gkmcnees@comcast.net wrote:
> You say, "I know I am saved because Christ died for me."
>
> I say, "I know I am saved because God told me that Christ died for
> me."
>
> In your case, you say it is not by works, but in my case you say
> it is by works. This does not make any sense to me.
This is not "why I know" but "why am I saved". Are
you saved because Christ died for you or because you
"know" that Christ died for you?
> I believe that in your sentence is hidden faith.
It's not hidden, it's a statement of faith. But my
sentence doesn't say that my faith is the cause of my
salvation.
>> I don't care if you believe
>> in salvation by works, I'm just bothered that you don't
>> admit it.
>
> I deny that I believe in salvation by works.
> But I would affirm that you believe that man is
> saved by works. This is the NECESSARY consequence
> of the fact that you believe that salvation can
> be lost.
When did I ever say that salvation can be lost? Heck,
_you're_ the one who says we have free will, not me.
>> You haven't managed to come up with an argument that explains
>> your internally contradictory sentences like:
>>
>> 1. God controls everything, but He doesn't control sin.
>
> Controlling sin and causing sin are not the same.
But you've made it quite clear that you think God causes
sin. If there's some difference here, you should be able
to explain it.
>> 2. After we show God we're worthy, He grants us salvation.
>
> Never said this. I said just the opposite in other words.
> Saving faith is empty of worthiness.
To have saving faith is a quality. Those who have it,
God saves _on the basis of them having it_ (in your system.)
It's something to boast about.
Bart
((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post. )))
adamst@no.spam wrote:
>>What about doctrines that contradict scriptures?
>
> Doctrines that contradict scriptures are false doctrines. The problem
> is that pretty much every group claims to follow the Scriptures. No
> matter WHAT they teach.
That's not true. Most groups are quite specific and open about
how and why they don't follow Scripture. The Charismatics have
ongoing revelations which are authoritative. The divers liberal
(even slightly liberal) denominations and sub-denominations
have reasons why Paul wasn't an Apostle, or why something he
wrote doesn't really apply to them or some such. Others have
"historical criticism" so that they don't have to follow
