The Cross of Christ Alone Can Save

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

It's either interesting or sad that we used to converse and share, in the past (FCF, NFCF), on our views of various scriptures. Now we seem to come here to defend the faith which was once delivered unto the saints. Of course, that is probably just my opinion.

We'll see days more sorry than this, sister. Unfortunately, watch.

I think apostolic stances should be protected here. After all, we disallow attacks against Oneness.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by mfblume

And such reasoning from scripture is simply avoided. Anyone with any sense of understanding covenantal works realizes that every covenant has a part for each party to accomplish, otherwise the covenant is not in effect. To say all one needs is faith and repentance are TWO STEPS whether the "one step" folks agree or not. And baptism and Spirit infilling with tongues are no more works for salvation than those two are.

God's part is to save and our part is to obey. If we claim God saves, then it is ridiculously moot for anyone to claim we believe in salvation by works.

The only way we could ever espouse salvation by works is to DENY that the cross is required in any form for us to be saved by baptism and Spirit infilling. Ironically, though. KWSS and others claim there is no real difference between the times before and after the cross. This implies that the cross is not necessary to save! And yet you and I are accused of salvation by works without the cross! Go figure.

Very well said! There is just not anything else that could be said on this subject. We are walking in circles, articulating and arguing the same points over and over and over. I'm done!

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Very well said! There is just not anything else that could be said on this subject. We are walking in circles, articulating and arguing the same points over and over and over. I'm done!

Me, too. All that can be done is that our thoughts on how works are useless without dependence on the cross to save is to shove them further beneath a strawman argument.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by mfblume

We'll see days more sorry than this, sister. Unfortunately, watch.

I think apostolic stances should be protected here. After all, we disallow attacks against Oneness.

Perhaps, if you feel led to do that. I can see why others haven't stuck around though. I used to think they should, but now I see why they don't. But, again, I think it would and should be a personal decision and one that I would respect either way.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Me, too. All that can be done is that our thoughts on how works are useless without dependence on the cross to save will only be shoved further beneath a strawman argument.

Agree!

[TheLegalist]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

It's either interesting or sad that we used to converse and share, in the past (FCF, NFCF), on our views of various scriptures. Now we seem to come here to defend the faith which was once delivered unto the saints. Of course, that is probably just my opinion.

sadly it is nothing but defending the faith anymore on these boards that now seem to be overun with sympathists to false teaching. Want to argue about minute things like preference in standards applied.... ok whatever. BASIC TEACHING ON what the basics are thrown out the window on what the covenant is let alone coming into covenant and baptism and God filling you with his Spirit. I see way to much reformed/protestant mentality on these boards and many don't even realize how much they are effected by such teachings. They may not hold to the hard theology but in part they have brought in bits and pieces that still smells the same with it's end results.

[notofworks]

Originally Posted by mfblume

No it does not. lol. I already said I can only speak from experience, and that was my experience, so I cannot speak for other reasons.

No, it means repentance is required to get saved. I had not truly repented.

When misconstrued like you did with it, sure.

You shock me. After all the statements I made that state baptism and Spirit infilling with tongues are no more a work than repentance, and you still say this! Wow. Brother, I thought you were more honest about this than that.

You really shock me with your words today. I was hestitant to agree. but now agree with Leg. that you simply do not want to see another perspective. I am disappointed.

Again, baptism and Spirit infilling with tongues are no more a work than repentance is because repentance is reliance upon the work of the cross alone for forgiveness, and baptism likewise is useless without faith that the cross saves, and Spirit infilling shows God giving utterance for tongues taking away anything in our minds that might think we do not need the cross and God's power to effect anything. but I already said that, and to twist my words like you have here shows me you were not interested in what I actually believe after clearly stating it.

Mike you can throw the verbal daggers and accusations all you like, but at the end of your tirade the fact still remains that you believe one has to eliminate sin from their life in order to get saved. I can sternly claim that because of the things you've said here and I'm just fitting the puzzle pieces together in a way you don't like. But they're your words, not mine.

You believe the infilling of the Holy Spirit as evidenced with tongues is a necessary part of salvation. You also said that sin must be eliminated from one's life in order to get those tongues.

Sorry Mike, but I'm just connecting the dots of your statements. I realize it's very uncomfortable for you, but it is what it is. And I'll strongly reject, every single time, the words of someone who believes we can improve ourselves and in so doing, improve our position with God and His grace.

I found it very scary when you first said it, and I find the table-turning to me, just as troubling.

Many in the "grace camp" accuse people in "your camp" of "salvation by works." Your position here only exacerbates that perception.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by TheLegalist

does it matter? Point is all pointed to Christ.

Which is an excellent point. I'm glad to see you coming around to the idea that Jesus saves. If salvation came about through our own effort than it would no longer be a gift. Romans 5:19

[TheLegalist]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Which is an excellent point. I'm glad to see you coming around to the idea that Jesus saves. If salvation came about through our own effort than it would no longer be a gift. Romans 5:19

you need help as you lack comprehension

[TheLegalist]

Originally Posted by notofworks

Mike you can throw the verbal daggers and accusations all you like, but at the end of your tirade the fact still remains that you believe one has to eliminate sin from their life in order to get saved. I can sternly claim that because of the things you've said here and I'm just fitting the puzzle pieces together in a way you don't like. But they're your words, not mine.

You believe the infilling of the Holy Spirit as evidenced with tongues is a necessary part of salvation. You also said that sin must be eliminated from one's life in order to get those tongues.
Sorry Mike, but I'm just connecting the dots of your statements. I realize it's very uncomfortable for you, but it is what it is. And I'll strongly reject, every single time, the words of someone who believes we can improve ourselves and in so doing, improve our position with God and His grace.

I found it very scary when you first said it, and I find the table-turning to me, just as troubling.

Many in the "grace camp" accuse people in "your camp" of "salvation by works." Your position here only exacerbates that perception.

oh so TURNING FROM SIN/REPENTING is not necessary? ROFL!