on this point yesterday. That makes two weeks in a row that his sermon has been directly on point in this thread. Maybe he's lurking. :) Anyway, no one on my side believes that we enter heaven without love. God gives the elect love, which we use to love Him back. He loved us first.
So then we are not saved by faith alone, correct? Furthermore, if we are judged on our walk, what happens if our walk was insufficient, for example, as Jesus describes on several occasions in Matthew 25 with three parables? Are those who are judged unworthy entering heaven?
Regards
Yes, a man by himself is insufficient to be considered righteous. How can a man who abides in Christ do so if he is not of the elect? And, what does any of this have to do with being perfect in our actions while alive on earth? You've never heard that from me.
Again, the mother ALLOWS this daughter to be a secondary cause of how the cookies turn out. And I believe God does the same with us. He allows us to struggle through life, not fulfilling the Commandments perfectly, but struggling to abide in Him, ... He is in control, but He doesn't use that control to overtake our efforts.
I fully agree that God allows us to struggle, and that He allows many of the cookies we make to be misshapen. That's how we learn how to make cookies the right way, and this is a good thing in God's eyes. However, when it comes time to actually make the cookies, to turn the dough into cookies, the mother DOES overtake the daughter's efforts to help. The loving mother won't let the daughter anywhere near the hot oven. God keeps His elect out of the oven too! :)
However, "an offer they can't refuse"? You are presuming that a person TRUSTS God completely and totally from the get-go. Trust is learned.
No, the trust I am talking about is a grace from God. If you believe that this trust comes from ourselves, apart from God, then what exactly do we need from God to come to Him? No one can have belief without trust, therefore, it appears you are saying that our belief also comes from ourselves, apart from God.
But why is it necessary that we pray that the will of God be done, if God's will is ALWAYS done?
LOL! Pretty good, Joe. I think we are commanded to pray for God's will for similar reasons that we are to praise God in prayer. (Does God really need our praise?) It is for our benefit because it reminds us of who God is and what He has done for us, both for our salvation and in our day to day lives.
We will always battle the serpent - and he will try to get us to refuse the Lord.
On this there can be no doubt. For the elect, under my system, the serpent always loses in the end. It appears that under your system, the serpent sometimes wins, such as with those unfortunate missionaries you told me about.
FK: "All those who are saved are of the elect and all those of the elect will be saved."
A wonderful circular argument!
Wow! When you take it completely out of context like that, you're right. It sure sounds like it.
My statement was in direct response to your challenge: "You are equating "being saved" with being of the elect ...". You were implying that is wrong, and I was saying that I disagree and that it is right. The sinner's prayer CANNOT be ineffective for the elect. I notice that you never bothered to tell me which of the elect are not saved, and which of the saved are not of the elect. Surely, this should be easy for you, since I'm using circular reasoning.
FK: "We humans can't be absolutely certain about that for other people, but God provides that we may be sure about ourselves."
LOL!!! Which Protestant believes that that after saying the Sinner's Prayer, that they are not of the elect? The only one who believes it didn't work are those who judge other people after the fact when a person falls - "He was never saved to begin with" What device did God give that person to indicate that this person would falter?
The Bible. I hope that also gives you a good laugh. Ultimately, I don't judge the salvation of any particular person. I just answer hypotheticals based on scripture.
If you are wrong, your assurance is just delusional, correct? When IF Christ meant that a person must eat His flesh to be saved for eternal life? Have you received the Eucharist as HE implemented it at the Last Supper and practiced by Christians for 2000 years?
Yes, if I am wrong, then my assurance is most assuredly delusional. If Christ really meant, as you suggest, that a person has to partake of the Eucharist, with the Catholic meanings attached, in order to be saved, then I am toast. I am perfectly comfortable with all of this, because if I am wrong, then the Bible is wrong, and I am worshiping a false God anyway.
The point of this is that your assurances are based on presumptions. Presumptions that you will remain faithful until the end, that you will persevere, AND presumptions that your interpretations of Scripture are entirely in line with God's intent.
What you call presumptions, I call scripture. As for my interpretations, if God really did write mostly in secret code, to confound the elect, then my interpretations will be wrong. If, however, Christianity is a revealed faith, then the scripture is understandable to the elect. It appears that the scripture is almost completely useless to the average Catholic without a translation manual separately written by the Church.
FK: "I am certain that we will all face a judgment based on our walk in faith. Interestingly, my Pastor preached on this point yesterday. That makes two weeks in a row that his sermon has been directly on point in this thread. Maybe he's lurking. :) Anyway, no one on my side believes that we enter heaven without love. God gives the elect love, which we use to love Him back. He loved us first."
So then we are not saved by faith alone, correct? Furthermore, if we are judged on our walk, what happens if our walk was insufficient, for example, as Jesus describes on several occasions in Matthew 25 with three parables? Are those who are judged unworthy entering heaven?
To your first question, 'No', we are saved by grace through faith alone. I'm not sure what part of my paragraph you find contradictory. On my reference to judgment, I was only talking about rewards in Heaven, not salvation at all. As to the parables, the elect will be judged worthy and the non-elect will not. It is impossible for a member of the elect to have salvation, and then lose it for failing these parables.