PREDESTINATION; LIVE BY GRACE; NOT BY WORKS (WEEK 8)

St. Louis Center for Christian Study ^ | Greg Johnson

[Dr. Eckleburg]

If salvation is all of grace -- if God is God and he has chosen us for salvation even though we did nothing to deserve it -- then we ought to live by the grace we have received. Of course, some of you will look at that and say to yourselves, “Yeah, I really need to do better at living by grace. I’ve really been a failure there. I hope God will forgive me again.” If that’s you, you still don’t get it. Go back and re-read the last seventeen pages and (if you’re a believer) remember that you’re one of the elect!

Our hearts so quickly try to relate to God on a works-basis! It’s our pride, really. I’m convinced that that’s the problem with free-will Arminianism. People naturally process it like this: God requires one work from me, to believe. Once I believe, I’ve done my work and deserve heaven. Of course, in more hard-line Arminian circles, it goes a step further. Unless I’m holy enough, I’ll still go to hell, and maybe I’ve even committed the unpardonable sin and will be damned even if I’m sinlessly perfect from here on out. Legalism. Legalism. Legalism. Such a religion is barely recognizable as Christianity.

But Calvinists can fall into legalism just as easily. You see, I understand predestination. I’m a superior Christian. I’ve got all my theological “t”s crossed and my Reformed “i”s dotted. I sure am close to God. Pride is the Presbyterian’s favorite form of legalism, so watch out! But if God really is for us, and if we had nothing to do with that decision -- if even our faith was given to us by the Father -- then there’s no room for boasting. God’s sovereign choice of us leaves us free from pride. It leaves us aware of our brokenness and humble before God, but all the while confident that his eternal purpose will stand, that we will glory in God forever as objects of his saving mercy. As God’s eternal blessing really begins to sink from our heads into our hearts, we see a new freedom that we never would have imagined when we first encountered the raw, holy, sovereign power of God. Among the newfound freedoms:

1. Freedom from shame, guilt & Insecurity

Read Romans 8:28-39. Nothing can separate you from God’s love -- nothing in the past, nothing in the future. No one can stand against you. No one can accuse you. Even bad things (“all things”) are working right now to your benefit, to make you more like Jesus. God didn’t choose you because of your faith, and Jesus is not ashamed of you—even at your worst (Hebrews 2:11). He’s proud to have you in the family, proud to call you brother or sister -- even knowing what he knows. He’s displaying the glory of his mercy, remember. God’s law is no longer your enemy, but a friend. You can have confidence before God.

2. Freedom from destructive Perfectionism

If God really is for you, then you can quit trying to look good. If you’re trying to be good enough for God, he’s not buying it -- he didn’t choose you because of your great faithfulness. If you’re trying to be good enough for other people, don’t bother. God wants to display his mercy -- that means we have to be broken. God’s glory is not displayed by trying to look like you have it all together. Faith is not a work, and even if it were it still wouldn’t earn you any brownie points. Let God be God. If you won’t show your weakness, then others won’t see God’s power displayed in it.

3. Freedom from legalistic man-made rules

Some of the biggest practical opponents to living by grace are those legalistic little rules that we live by. We love to judge other with them -- they make us look good, and help us feel better about ourselves. (Pride again.) Dress this way, not that way. Wear this much makeup, not that much. Work. Don’t work. Home school is God’s way. Public school is God’s way. Christian school is God’s way. Drink. Don’t drink. Smoke. Don’t smoke. Dance. Don’t dance. This is God’s worship style. If we’re all about God’s glory, there’s no room for any of this. Do whatever you do for God’s glory without comparisons. God has freed you from judging others. You don’t understand God’ sovereign grace until you realize you are a beggar who’s been blessed without cause. You had nothing to do with it -- you’re just a receiver.

4. Freedom from Penance

Even repentance can be a sham if we’re trying to approach God with some vestige of self-reliance. Biblical repentance is a freedom we can enjoy daily, while penance is its counterfeit.

Repentance/Penance

Comes with empty hands/Tries to bargain with God

Acknowledges real sin as against God/Makes excuses for sin

Grieves over displeasing God/Grieves over getting caught

Asks for help to do better/Promises to do better

Is willing to publicly confess, if needed/Is too proud to publicly confess

Relies on God's promises to us/Relies on own promises to God

Turns outward, away from self, to God/Turns inward on self

Produces freedom, joy, and confidence/Produces guilty feelings, anxiety

God has obligated himself to receive any repentant sinner who comes to him. Without this realization, true repentance is impossible. Until we realize that God is for us, we cannot truly be for God.

[hosepipe]

[ If what I said is false, show how it is false. ]

I did...

[1000 silverlings]

Blue duncan has your t-shirt, every post you make to some people is ad hominem.

[adiaireton8]

How have you shown the following statement to be false?

"If you claim that logic does not apply to statements about God, then you have just contradicted yourself, for you have just used logic to make a statement about God."

-A8

[hosepipe]

[ How have you shown the following statement to be false?]

We just went over that.. (Dyslexic question)

[HarleyD]

A8: Where did He state it?

Would you like me to quote every single verse for every single doctrine? I would suggest that you simple read through the Westminster Confession of Faith. You should have it handy being a former PCA minister. I don't agree with quite everything they say but probably 95%.

How do you know that anyone who "recognizes that they're a sinner resting on His promises" is elected for glory?

And how do you know Saint Thomas More is in heaven and you can pray to him on lawyer affairs ? Based upon the Church telling you this is a fact? Or that Saint Joseph will help you sell your home? Based upon the testimonies of a few people who bury statues of Joseph's next to their realty signs and the house was sold in a week? With all due respect, it is rather laughable that you tell me that I can't know that I'm saved based upon the clear teaching of scripture when the Church has 5,000 saints that they say are in heaven because they say it's so. How do they know? Because Bozo the clown prayed to the Saints of Clowns that he would be funny and so he is? Because they went to their grave with, "Hail Mary full of grace." on their lips? Please.

I'm the one who is basing my faith upon text of scripture. You are the one basing your faith (although you can't define it) upon "infallible" Popes who have literally sold people souls out of purgatory only to have the Church turn around and say, "Oops, our mistake." The Catholic Church has created doctrine such as purgatory based on one little line in a dubious document and the Immaculate Conception on no scriptural evidences at all. And my doctrine can't be defended?

I'll rest my faith upon what is written in God's word which is clear on many issues. Not on some goofy 15th century "Saint" who was bored one day and decided to think up some new humanistic ideas. The early church fathers didn't seem to have a problem with placing their faith in Christ nor have a number of other people since then.

Peter called himself and others the "elect". Paul states the same thing in several places. They knew they were saved and knew who the "elect" were. Christ referred to us as the elect. In fact the term "elect" or "chosen" is referred to with believers far more than the word, "Christians". Of course you tell me Peter was just mixed up in his writing when he called them the elect and chosen of God. And this coming from your first Pope. Tsk, tsk.

The scriptures are clear if one wishes to read them. But what can one expect from the Church who doesn't accept the blood atonement of Christ. No thank you. I'll stay on this side of the fence.

[hosepipe]

[ every post you make to some people is ad hominem. ]

Superlatives can be silly..

[HarleyD]

Where is that in the Catholic Catechism? Or are you just making things up out of thin air?

I never make anything up. I simply would refer you to the doctrine of the Holy Spirit on www.newadvent.com. The Catholic Church does not believe the Holy Spirit indwells a person and the blood atonement of Christ. Surely you checked all of this out before you switch?

[blue-duncan]

At the rate we are going I am going to run out of t-shirts and credit cards for our new alumni caucus.

[adiaireton8]

Saying that a person is "chasing his tail" does not show that his statement is false.

-A8

[adiaireton8]

Where in the article does it deny that the Holy Spirit indwells a person? And where does the Catholic Church deny the "blood atonement of Christ"?

-A8

[adiaireton8]

HarleyD: If left to my own devices I will fall back to my evil ways but God has told me He won’t allow that to happen.

A8: In a dream, a vision, the Bible? Where has He told you this?

HarleyD: I trust Him because He has stated it.

A8: Where did He state it?

HarleyD: Would you like me to quote every single verse for every single doctrine?

No. There is only one claim in question here, and that is how one can now know with certainty that one is elect for glory. I don't need verses for "every single doctrine". If you know of even one verse that gives one infallible knowledge *now* that one is elect for glory, I would like to see it.

-A8

[Alamo-Girl]

Perhaps this will help explain why hosepipe's assertion of circular reasoning was a successful debunking of the assertion:

Petitio Principii

I. Petitio Principii: (circular reasoning, circular argument, begging the question) in general, the fallacy of assuming as a premiss a statement which has the same meaning as the conclusion.

[many examples at the source]

III. The reason petitio principii is considered to be a fallacy is not that the inference is invalid (because any statement is indeed equivalent to itself), but that the argument can be deceptive. A statement cannot prove itself. A premiss must have a different source of reason, ground or evidence for its truth from that of the conclusion.

[adiaireton8]

Hello Alamo-Girl,

I am quite familiar with the fallacy of petitio principii. Petitio principii only applies to arguments, not statements. So it does not refute my statement.

-A8

[Alamo-Girl]

Beg your pardon. Your original statement at 414 was an argument to refute my post at 413 - and it was circular reasoning and therefore, a logical fallacy (petitio principii.) You said:

If you claim that logic does not apply to statements about God, then you have just contradicted yourself, for you have just used logic to make a statement about God.

I am using language to make statements about God, not formal logic - so your premise is wrong per se.

And by the way, I expressly said it was a matter of believing God - not logic - that we accept what He has said, that His ways are above our ways and that His thoughts are above our thoughts.

It is not logic whereby we believe that Jesus Christ, The Living Word of God who was in the beginning and was with God and is God, was enfleshed and dwelled among us, died on a cross for our sins and was raised on the third day and sits at the right hand of God the Father. It is not logic whereby we believe all the miracles testified in Scripture. It is not logic whereby we embrace all of His promises. And it is not logic whereby we are indwelled by - and follow - the Holy Spirit.

Those who believe God exists through reason alone are usually called Deists because a perfect God makes a perfect creation - He doesn't meddle with it, He doesn't "do" miracles after the fact of creation - He doesn't need to because He is logically perfect. That is the "god" which can be recognized by logic alone.

[hosepipe]

[ At the rate we are going I am going to run out of t-shirts and credit cards for our new alumni caucus. ]

Whatsit cost for a caucus speedo and ceremonial toupe'?...
You know ... to look good at the pool..

[hosepipe]

[ Saying that a person is "chasing his tail" does not show that his statement is false. ]

LoL... yep dyslexic...

[adiaireton8]

I am using language to make statements about God, not formal logic - so your premise is wrong per se.

Actually, every use of language requires logic. For example, the principles of logic are all rooted in the most fundamental principle of logic, namely, the principle of non-contradiction. In order to use language, one must assume and make use of the principle of non-contradiction. So if you want to avoid using logic, you have to avoid language. Aristotle showed this very clearly. Aristotle pointed out that the person who wants to deny logic is reduced to wagging his finger (since if a such a person were to try to use speech to deny logic, that person would already be using logic in his very act of denying it).

-A8

[adiaireton8]

yep dyslexic...

That's an ad hominem, which is a fallacy.

-A8

[Forest Keeper]

We receive the Holy Spirit through the sacrament of water baptism. And then we are baptized into the fullness of the Spirit through the sacrament of confirmation.

I have been told that in Catholicism, once a person is baptized he is saved ONLY until the commission of the first mortal sin (upon reaching the age of reason). At that exact moment, and barring some special dispensation by God, the person is no longer saved and is forever destined to hell IF nothing changes and he dies. I have been told that during this time the Holy Spirit departs the body. The good news of course is that the person can confess his sin to a priest and the priest can reinstate the person to saved status. At this time the Holy Spirit re-enters the body. This process is then repeated throughout life. Does this square with your understanding?

You have water baptism in the name of the Father, and the Son and the Spirit, and thus you have the initial measure of the Spirit.

I'm not sure if you mean from my POV or yours, so just to be clear, Reformers do not believe that baptism has any salvific effects. We believe the Spirit indwells upon true belief, before or after baptism.

[hosepipe]

[ That's an ad hominem, which is a fallacy. ]

WoW.. DejaVu...