Salvation

[akosabni]

---

^ yes, i know

are we to think that god has nothing to do with our action or our choices? so if we are save, it is entirely our own doing?

or is it a 50/50 partnership, god offers it and its up to us to take it. when i think about this, i feel like god is telling me ... 'hey, i want you choose me, but its okay if you don't' ... that for me is unconditional love, and i don't expect to be punished for this

come to think about it, maybe that's the reason why he allowed the devil in the garden of eden

[Reason2believe]

Akosabni sees a condition along with salvation but Mr.Ho_chia seems to disagree.

To me basing from what aphrodite posted i also see a condition. You have to believe to be saved,to me,thats conditional. Not only that, one also has a participation in ones salvation by choosing to believe or not,contrary to what Mr.ho_chia and aphrodite proposed,that it is all by the grace of god.


Salvation then is LIMITED to those who only believe, tho in general he died for all. Therefore,it is conditional.

okay so we have freewill,some chooses not to believe and some chooses to believe. I have a problem with these,why? because in the bible it is written that all men are depraved beings,by a theology's definition it means men has nothing good inside him,he is totally deprived of anything good. Romans puts it this way "No one seeks God" why? "For all men are sinners". My question now is,if we have no good inside of us how can we choose to follow God? in fact the bible already stAted that Nobody seeks god.

So theologists propose that God needs to open the eyes of these depraved creatures for them to see God's plan of slavation,now isnt this a vilation of Freewill? God intervening man's freewill. In fact in the book of peter it says there that We(christians only) are PREDESTINED to be saved,isnt that also a violation of man's freewill? The saying "I hate esau but i loved Jacob" also proposes the idea that God chose whom he saved and chose whom he wants to go to hell(doctrine of predestination--Calvinism),This is an obvious act of violation of men's freewill.

[NASYO]

"emancipate yourself from mental slavery, non but yourself can free your mind.."

mao lang na ako matampo.

[akosabni]

i agree with you nasyo

yes, reason2believe there is a conflict indeed, as of now, i believe that we have freewill, 'coz i'm experiencing it, but salvation i don't know, i guess i should die first before i know the truth ... but, why should i wait for my death, i'm i not save already, i'm i not alive now ... we might not be aware of it, that we're all save already, that's why god sees no problem with our free will

[Mr.Ho_chia]

^ yes, i know

are we to think that god has nothing to do with our action or our choices? so if we are save, it is entirely our own doing?

or is it a 50/50 partnership, god offers it and its up to us to take it. when i think about this, i feel like god is telling me ... 'hey, i want you choose me, but its okay if you don't' ... that for me is unconditional love, and i don't expect to be punished for this

come to think about it, maybe that's the reason why he allowed the devil in the garden of eden

Salvation is the work of GOD, His alone, HE alone died for us and paid our ransom for sin.
Our decision and our choice is our own, we made that decision to either follow and accept that very salvation or reject it, that part is our decision 100%.

I think otherwise, because any sin has to be paid, that is justice, for us to be free from that accountability GOD offered HIS life for us but we need to repent and accept that ransom HE paid for us maski kinsa, unsa ug asa kapa that is unconditional love, but if you reject the ransom GOD paid for you then you are not freed from that accountability and as you reject that ransom then you will have to pay for it, and the payment is death and eternal separation from GOD and if you are not under GOD's care then the devil have authority over you. and if you are separated with GOD forever, where will you be? you will be with the devil under him in the place prepared for him and we know where.

[akosabni]

^ sir, if i reject and do the paying for my sins, isn't it the same as what jesus did? why can't god accept this as my payment, why does he need his son to do the sacrifice?

wouldn't god appreciate if i say to him, 'thanks jesus, but i'd rather do my penance'

[NASYO]

OT

save para naa savings
crisis ra ba ron

[Reason2believe]

^ sir, if i reject and do the paying for my sins, isn't it the same as what jesus did? why can't god accept this as my payment, why does he need his son to do the sacrifice?

wouldn't god appreciate if i say to him, 'thanks jesus, but i'd rather do my penance'

God needs his son akosabni because according to their doctrine The Father's justice should be SATISFIED and the only way to meet that requirement is to shed BLOOD(imagine that) since you and i are sinners our blood has a stain therefore The Father can not accept it. He needs a PURE BLOOD class A blood in exchange for the forgiveness and salvation of mankind. How horrible, a blood-thirsty God, imagine that,what kind of a God is this?

akosabni,actually this concept of shedding blood in exchange or to effect something came from paganism. To appease these gods one needs to offer an animal and its blood.

[Mr.Ho_chia]

^ sir, if i reject and do the paying for my sins, isn't it the same as what jesus did? why can't god accept this as my payment, why does he need his son to do the sacrifice?

wouldn't god appreciate if i say to him, 'thanks jesus, but i'd rather do my penance'

There is a little confusion here somewhere, The ransom that GOD paid for has to be accepted by the person, meaning to say it's like a transaction that we will present as a receipt that indeed that debt had been paid for. that is why there is a need to accept and accepting goes with a real repentance, we can not claim of accepting that salvation without that repentance as a proof of our accepting.

Men in many times tried to do things on our way, we do penance, but would that be enough as payment for our sins? not so, Reason2Believe explicitly pointed out that for the remission of our sin there should be shedding of Blood (death), I absolutely agree, Because the GOD of the Bible is a HOLY and a JUST GOD. Being a JUST GOD an appropriate payment should be made equal to the offense made, the ultimate sacrifice was and is GOD himself so that the enemy(referring to the devil) cannot argue insufficient payment to manipulate his(devil) authority over us.

another point I want to share in relation to what reason2believe said. the shedding of Blood is not of a pagan origin, the first recorded shedding of blood was in the garden of eden, If you can remember when adam and eve eat of the fruit and hid themselves from GOD, remeber that GOD made clothes for them from animal skin? that was shedding of blood. although it was not explicitly discussed during the first few chapters in Genesis. But another shedding of Blood and a burnt offering was recorded during the time of Abel, how GOD was so pleased by what Abel offered to HIM.

If we go by Creation timeline,shedding of blood didn't came from paganism at all. Thanks

[akosabni]

yes, Mr.Ho_chai, there is a little confusion and i hope you will agree now that salvation your talking is conditional, one has to accept and repent before one is save. i see nothing wrong with this, since the condition is quite reasonable for the promise made ... wouldn't you agree with this?

as for appropriate payment, i don't know, you keep on saying that we still have do more ... it seems that god does not only need the principal back but also the interest

shedding of blood ... god must be furious when jesus used wine only at the last supper ... that's why he died a horrible death ... btaw, sir, as what reason2believe posted ... do we really have blood-thirsty god? ... i hope not