"Lordship Salvation"

[Paidion]

While I agree with much in your first post. it seems to me "being saved" is confounded with sanctification. We are saved by trusting in Jesus and our works are evidence of this state of salvation.

I have just one question, Homer. Your answer may help me to undertand your quoted statement.

If we are saved by trusting in Jesus, then it seems you are saying that we have been saved as a completed fact rather than an ongoing process. If that is what you mean then please tell me what it is that we have been saved from.

[Homer]

Hi Paidion,
I could cite many scriptures relevant to my position but I am pressed for time at the moment. I hope this will help clarify for you what I believe:

John 3:36
New American Standard Bible (NASB)

36. He who believes (present, active) in the Son has (present indicative) eternal life; but he who does not (persist) obey (believeth not, KJV) the Son will not see (will never in the future see) life, but the wrath of God abides (keeps on remaining) on him.”

John says the person who is actively believing is in a state of eternal life. And the person who disbelieves/does not obey is under the wrath of God. So the one who believes is saved from the wrath of God.

Perhaps an (imperfect) analogy will help. The crabapple tree produces worthless fruit. Let us say I graft a golden delicious apple tree onto the crabapple rootstock. The tree is "born again" and produces good fruit because its nature has been changed. Although some of the fruit is poor because of worms and scab (a disease), it is still a golden delicious tree. It is, and remains "saved" and will not be cut down. The fruit it produces is because of what it is. The fruit does not make it a golden delicious tree, nor was it not a golden delicious tree when as a newly grafted tree it had yet to produce fruit. Nor would it not be a golden delicious in a bad year when there was a crop failure due to conditions in the environment that caused there to be no fruit. However, if the grafted part of the tree is broken off and a crabapple tree sprouts from the rootstock the tree might be cut down and thrown into the fire.

The purpose of the tree was to produce good fruit but it produces good fruit because it is its nature to do so.

[Paidion]

So the one who believes is saved from the wrath of God.

Therein lies my problem with this kind of thinking. It presupposes that Jesus died to save us from God. That idea certainly introduces a dichotomy into the Trinity!

The angel who announced to Joseph that Mary would bring forth a son, said, "You shall call his name 'Jesus" [saviour] for he will save his people from the wrath of God" (Matthew 1:21).
Hey wait! That's not it. It reads "...for he will save he people from their sins."

John 3:36 tells us that the wrath of God is the consequence for those who don't believe. But nowhere is it written that Jesus saves us from the wrath of God. It's all about being saved from SIN.

But as long as a person sins, he has not been saved from sin. So salvation is the process of being saved from sin. That process will come to an end at the return of Christ for those who have entered into it now.

"... the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. (I Corinthians 1:18 NKJV)
The verb translated as "those who are being saved" is a present passive participle. Thus "being saved" is continual.

[Homer]

The angel who announced to Joseph that Mary would bring forth a son, said, "You shall call his name 'Jesus" [saviour] for he will save his people from the wrath of God" (Matthew 1:21).
Hey wait! That's not it. It reads "...for he will save he people from their sins."

Have you ever considered that "being saved from their sins" is a metonym for being saved from God's wrath, just as Jesus was said to bear our sins although He went to the cross as a "lamb without blemish"? Or are you unaware of the frequent use of the metonym in scripture? After the metaphor, it is the most common figure of speach in the scriptures. A clear example is "Moses is read every sabbath day in the synagogue". Others are not so clear and require a little thought.

But as long as a person sins, he has not been saved from sin. So salvation is the process of being saved from sin. That process will come to an end at the return of Christ for those who have entered into it now.

So in your view Jesus has failed in His mission. He died on the cross to assist in a process that is never successful until He returns; we are never saved in this life for we all "stumble in many ways". The cross failed; we are saved by His work when He returns, and not until.

You appear to believe that possession of eternal life, which the scriptures clearly say we have now, does not equate to being saved.

Looking again at John's testimony about Jesus:

36. He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.”

Seeing that the one believing in Jesus has eternal life while the one who rejects Jesus remains under God's wrath, is it your position that the one believing was never under God's wrath? And by what process or mechanism does the one in possesion of eternal life acquire it? On what basis?

[jeremiah]

hello homer,

You appear to believe that possession of eternal life, which the scriptures clearly say we have now, does not equate to being saved.

yes they do say we have it now. but they also say we will have it at Christ's coming. we can't camp only on the verses that speak of us having eternal life in some sense now and ignore the equally clear statements from Jesus and Paul that speak of us receiving eternal life at the resurrection.

we are also said to be raised with Christ now. but we still know that the ultimate fulfillment of the resurrection has yet to take place. i believe it is a mistake to assume we have eternal life now in the hard sense that so many seem to believe we do.

even if it is true that being saved from our sins is metonymy as you say, you still have to balance this rigid view of possessing eternal life currently with what Paul said in his letter to the romans. that god will reward us on judgement day with eternal life, to them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honor and immortality.

So in your view Jesus has failed in His mission. He died on the cross to assist in a process that is never successful until He returns; we are never saved in this life for we all "stumble in many ways". The cross failed; we are saved by His work when He returns, and not until.

when a statement like this immediately follows one like this:

A clear example is "Moses is read every sabbath day in the synagogue". Others are not so clear and require a little thought.

your words appear extremely disingenuous.

in your view how can the holy spirit who dwells in us now be the earnest of the redemption God had promised? if we already posses eternal life, what possible need remains for an earnest?

grace and peace...

[Paidion]

You appear to believe that possession of eternal life, which the scriptures clearly say we have now, does not equate to being saved.

Looking again at John's testimony about Jesus:

36. He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.”

You have quoted a scripture which appears to negate your position. If he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him, then how does anyone have eternal life NOW unless he goes through life goes on obeying the Son without a slipup throughout the rest of his life? If the first clause is absolute, then so is the second!

It seems to me that the two scriptural statements are speaking in general terms and and not in absolute terms. The person who goes on believing in the Son (that is entrusting himself to the Son) has lasting life. It will last as long as he continues entrusting himself to the Son. Of course he will no longer have it if he takes his life back into his own hands as lives it as he wishes.

For emphasis the second clause affirms pretty much what I have just stated. If a person does not go on obeying the Son, that is, is he takes his life back and lives as he pleases, the wrath of God remains on him. To go on obeying the Son does not imply absolute perfection in doing so, but rather that the main focus in life is on obeying the Son rather than serving oneself.

There may also be the sense that even if we slip up in obeying the Son, the wrath of God is upon us in the sense that He will take steps to discipline us.

For whom the LORD loves he chastens, and scourges every son whom he receives." (Heb 12:6 NKJV)

[Homer]

Hello Jeremiah,

i believe it is a mistake to assume we have eternal life now in the hard sense that so many seem to believe we do.

Not sure what you are getting at there but I am definately not OSAS if that is your point.

you still have to balance this rigid view of possessing eternal life

I have no rigid view of eternal life. Paul states it in four ways: as a past event (Rom. 8:24), as a present abiding state (Eph. 2:5 - perfect tense), as a process (I Cor. 15:2), and as future result (Rom. 10:9). We are in a present abiding state of salvation. If we persevere, we will be permanently saved in the end.

your words appear extremely disingenuous.[/quote]

Could you explain your statement? That's quite a charge.

in your view how can the holy spirit who dwells in us now be the earnest of the redemption God had promised? if we already posses eternal life, what possible need remains for an earnest?

Because knowledge of being in a state of salvation is based in faith that He will do as He promised.

There are three basic views of faith and works:

1. We are saved by faith + works. This is the Catholic view, although they will deny it. It seems clear if you read their catechism. Some Christians make statements that, in effect, agree with the Catholics.

2. We are saved by faith; works are evidence of this state. This is the position of both Calvinists and Armineans.

3. We are saved by faith. Being saved is a transaction; works are irrelevant.

Which of the three is correct is the question.

[Paidion]

This does not exhaust the possiblities.

4. We are BEING saved from sin through faith.

Surely this one should be included. It is the position of many, including the Orthodox Church — and that represents a sizable portion of Christendom.

Check this out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjHGtCHy ... re=related

[jeremiah]

hello homer,

Could you explain your statement? That's quite a charge.

while "disingenuous" may be used in a very negative way, as if to invoke shame or something, that's not the only way the word is used, neither did i mean to charge you with anything. it simply was the most precise word i could think of to describe how your words "appeared".

at the end of your thoughts on metonymy you said some of its example require some thought. i took that to mean some require the reader to think beyond the surface. your next comment appears to be quite a surface level caricature of salvation being a process. having been edified by many of your posts, i know you are capable of a greater degree of argumentation. so i said, "your words appeared extremely disingenuous." (as in pretending to be unaware or unsophisticated) perhaps "extremely" was unnecessary

grace and peace...

[Homer]

Perhaps an analogy (imperfect) will clear up things a bit.

A man has a crabapple tree. Crabapple fruit is extremely sour and woody and is rarely eaten raw for this reason, but the man desires to have good apples to eat. So the man takes a scion of a golden delicious tree and grafts it to the crabapple. The scion takes and soon he has a vigorous golden delicious apple tree. The tree is "born again". The man was going to cut down the crabapple tree and throw it into the fire but now the tree is "saved". Though the tree produces no fruit at first he is patient with it. And as it grows it soon produces good fruit, more and more as the years go by. Although there are seasons when the crop is poor due to severe weather, he knows what kind of tree it is and will not cut it down. Rather, he takes care of it.

Now if under duress of a severe storm, the tree is broken off below the graft and reverts to being a crabapple, the tree is in danger of being cut down and cast into the fire.

The tree did not become a crabapple in the first place by producing crabapples, nor did it become a golden delicious tree by producing good fruit. The tree produced fruit in accord with its nature. And this is how it is with our fruit. It identifies what we are; in no way does it make us what we are. In our youth, in good seasons or bad, we are saved just the same because of what we are: one of Jesus' sheep. (Mixed metaphor, I know, but Paul made use of it. )

Though we become more fruitful, more sanctified, we never become more saved (in the sense of possessing eternal life) during this life.

Oops! Posted this little story twice! Thought my earlier post didn't go through.