The Great Paradox
 

The great paradox: Salvation is freely given by the grace of God, it is unmerited and underserved, yet so many people attempt to earn it by their "works". Whereas, damnation is worked for and deserved (The wages of sin is death), yet many people accept by faith that they are hopelessly lost and can never be saved.

Just thinkin' aloud.

Re: The Great Paradox
 

So many people try to save themsevles through "works" whether standards, religious rituals, church attendance, correct doctrine, etc. And fail to realize that savlation is by grace through faith in Jesus Christ.

Nothing we can do saves us, all we can do is accept by faith the work of Christ (elementary, I know).

Yet damantion is completely deserved. It must be "worked" for, because the wages of sin is death. And as Paul so perfectly pointed out if what we receive is a result of our work, it is debt, not grace.

Thus in effect, we cannot earn salvation, it is wholly of God. But we earn damnation, it is wholly of ourselves.

(BTW-this completely destroys the theory that "God SENDS people to hell." Man sends himself to hell, in fact, he has to earn it-by sinning).

Re: The Great Paradox
 

Reward is for works, justification is by grace

Romans 6:23, "If you go to hell you pay your own way; but you go to heaven on a pass" John R. Rice

Re: The Great Paradox
 

You don't have to work to be damned, we as fallen man are born damned, that is why grace is so amazing...The OP church would be 1000000x more powerful if they truly understood the concept of Grace and the fact that we are all morally bankrupt...

Re: The Great Paradox
 

Course, it's not "their" works, they accurately will say, it's God's work through them. But at judgment, it goes back to being judged righteous by what "they" did. Darn consistency.

Re: The Great Paradox
 

Few of them believe fully in Original Sin, or any shade or spectrum of total depravity. This may undermine their view of both sin and grace.

Re: The Great Paradox
 

In my forty years of knowing the Lord I have yet to find a professing Christian that is without sin! Now I have met many who think they are, but I and Jesus know better. People can pretend and even try to convince themselves and others that they are perfect in their own efforts but the fact of the matter is this. If you in your total person are anything in any area of your life less than what God in His totality is then my friend! You are not sinless and don't "according to some teachings", deserve to go to heaven.
God sees sin not only as the multiple acts of something, He sees sin as the presents of imperfection in reflection to who He is.
True humility is not having a patch sown on the back of your pants and hole in your shoe. It is realizing that you are less than the expectations of God and must be dependent upon His mercy and strenght. This kind of humility comes by revelation through the Holy Ghost. But some people never get it and go through life in a spirit of condemnation, allowing the devil to beat them every day. Jesus help our understanding!

Re: The Great Paradox
 

It's probably just their definition of sin is different than yours.

Re: The Great Paradox
 

Your real paradox is this: we deserve eternal punishment because we fail to accomplish the impossible.

Re: The Great Paradox
 

I agree 100%.

More then a few people here have declared it possible for a Christian to live sin-free and in fact say it is a requirement to enter heaven. ANY sin present at the time of death will result in eternal punishment.

The problem is that so many look at at everything in a binary way having to decide if every possible thing a person can do is sin or not sin. Example: Gluttony is a SIN, so at what point does eating become gluttony? There HAS to be the ONE tiny morsel, mouthful, or even crumb that defines the line between the two! This way of defining sin misses the mark by a mile. Rather I look at sinlessness as perfection -and sinfulness as anything but, and since NONE of us are perfect (save for Jesus Christ and Mary Poppins) we are ALL sinful, aka, not perfect.

Re: The Great Paradox
 

I think you guys are making too much of my post, which is a generalization, the point being that no matter what we do, God is solely the source of our salvation, not our works. If we end up in heaven it will not be because we "earned" it. On the flip side if we end up in hell, in a real sense it is because of our "works" namely sins we comitted.

I do believe that man is a sinner, depraved, lost, etc.

I don't fully accept the doctrines of Adamic sin and total depravity, because if they are followed to their most consistent logical conclusion, the the infant who dies, despite having no sin of his own, is damned to hell because he is responsible for Adam's sin, and was totally depraved.

Re: The Great Paradox
 

Is an infant dying being sent to eternal torment any more depraved than a native in North America who died a few days after the upper room experience and never heard Peter quote Acts 2:38?

Re: The Great Paradox
 

God's ways are not our ways.

Re: The Great Paradox
 

Completely different RW, but for the sake of context, I don't believe Acts 2:38 is the magical formula, I believe strongly in justification by faith.

So heres the difference in the infant and the Native American. The infant has no knowledge of sin and has not committed sin. The Bible calls infants "innocent" and speaks of the innocence of young children likened unto the Kingdom of Heaven.

Whereas the Native American may not have had someone preach the gospel to him, but He still has comiited sin, and is therefore guilty. The Native American has the chance to draw close to God through both the creation and his own conscience, which witnesses to right and wrong. Furthermore, lets say this NA was the Chief of his tribe, and he executed the justice. Everytime He makes a judgment, he testifies that He know the differrence between right and wrong. Along with his tribesman who accept the judgment.

However, if the NA or any heathen would seek after God through the things revealed to him by creation and conscience, it is quite likely He would be brought by God to saving faith. The Bible gives such examples, beginning with Abraham who was a pagan living in a world without a special revelation of God, as well as Cornelius, and the men of Macedonia who God sent Paul to, not to mention thousands of testimonies in contemporary times of pagans who sought after the Creator, but didn't know much about Him, yet were someone brought to faith in Christ.

I think Romans 1,2,&3 says it much better than me.

Re: The Great Paradox
 

So if your lost, it will be God's fault, is that what your saying?
Is God unjust, is that what your saying?

Whatever point your making, your not taking into consideration that God provides a way of salvation through Jesus Christ.

Re: The Great Paradox
 

That may be, but why is there a need for a "way of salvation"? What do I need to be saved from? From God's wrath, correct? He has set things up so that I "deserve" death, because I am a sinner, and it is impossible not to be a sinner. (First off. The "way of salvation" comes later. Remember, we are talking about why that is needed.)

Re: The Great Paradox
 

Further, God didn't have to provide a way of salvation, correct? If He had just let things go the way they were, with everyone deserving eternal punishment, we would, in fact, all end up in eternal punishment, and nobody could complain. Because all deserved it. Every last one of us. Correct?

Re: The Great Paradox
 

Excellent post!! Timmy, this one sentence speaks volumes!

Re: The Great Paradox
 

That is why God provided the sacrifice, because it is impossible for us to be perfect, "...as God is perfect..."

Re: The Great Paradox
 

Thank you Randy!
It's great to hear from someone with some godly sense. Iam happy that I'm cloaked in His righteousness and not my own.It took me about twenty five years to learn that lesson.After learning it and realizing that Jesus loved me not because of anything I did but because He wanted to.I then began to put the pieces together. When the revelation of that truth fully hit me it caused me love Him even more. And now I know for a certainty that salvation is in His hands and not ours. I also realized if no one from Moses to Jesus could keep the law and by it no one was made perfect I kind of figured I was no different. When I trying to keep all the 2,362 commandments of both new and old testment I found the verse in Romans 3;20, and quickly realized I was going about it the wrong way and then the understanding of why I always had so many problems was brought to light. Thank the Lord Jesus that we still have His written word or I could only imagine where people would lead us!
Hebrews Chapter 10:12 But this Man, after He had offered, (ONE SACRIFICE) for (SINS) "plurality, means all sin" (FOREVER) sat down on the right hand of of God. " Sounds like a finished work for all, when are we going to start teling them the good news so they can come to The Lord instead of thinking they can't be forgiven or that God hates them??

Re: The Great Paradox
 

Not sure what the source is of this last line. I don't think anyone on this thread believes that sinners can't be forgiven or that God hates them. ???

Re: The Great Paradox
 

Good observation.

Re: The Great Paradox
 

You shouldn't side-step an entire biblical theology because you emotionally aren't sure it means for children.

Apparently, many Christians believe that there is a magical split-second in time before which a child, if they die, will go to heaven, and after which, if they die will spend eternity suffering in hell. They call this the "age of accountability."

One writer said this:
I think this is an opportunity to consider the foreknowledge/election idea we see in Scripture. God knowing who will be obedient, elects those "whom he foreknew."

Also, Luke leaves us with something to be curious about:
Either way, rejecting the idea of Original Sin because of an emotional compulsion toward little children is hardly a logical way to approach the topic, IMO.

Re: The Great Paradox
 

I don't outright reject original sin or total depravity. What I am pointing out is that I haven't found an explanation of either doctrine that I feel like addresses the instance of an infant dying WHILE being consistent with their stated doctrine. If anything at least the catholics are consistent, in that they believe a baby has to be baptized to cleanse it from sin. It is error, but at least its consistency.


Furthermore, I don't reject doctrine based on "emotional complusion". If that were the case I'd be a universalist. I'm not saying that babies go to hell, and I'm not making excuses for the heathen who hasn't "heard" the gospel, so I'm a bit confused at the "emotional" shot-what are you getting at?

BTW-is the "writer" you quoted John MacArthur? I've heard him speak something very similar to that. (Which I am in agreement with, but I don't think it is consistent with total depravity)