The Cross of Christ Alone Can Save - Page 3

Fiyahstarter · #21 03-30-2010, 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notofworks

Wow dang, I never thought of that.

Well, sure you have.

So why not answer? I'm just trying to understand what you believe, my friend.

Sam · #22 03-30-2010, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notofworks

Ok, actually I have thought of it. Oldest argument in the history of exegesis. No, the devil does NOT believe and confess that "Jesus is Lord."

to quote something Michael said about a month ago regarding 1 Corinthians 12:3:

In the Aramaic Peshitta version of scripture the verse says No one can say Jesus is MARYAH except by the Holy Spirit.

MARYAH is Aramaic for "Master YAH".

That would seem to be pointing to the deity of Jesus Christ.

Jeffrey · #23 03-30-2010, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Paul is saying the same thing that Peter said, so, I will have to bring that up. You are not going to find anything in the Epistles that doesn't keep spiraling back to the Book of Acts in some way.

Where do you come up with that supposition?

Jeffrey · #24 03-30-2010, 07:00 PM

"believing" is not on the head level, it's on the heart level.
The Satan didn't believe God at the heart level, that He is on the throne and was a Provider, the proof was his actions of Pride, in attempt to lift himself up toward God. The devil is reprobate and believes his own lie.

His believing is a head knowledge -- not a heart level response and realization that Jesus is LORD, the conqueror of all:

The demons are not atheists; they believe there is a God, and tremble at the thought of Him. They know all about Him and His power. They knew Christ when He was here. We hear the legion of demons in the man of Gadara say, "What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? Art thou come hither to torment us before the time?" (Matt. 8:29). They not only recognized and acknowledged Christ, but they actually prayed to Him and had their prayers answered. "So the devils besought Him, saying, If thou cast us out, suffer us to go away into the herd of swine. And he said unto them, Go" (Matt. 8:31, 32). Yet for all this, demons are not saved, nor can they be.

Pressing-On · #25 03-30-2010, 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

Where do you come up with that supposition?

Well, look at Romans 10:8-12 for instance. Paul is preaching what Peter preached. The tenets of the Gospel have already been laid out in Acts. The Epistles just simply reinforce it all. That's what I've come across in studying the NT. Look at Galatians 1 as another example - Paul is teaching the same thing that Peter covered in Acts 2 - death, burial, resurrection. You aren't going to be able to bypass that, no matter how hard you try.

There is more involved than just saying the cross alone saves us.

Jeffrey · #26 03-30-2010, 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Well, look at Romans 10:8-12 for instance. Paul is preaching what Peter preached. The tenets of the Gospel have already been laid out in Acts. The Epistles just simply reinforce it all. That's what I've come across in studying the NT. Look at Galatians 1 as another example - Paul is teaching the same thing that Peter covered in Acts 2 - death, burial, resurrection. You aren't going to be able to bypass that, no matter how hard you try.

There is more involved than just saying the cross alone saves us.

Interesting. It is accepted that Acts was written well after Romans.

No doubt that will consistently refer to the Gospel with synonymous terms, no one will argue that. But to say Acts is the primary focus and standards that all writers must reconcile with is simply not true.

Luke's purpose for writing is not Paul's purpose for writing. Luke's emphasis will not be Paul's. For example, Luke perspective of the Spirit, is to show that all are included in the Promise (Gentiles as well) and to tell the story of how wildly the Church began. He reflects on the Spirit as an empowerment for mission. Paul often refers to the Spirit more in terms of sanctification, living an overcoming life, and of course has a didactic concerning order with the charismata. John refers to the Spirit in terms of its function and role in salvation. All are quite unique and beautiful as they stand on their own.

pelathais · #27 03-30-2010, 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

I believe this to be false. Obviously Christs death on the cross was the BASIS for our salvation. But Paul never thought anyone would try to segment his teachings like we see today.

How does this doctrine that the cross only saves play out? I suppose that all one must do is believe Christ died on the cross for us.

Paul himself added somethings to this.

8: But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;
9: That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
10: For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
11: For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
12: For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.
13: For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. Romans 10:8-12

Was Paul a heretic? He said we must CONFESS the Lord Jesus in order to be saved!

He also said we must CALL ON HIS NAME in order to be saved!

LOL. Nice once Michael.

Verse 10: For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation...

... does NOT identify TWO DIFFERENT things, but is a common parallelism. No one is suggesting that a true believer in Jesus Christ would "just believe in his/her heart" and then never say of do anything else with their lives.

We are saved because Jesus Christ saved us - John 1:29.

We could not and we simply cannot do anything to save ourselves (Ephesians 2:12-13 and Acts 2:21-40). We must call out to Him for salvation (as you have said) and then trust in His salvation, the cross of Calvary.

Pressing-On · #28 03-30-2010, 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

Interesting. It is accepted that Acts was written well after Romans.

No doubt that will consistently refer to the Gospel with synonymous terms, no one will argue that. But to say Acts is the primary focus and standards that all writers must reconcile with is simply not true.

Luke's purpose for writing is not Paul's purpose for writing. Luke's emphasis will not be Paul's. For example, Luke perspective of the Spirit, is to show that all are included in the Promise (Gentiles as well) and to tell the story of how wildly the Church began. He reflects on the Spirit as an empowerment for mission. Paul often refers to the Spirit more in terms of sanctification, living an overcoming life, and of course has a didactic concerning order with the charismata. John refers to the Spirit in terms of its function and role in salvation. All are quite unique and beautiful as they stand on their own.

They are all preaching the same message and do not stand on their own. It doesn't matter when any of it was written. It matters when it happened and it matters that they are all on the same page with their message. They are. The canon of the Bible was chosen for it's intertwining truths and message. Nothing stands on it's own.

You are right about what they preached. That is why I don't buy the "We only need the HG for empowerment", but it's not salvific." John does indeed refer to the Spirit in function AND it's role in salvation. We need the HG for both. It is the earnest of our inheritance.

Galatians speaks of receiving the Spirit by faith or by the law? And that we cannot be made perfect by the flesh, but by the Spirit. That allows me to know that it is not some "measure of the spirit" that some say they receive at repentance. The Bible doesn't ever bear it out that way. It does not say they received the HG any other way than how the Apostles identified their reception of the HG - speaking in tongues. But that issue has been discussed ad nauseam.

I believe, wholeheartedly, in Acts 2:38. I have never studied the Epistles where it did not take me back to Acts.

pelathais · #29 03-30-2010, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Paul is saying the same thing that Peter said, so, I will have to bring that up. You are not going to find anything in the Epistles that doesn't keep spiraling back to the Book of Acts in some way.

Jude 1:6 and Jude 1:14?

rgcraig · #30 03-30-2010, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pelathais

LOL. Nice once Michael.

Verse 10: For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation...

... does NOT identify TWO DIFFERENT things, but is a common parallelism. No one is suggesting that a true believer in Jesus Christ would "just believe in his/her heart" and then never say of do anything else with their lives.

We are saved because Jesus Christ saved us - John 1:29.

We could not and we simply cannot do anything to save ourselves (Ephesians 2:12-13 and Acts 2:21-40). We must call out to Him for salvation (as you have said) and then trust in His salvation, the cross of Calvary.

Why do some have problems accepting this?