Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: 'Believe and Receive' - the Christian Salvation?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Zenith Darksea's Avatar Ορθοδοξία ή θάνατος!
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    4,659

    Default 'Believe and Receive' - the Christian Salvation?

    Recently in a couple of threads (especially the 'Orthodox Christianity' thread) we touched upon the interesting subject of salvation within Christianity. Since it's such a fascinating and broad subject, I thought that it deserved a discussion thread of its own. There are, very broadly speaking, four models of salvation within Christianity - there is the Orthodox model, the Roman Catholic model (not a million miles away from Orthodoxy, but different nonetheless), the Calvinistic Protestant model and the Arminian Protestant model. This opening post will set forth the Orthodox view of Christian salvation.

    As the title suggests, I'd like to particularly deal with the distinctly Protestant concept of 'believe and receive'. Basically, if you've ever heard anyone ask you, "Have you been saved?" you can tell that they follow this 'believe and receive' doctrine. It's a peculiarly Western, hyper-legalistic concept - you sign a contract with God on the day that you become a Christian, and then you are saved, no matter what should transpire afterwards. It often goes hand in hand with the Calvinistic theme of predesination - you have been chosen before time either to be saved or not to be saved.

    However, this is a novelty of the late Middle Ages, the unwitting resurrection of an early, minor heresy, and development into Protestant terms. Protestants often sum this up with the term sola fide, sola gratia ('only by faith, only by grace'). The irony of course is that Orthodox also believe in salvation only by faith and only by grace, yet their traditional concept is much different.

    Salvation is nothing more than the development of a loving relationship with God.

    I shall give the basic outline. Through his own free choice, Adam chose to disobey God, and caused the fall of man. Through his disobedience death was created in the world. However, it would be through another man that death would be destroyed. Jesus Christ, the person who is at once fully God and fully man, was crucified for our sakes. He went down to Hades (the Jewish Sheol, the place where the dead souls go to rest), tore down the gates and trampled down death by His own death.

    So what now? A Christian believes in Christ, but then what? Is that it? No, not quite. But we believe in salvation by faith and grace alone, surely? Yes. God offers grace to everybody on Earth, however, unlike Calvin's God, God does not force a person to be a Christian or not to be. Neither the Devil nor God can force a Christian to do something, the Devil because he does not have the power, and God because He wishes us to worship him out of our own volition. Afterall, what sort of love is it that is not given freely?

    "Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and will dine with him, and he with Me." [Revelation 3:20]

    God therefore offers us grace - it is only the grace that saves us. However, we as humans must make the free choice to accept that grace. What then? The Christian is baptised, for:

    ...don't you know that all of us who were baptised into Christ Jesus were baptised into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life. [Romans 6:3-4]

    We are renewed, born again, indeed, through baptism. So then, is that it? No. Why should it be? We still have free will. If I were married, and someone asked me if I were still going to be married to the same woman in ten years, and I said yes, why ought I to be confident of that 'yes'? Because I'd signed a marital contract? No - because I believe that I shall continue to love my wife. It is no different with God - the only reason that I ought to have for believing that I shall continue in God's grace is that I shall continue to accept it. Moreover, we should not just cling to what has gone before, but we should strive to love God more and more every day, to seek His grace every moment of our lives. Sin will lead us away from God, and therefore we should seek to counter sin. That is why it is written:

    Anyone who listens to the word but does not do what it says is like a man who looks at his face in a mirror and, after looking at himself, goes away and immediately forgets what he looks like. But the man who looks intently into the perfect law that gives freedom, and continues to do this, not forgetting what he has heard, but doing it—he will be blessed in what he does. [James 1:23-25]

    It is also why we hear the famous line 'faith without good works is dead', also from James. This does not mean that faith + good works = salvation. No. Just as sin reduces our love for God, so good works help to maintain our love of God. They do not in themselves earn us spiritual points, but rather serve to strengthen our faith. That is why, furthermore, it is written:

    Not that I have already attained, or am already perfected: but I press on that I may lay hold of that for which Christ Jesus has also laid hold of me. Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forward to those things which are ahead, I press toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. [Philippians 3:12-14]

    It's true that I haven't gone overboard in Scripture here. Anyone who wants further quotations from Scripture, or for those who who have been enlightened as to the value of Sacred Tradition as a whole, from the Church Fathers, can ask me for them. However, I've tried to basically set out the Orthodox belief in salvation. I've left out a few points here and there - I haven't touched on theosis, for example. Other points haven't been developed as much as they might have been. But the key thing to remember is:

    Salvation is nothing more than the development of a loving relationship with God.

  2. #2
    High King Fingal's Avatar Foederatus
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Wiesbaden, provincial capital of Hessen, Germany
    Posts
    40

    Default Re: 'Believe and Receive' - the Christian Salvation?

    there is nothing to discuss- I agree completly, I am a protestant christian.

  3. #3

    Default Re: 'Believe and Receive' - the Christian Salvation?

    I got a little bit of time to post on this subject, but probably sticking to my guns this time in not following this one "too far." This is a "hot topic" in almost all Christian forums, and could end up being one here too considering there are a few Orthodox, catholics, and protestants, etc. I only wanted to say this - it seems like you and the rest of Orthodoxy place great importance on a future salvation, as well as a present one (ongoing), and that you also stress corporate salvation rather than personal salvation which can lead to a person being puffed up and having spiritual arrogance (I know it happens). And it's in contrast to protestants you say who stress a past salvation only (belief and security in it), and a personal salvation more than corporate.

    I myself - I see all 3: a past point of salvation (the point of my "realization"/acceptance of my Savior/Messiah by His redemptive work, acknowledging Him as YHWH in the flesh, YHWH as my God, etc.); a present ongoing salvation (one in which I am not putting works into my salvation, but as God works in me and through me, works are the natural "byproduct" just as fruit is to a tree that bears it); and a future salvation (what most protestants refer to - although they only speak in present terms, which is a "rescue" from the ultimate penalty of sin through a "second" death/separation from God upon Judgment).

    I believe there are lots of archetypes in the OT though - which should often help us theologically in many areas, but unfortunately a lot of people only speak about the NT and its writings. For instance, when we all use terms - we use them differently, and often have different things in mind. You mentioned "predestination," which is tied to "election" ("personal election" more specifically) - but "election" can be in reference to "personal" or "corporate." It's not a Calvinistic thing - election is a God thing, one which is presented in the Tanakh and carried forward in the NT. Whether it's the "choosing" of a single person (by God) and his "calling-out", such as Abraham - or a "choosing" of a nation and peoples (corporately) in the form of Israel (through Abraham's "seed"). And I know why you created this thread - so I'll just let you and him argue it out for the most part, but I will say that I notice "limiters" in your initial statement:
    However, this is a novelty of the late Middle Ages, the unwitting resurrection of an early, minor heresy, and development into Protestant terms.
    Where you attempt to equate Protestants and their beliefs with heresy off the bat. I see this in protestant circles too - one person begins: "this was an early heresy" and thus limits the discussion from any fruitful progression. It's always odd to see, especially considering the fact that it is almost never mentioned who these early heretics were or where exactly it is recorded. People generally just supplement broad claims and statements.

    At any rate...I believe in a salvation that has been kept from beginning to end, the same as you - by grace through faith. Even as it says:
    "Behold, as for the proud one, His soul is not right within him; But the righteous will live by his faith. [Habakkuk 2:4]
    Two important words in Hebrew there:
    righteous - צדּיק (tsaddiq "sad-deek") - I always laugh when I read it because I get to thinking about the Total War series and it's usage for one of the diplomats. Anyways - this word means "just"/"right(eous)"/"lawful", etc. And as we know - our own righteousness is like rags before God, so we know that it is Christ' righteousness imputed to us after all.
    faith - אמוּנה (emunah "em-oo-naw") - which is "faith(ful) [one]"/"firmness"/"fidelity"/"steadfastness"/"steadiness". I often like pointing out substitutionary words for understanding to people - it helps give a good background I believe in understanding languages and nuances, etc. And not that you need it (I don't even know your linguistic background), but I especially love stressing "trust" through complete confidence in the Greek word "pisteuo." I just wanted to point out that in the Hebrew though - "faith" was equated to "steadfastness" (at least in this passage ). It reminds me somewhat of this passage:
    But let him ask in faith, with no doubting, for he who doubts is like a wave of the sea driven and tossed by the wind. For let not that man suppose that he will receive anything from the Lord; he is a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways. [James 1:6-8]
    Or rather double-"spirited" (as the Greek also allows), which I believe more correctly aligns with Judaic teaching as well - or at least the deeper understandings thereof. I only mention this because it seems understandable for us knowing the English language to talk about a person not being able to "make up their mind" - but I believe the underlined understanding is stressing something unnatural...or rather - "worldly." A double-spirited person is one attempting to live by (or be inhabited by) two different and opposing spirits - that of the world and that of Christ (of course this is where it differs from Judaic teaching). It can easily be seen by the English translated words of "faith" (which means "trust") and "doubt" (not trusting) - although most believe Jesus spoke about faith in measure (especially in regards to the mustard seed), I'd say the scriptures are pretty clear about "doubt" (not believing/trusting). Ok - back to the Hebrew, and tieing it in. Just like this example - I'd say that the "steadfastness" is (trying to figure out how to word this)...more like an observation than a promise (within site of these passages). IOW - when the scriptures say "the righteous/just shall/will live by his faith" it is not saying that it is the person's own "belief" by which they will live by...but rather what the steadfastness is upon - the same as which they are accredited to righteousness. And there you see I believe that apart from the "steadfastness" (in trusting God) - there is no "righteousness", because our "doubt" is truly the opposite.

    **edit**

    I do disagree with:
    Salvation is nothing more than the development of a loving relationship with God.
    For as it can be said that "God is love" (1 John 4:16) - we cannot say that God is "nothing more" than simply "love", less we turn Him into simply some force that is felt and expressed, and nothing more. So while it may be an inclusive definition...definitely not exclusive.

    later, YBIM,
    Gersh
    Last edited by GershomPatmos; May 19, 2007 at 11:44 PM.

  4. #4
    Zenith Darksea's Avatar Ορθοδοξία ή θάνατος!
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    4,659

    Default Re: 'Believe and Receive' - the Christian Salvation?

    Quote Originally Posted by GershomPatmos
    we cannot say that God is "nothing more" than simply "love"
    And indeed I did not say that. What I said was this:

    Quote Originally Posted by Zenith Darksea
    Salvation is nothing more than the development of a loving relationship with God.
    See the difference? I was referring to salvation.

  5. #5

    Default Re: 'Believe and Receive' - the Christian Salvation?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zenith Darksea View Post
    And indeed I did not say that. What I said was this:

    See the difference? I was referring to salvation.
    I know what you said, and what it was all in reference to. I simply gave an example of an inclusive rather than exclusive definition - which I believe should have been your reference to salvation. You gave it an exclusive definition...and I was simply refuting it, and saying that it was merely inclusive - one of the facets of salvation, not the strict definition of it. I think you just misread my post was all...it's cool.

    later,
    Gersh

  6. #6
    Zenith Darksea's Avatar Ορθοδοξία ή θάνατος!
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    4,659

    Default Re: 'Believe and Receive' - the Christian Salvation?

    But you didn't refute what I said about salvation, you refuted what you said about God. Perhaps you'd care to elaborate on the salvation aspect of the question?

  7. #7

    Default Re: 'Believe and Receive' - the Christian Salvation?

    so Christ also, having been once offered to bear the sins of many, shall appear a second time, apart from sin, to them that wait for him, unto salvation. [Hebrews 9:28]
    Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to do service for the sake of them that shall inherit salvation? [Hebrews 1:14]
    Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to his great mercy begat us again unto a living hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, unto an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you, who by the power of God are guarded through faith unto a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time. [1 Peter 1:3-5]
    And I heard a great voice in heaven, saying, Now is come the salvation, and the power, and the kingdom of our God, and the authority of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, who accuseth them before our God day and night. [Revelation 12:10]
    Anyways - those are references mostly to a "future" salvation. As I mentioned in my post - I see the scriptures speaking about salvation in 3 different ways: past (having been "sealed" upon believing - Ephesians 1:13), present/ongoing (as your quote stresses), and a future one - as I just provided more verses on that. Your quote only addresses a present/ongoing salvation defined by: "nothing more than the development of a loving relationship with God." And therefore I said it was inclusive, but not exclusive - it does not address either of the other two points (past or future)...though I understand why it wouldn't address past (considering Orthodox believe it is a "protestant" thing), and I wonder if Orthodox believe in a "sealing" of the Holy Spirit at all in the believer. (cut some stuff out because realized this isn't orthodox thread)

    later - YBIM,
    Gersh

  8. #8
    Zenith Darksea's Avatar Ορθοδοξία ή θάνατος!
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    4,659

    Default Re: 'Believe and Receive' - the Christian Salvation?

    Well, I think that the word 'development' indicates that it wasn't as exclusive and expression as you might think. It naturally entails that you develop something from a beginning and towards an end. But yes, I think we're basically of the same mind here.

  9. #9

    Default Re: 'Believe and Receive' - the Christian Salvation?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zenith Darksea View Post
    Well, I think that the word 'development' indicates that it wasn't as exclusive and expression as you might think. It naturally entails that you develop something from a beginning and towards an end. But yes, I think we're basically of the same mind here.
    Oh, ok. Guess I did read a little into it then. (There goes my "infallibility". ) j/k. Anyways...the "believe and receive" doctrine is something which quite a few of us protestants are actually a bit upset with. A lot of this problem has come from "neoevangelicalism", characterized most popularly by Billy Graham with his invitations which "saved" thousands upon his "crusades." Unfortunately, a good many of those "christians" as well as many others who were saved out of "faith alone" as a one-time confession later "turned away from God" (though I would say they never had a saving faith in the first place) and never "practiced" their religion. I've seen numbers as high as 85% of those making decisions thinking they were then "secure" and able to do whatever they wanted to...it's something not supported by the Catholic church, Orthodoxy, nor Calvinist or Arminian believers (in "Protestant" churches). But I think the most misunderstanding comes towards Calvinism - which most believe allows for such "reckless" works and acts after professing to have faith in Christ. It's absolutely not true though...what a person practices and comes forth through them - shows what kind of tree it is which bore such fruit.
    Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but the corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. [Matthew 7:17]
    later friend,
    Gersh

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •