At what point in our salvation is the blood of Christ applied?

[mailmandan]

Justification is not the entirety of salvation.

There are 3 tenses to salvation that often get confused by works-salvationists.

1. We have been saved from the PENALTY of sin (justification)
2. We are being saved from the POWER of sin (progressive or ongoing sanctification)
3. We will be saved from the PRESENCE of sin (glorification)

 

[mailmandan]

No one is pushing this idea. It's that same boogie man living in your head.

Again, no one is pushing salvation through merit.

Those who promote salvation by works will often deny there is merit involved in their so-called gospel plan. I once had someone tell me - "It is works of obedience and not works of the law or works of merit that help save us." That is sugar-coated double talk. If works of obedience help save us, then there is merit in those works if they are needed to help Christ save us. No way around it. That salvation by works results in merit is no boogie man. (Romans 4:4; 11:6; Ephesians 2:9)

 

[mailmandan]

In Christ.

Believers are "in Christ" and the true Chruch is the body of Christ (Colossians 1:18,24) that is made up of all born again believers, but I'm asking you where do you attend church? (church building whether denominational or non-denominational) Or do you not attend church anywhere?

 

[mailmandan]

I trust that we all seek to meet together in Christ, but I imagine the question referred to where you regularly meet with fellow Christians to worship.

Exactly. Thank you.

I know the answer the poster wanted, intending to use it to apply the guilt by association fallacy. I gave a correct and accurate answer. that the poster could not weaponise.

DavidLamb was correct. I was asking where you regularly meet with fellow Christians to worship. What do you mean by guilt by association and weaponize your answer? Good grief. It was a simple question. Why the paranoia and hostility?

 

[PaulThomson]

Exactly. Thank you.

DavidLamb was correct. I was asking where you regularly meet with fellow Christians to worship. What do you mean by guilt by association and weaponize your answer? Good grief. It was a simple question. Why the paranoia and hostility?

Why did you want to know where the poster fellowships on Sunday?

 

[PaulThomson]

Believers are "in Christ" and the true Chruch is the body of Christ (Colossians 1:18,24) that is made up of all born again believers, but I'm asking you where do you attend church? (church building whether denominational or non-denominational) Or do you not attend church anywhere?

Why do you ask that question? I attend church everywhere I go. We do not stop being the church and in the church after the benediction.

 

[mailmandan]

Why did you want to know where the poster fellowships on Sunday?

So that I can see what the core beliefs are of where they fellowship. I'm not asking for the specific name and address of their church. A statement on core beliefs would be just fine. I would be more than happy to share the core beliefs of where I fellowship on Sunday.

 

[mailmandan]

Why do you ask that question? I attend church everywhere I go. We do not stop being the church and in the church after the benediction.

You sound paranoid. It's a simple question. Do you not fellowship regularly on Sunday at a particular church?

 

[PaulThomson]

So that I can see what the core beliefs are of where they fellowship. I'm not asking for the specific name and address of their church. A statement on core beliefs would be just fine. I would be more than happy to share the core beliefs of where I fellowship on Sunday.

So, you want to judge the poster based on the professed core beliefs of the institution they meet at on Sunday? In my experience, many of the people in a particular fellowship disagree with one or more tenets of the official tenets of that fellowship. It would be unwise to judge them based on where they meet with others around the Bible. That's not how God judges us.

 

[mailmandan]

So, you want to judge the poster based on the professed core beliefs of the institution they meet at on Sunday? In my experience, many of the people in a particular fellowship disagree with one or more tenets of the official tenets of that fellowship. It would be unwise to judge them based on where they meet with others around the Bible. That's not how God judges us.

One who attends a particular church on Sunday may or may not agree with everything their church teaches, but they would generally agree with their core beliefs that separate Christian churches from false religions and cults. I did not say I was going to rush to judgment if that person does not agree with everything their church teaches, but if their church deviates from essential Christian doctrine, then it gives me a pretty good idea of where they may be going wrong in their theology.

 

[PaulThomson]

You sound paranoid. It's a simple question. Do you not fellowship regularly on Sunday at a particular church?

I go to whatever fellowship is nearest to where I live, as long as I can stomach what they do and say. If it jars too much and the oversight is controlling and does not allow different perspectives to be expressed, I see no need to remain there, and try to find somewhere more relational and interactive. I have attended a wide range of denominations: Open Brethren, Nazarene, Baptist, Reformed Orthodox, Assemblies of God, New Life, House Meetings. Presently, we regularly attend another denomination here in India.

 

[mailmandan]

I go to whatever fellowship is nearest to where I live, as long as I can stomach what they do and say. If it jars too much and the oversight is controlling and does not allow different perspectives to be expressed, I see no need to remain there, and try to find somewhere more relational and interactive. I have attended a wide range of denominations: Open Brethren, Nazarene, Baptist, Reformed Orthodox, Assemblies of God, New Life, House Meetings. Presently, we regularly attend another denomination here in India.

That is quite a variety.

 

[PaulThomson]

Faith that saves does result in producing works, yet we are still saved by grace through faith, not works (Ephesians 2:8,9) and not by grace through faith "infused" or "conjoined" with works and then those works become meritorious towards receiving salvation as Roman Catholics (and other works-salvationists) teach.

So, if someone claims to be saved by grace through faith without any need for works, and is habitually practising sin without any remorse, and is extremely self-centred and unforgiving, will their faith save them.

 

[mailmandan]

So, if someone claims to be saved by grace through faith without any need for works, and is habitually practising sin without any remorse, and is extremely self-centred and unforgiving, will their faith save them.

No. That is not descriptive of genuine faith or a child of God.

 

[Cameron143]

So, if someone claims to be saved by grace through faith without any need for works, and is habitually practising sin without any remorse, and is extremely self-centred and unforgiving, will their faith save them.

This is James' point...if a man says...

This person does not have faith.

 

[mailmandan]

This is James' point...if a man says...

This person does not have faith.

Yes, says/claims (key word) to have faith but has no works (James 2:14) to evidence his claim. The absence of evidence can be construed as evidence of absence.

 

[PaulThomson]

I noticed you did not highlight Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, and went straight to "unto obedience" to imply we are saved by works.

i Peter 1:1 - 2 Πέτρος (Peter, ) ἀπόστολος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ (an apostle of Jesus Christ, ) ἐκλεκτοῖς παρεπιδήμοις (to elect strangers, dative m. pl.) διασπορᾶς (of/from a diaspora, genitive f. sg.) Πόντου Γαλατίας Καππαδοκίας Ἀσίας καὶ Βιθυνίας (of Pontus, Galatia, Kappadokia, Asia, and Bithynia

κατὰ πρόγνωσιν θεοῦ πατρός (according to Father God's foreknowledge) ἐν ἁγιασμῷ πνεύματος (in/by sanctification of the Spirit) εἰς ὑπακοὴν (into/for obedience, eis + accusative) καὶ (eis) ῥαντισμὸν αἵματος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ (and into/for a sprinkling of the blood of Jesus) χάρις ὑμῖν (grace to you) καὶ εἰρήνη πληθυνθείη (and peace be multiplied).

The word elect is not in the Greek text of verse 2. Some assume the kata at the beginning of verse 2 is referring to elect strangers being "elect strangers out of a diaspora according to God's foreknowledge".
Some think the kata refers to what follows. "Grace to you and peace be multiplied according to God's foreknowledge... "

Since assuming the first helps your case best, we will do that.

We read that this foreknowledge is by/in the spirit's sanctification/setting apart for/into obedience, and by/in the spirit's sanctification/setting apart for/into a sprinkling of Jesus' blood.

Foreknowledge is simply knowing or having a relationship beforehand. Peter is simply saying,
" To elect strangers of a diaspora whom God has already come to know by means of the spirit's setting you apart into obedience and by means of the spirit setting you apart into sprinkling with Jesus' blood. "

When does the Holy Spirit set us apart into obedience? When we obey and put our trust in Jesus Christ as our Lord and Saviour.
When does the Holy Spirit set us apart into a sprinkling of Jesus' blood? When we put our trust in Jesus Christ as our Lord and Saviour.
When does God start to know us relationally? When we trun to Him with faith in Jesus Christ.

Gal 4:8 Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods.
Gal 4:9 But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?

Peter is simply saying that he is addressing elect strangers of a diaspora of Jews in the places listed, and that God already has a relationship with these elect, he has had a relatiuonship with them before now, a relationship which began when they were set apart into obedience and set apart into a sprinkling with Jesus' blood which cleansed them of their sins.

 

[PaulThomson]

PaulThomson said:
So, if someone claims to be saved by grace through faith without any need for works, and is habitually practising sin without any remorse, and is extremely self-centred and unforgiving, will their faith save them.

No. That is not descriptive of genuine faith or a child of God.

What about someone who was doing what is descriptive of genuine faith or a child of God for some time, but then apostasies into a lifestyle not descriptive of genuine faith or a child of God. Are they still saved by grace through faith without any need for works?

 

[mailmandan]

PaulThomson said:
So, if someone claims to be saved by grace through faith without any need for works, and is habitually practising sin without any remorse, and is extremely self-centred and unforgiving, will their faith save them.

What about someone who was doing what is descriptive of genuine faith or a child of God for some time, but then apostasies into a lifestyle not descriptive of genuine faith or a child of God. Are they still saved by grace through faith without any need for works?

Judas Iscariot looked like the real deal to the remaining 11 disciples, yet only Jesus knew his heart and said, "he is a devil!" (John 6:70-71) Those who go through a period of moral self-reformation (which is not a substitute for regeneration) then later walk away demonstrate they were never truly saved to begin with. 1 John 2:19 - They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us.

 

[Inquisitor]

You mean does not support your eisegesis.

I noticed you did not highlight Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, and went straight to "unto obedience" to imply we are saved by works. God's elect are those whom God has predestined to salvation. Not through fatalistic determination but through His foreknowledge. In Romans 8:30, we read - Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified. *ALL of them. *Notice how Paul uses the past tense for a future event to stress its certainty.

Hello Mailmandan.

Can you explain how you read the verse below which you did cite above.

Please specifically explain the relationship between, predestined and foreknowledge.

Romans 8:29
For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that
He would be the firstborn among many brethren.