Are any pedos saved?
ACCORDING TO EXCLUSIVISTS,ARE ANY PEDOS AND OTHER
ERRORISTS SAVED?
Those of you who have read this blog for very long know that neither Charles, the Administrator, nor I is an "exclusivist." Theoretically, we don't exclude from possible salvation any person who differs with us on theological issues so long as that person professes to believe in Jesus Christ as Saviour.
We are not of the "Outside the Camp" nor "Lordship Salvation" type of thinkers, if we understand these groups correctly. Some professors, indeed, may not be born again, but we have no criteria other than what is taught in passages such as John 3:18, Acts 16:30, 31 -- if one indeed believes in Christ as Saviour, then by profession, at least, that person qualifies to be called a "Christian."
Only the Lord knows if such an outward profession is really expressive of one's inner experience.
One of our critical readers, "rev.", says:
"I'm not reluctant at all to believe a person is saved if he/she believes upon the Lord Jesus Christ."
However, rev. does not allow that it is theoretically possible for one who is a Mormon, such as Mitt Romney, to be saved. It is not within the range of possibilty that "a person is saved if he/she believes upon the Lord Jesus Christ" and yet is a Mormon, according to rev. In such a case, according to rev., this would be believing on the "Mormon Jesus."
This type of "logic," if applied to all cases in the professing Christian denominational world, gives rise to considering how it applies to those besides Mormons who represent "Jesus" in a way which would not meet with rev.'s theological approval.
rev. has stated that he rejects certain Pedobaptist doctrine and practice, if we understand him correctly. If this is his view, then according to his "logic," pedos such as Presbyterians have a "Jesus" who has taught them wrong on infant baptism and the "regeneration" of "covenant children."
If rev. is right in thinking that the true Jesus did not teach these things, then the Presbyterians are representing the true Jesus of teaching falsehoods. And if Jesus taught falsehoods, then that makes Him less than sinless, and he in effect is in reality another "Jesus" in whom the Presbyterians believe. Therefore, how can rev. theoretically include the Presbyterians in the possible salvation "tent"? Are they not shut out, to join the Mormons, according to rev.?
What about the Methodist "Jesus"? If rev. thinks the Methodists are wrong on Arminian theology, including the possibilty of losing salvation, what does rev. think about the "Jesus" whom the Methodists represent as the author of their doctrine? How could Methodists be saved, according to rev.'s "logic"?
And what about the Lutherans? They even have a stronger emphasis upon the sacramentalism of infant baptism, which rev. probably rejects. The Lutherans say that their "Jesus" taught their doctrine, so is their "Jesus," too, another false "Jesus," according to rev.? Is there a Lutheran saved if he
believes in such a false "Jesus"?
I assume rev. could span the whole range of professing Christian groups and find things in all of them which they claim were taught by their "Jesus," yet rev. would reject many of these things as false doctrine. How can rev. get any one of any such group in the "saved" category?
Just how far wrong can a group be in its claims that "Jesus" taught their doctrine, yet rev. still gives their professors a "pass" in regard to salvation?
Does rev. exclude "Arminians" from possible salvation, too? If Jesus did not teach "Arminianism," isn't he a false "Jesus," according to rev.? Can the "Jesus" of the Arminians and the "Jesus" of the 5-point Reformed advocates be the same "Jesus"? What about the "Jesus" of the 4-pointers, 3-pointers, 2-pointers? Are there any saved people who are less than 5-Point Reformed Calvinists?
Are there any saved people among the "non-Lordship Salvation" folks? Does the real Jesus abide in the "Lordship Salvation" camp only?
posted by Bob L. Ross @ 10:29 AM
9 Comments:
Amen! Here, here! Excellent!
You will surely anger a lot of people with this kind of talk! You are really going to be "hitting a sore spot" when you address this issue!
I have heard many Calvinistic Baptist all through my life talk about how only their version of the gospel is what saves!
Keep it coming!
God bless!
Stephen Garrett
Agreed.
I think that one of the big negatives that stands out for Calvinists, certainly the bloggers, is that it isn't love or forbearance that they show to people of other movements. It's just the opposite. In almost each thread or post that they issue there is a veiled slam taking place with the end result always the same "look at us, we've got it right". If they knew how foolish they looked I think they would tone this kind of thing down. One can diffuse their logic but it doesn't seem to matter. They're like kids. In fact, I think most of the blogging contributors are just adolescents.
Ascol wants people to think that 5-pointers are in accendency as far as numbers go but as soon as people find out how narrow and
self-inflated they are, with precepts that aren't even scriptural, they step away from them. You don't win converts by spitting at them.
As far as them being the most Christ-like in their daily lives I would say: don't make me laugh.
They aren't even in the same ball park as the Amish.
And, I hope McCain does pick Romney as a running mate just to drive the 5-pointers nuts.
If you're going to quote me, Bob, don't misquote me.
I NEVER said Mormons were beyond salvation, Bob, or that Mitt Romney couldn't be saved. I stated: "If Mitt Romney believed on Jesus Christ as Savior, it would not be the same Jesus Christ as the 'Mormon Jesus.' If he were truly converted, he would not remain a Mormon."
In other words, there is no salvation in the "Mormon Jesus" and there is no salvation in the Mormon "Church." If an individual, a Mormon, believes upon the Lord Jesus Christ alone for salvation (e.g., Jesus the Nazarene, the God-Man who died, was buried and rose the third day, the One revealed in Scripture), then that individual will not remain within the LDS.
BUT REV. . . .
Rev. said...
If he were truly converted, he would not remain a Mormon.
But rev., what about those Pedos I mentioned, who claim their "Jesus" teaches them to baptize babies on the pretext that those babies are "covenant children" and inherit "regeneration"?
If they truly believe in "Jesus," can they believe such doctrine as the Pedos claim "Jesus" teaches and remain in Pedo churches? Or is your dictum only the case with Mormons?
REMEMBER, REV. . . .
If you reject Pedo doctrine which Pedos claim was taught by their "Jesus," then you are in effect saying that the Pedo "Jesus" is teaching false doctrine, therefore can't be the sinless Jesus of the Bible.
Are you, therefore, going to say these Pedos may believe in such a less than sinless "Jesus," and be saved?
Bob:
Is the Mormon "Jesus" to be equated with THE Christ - Jesus of Nazareth, the God-Man, who was born of the virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, was buried, and rose again on the third day - upon whom Presbyterians, Methodists, Lutherans and other paedobaptists rest their entire hope of salvation? No. There is a vast difference between error and heresy/anti-orthodoxy.
Bob - Will Mormons, believing in the Mormon "Jesus" and remaining in the Mormon faith, enter heaven?
REV. AGAIN
rev. said:
Bob - Will Mormons, believing in the Mormon "Jesus" and remaining in the Mormon faith, enter heaven?
What if the Mormon believed in the less than sinless "Jesus" (according to rev.) joined the Pedos -- would he enter Heaven?
DOES REV. HAVE A
DOUBLE STANDARD
rev. refers to a "Christ" upon whom Presbyterians, Methodists, Lutherans and other paedobaptists rest their entire hope of salvation."
But all of these groups have a belief in a "Christ" whom they say teaches doctrines which you say are at least "errors."
That means -- in accord with your view -- that their view of "Christ" is not perfect in regard to what they believe are his teachings, therefore he's not sinless, therefore can't be Deity, therefore a false Christ -- Right? They may call him Christ," but if they attribute teachings to him which are in fact "error," aren't they presenting a false "Christ"?
How, therefore, is the less-than-sinless "Christ" of the Pedos any better to trust than the Mormon "Jesus"?
Do you reject Arminianism? If so, can the Methodist view of "Christ" -- whom they say taught Arminianism -- be worthy of one's trust? Can one be saved and remain in the Arminian Methodist church?
Why do you seem to "pick on" the "heresy" of the Mormons so strongly, yet you rather mildly give the other groups a pass on what you prefer to simply call "error"? How many Pedo "errors" would it take for a believer to have to leave a Pedo church, or else you would regard him as being in a lost condition?
And what about a Roman Catholic? Is the Roman Catholic "Christ" OK to trust, and a believer in the RC "Jesus" can remain a Roman Catholic and you would accept him as a Christian?
It just seems to me that you have a double standard.
MY PERSONAL VIEW
I don't attempt to speak for Charles, this blog's Adminstrator, but only for myself.
In regard to one's salvation, regardless of his religious affiliation, my understanding is that if a person believes on Jesus Christ as Savior, he is saved. John 3:14-18; Acts 16:30, 31.
Now, when someone wants to judge, pry into, or evaluate another person's profession of faith as to whether it is in fact legitimate or truthful, I say "only the Lord knows."
Peter made that "great confession" that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God (Matthew 16:16, 17), yet shortly thereafter Peter even rebuked the Lord for saying He would die and rise again (Matthew 16:21, 22). Evidently, Peter did not believe or understand the prophecies relating to Christ, so he had no faith in what we today believe as to the Atonement and Resurrection.
Also, three times Peter later denied even knowing Christ, cursing and swearing (Matthew 26:69-75). At that point, some might possibly think Peter's earlier confession was not authentic, yet Peter's faith failed not
(Luke 22:31, 32), though he was "sifted" by Satan.
We never know how "far off" one may be from the Lord, like Peter's case (Luke 22:54), yet still have a legitimate faith in his heart, despite Satan's "sifting." It is simply impossible for us to judge others' hearts as to the matter of faith in Christ.
Post a Comment
<< Home