Bidam:
Justification, salvation is a covenant made by God ALONE to mankind, no party is involved, it is a done and sealed deal.....through the blood of the everlasting covenant" (Heb. 13:20).

hahaha,


do you know how funny this sounds??

A convenant can't be made by one party. It is not possible, covenant even according to Calvin is a contract involving two parties.

All the covenants in scripture involve two parties and the new covenant is not an exception.

There is no such thing as a covenant made by God ALONE to mankind, instead it is a covenant between God and man.

Ubenedictus:
hahaha,


do you know how funny this sounds??

A convenant can't be made by one party. It is not possible, covenant even according to Calvin is a contract involving two parties.

All the covenants in scripture involve two parties and the new covenant is not an exception.

There is no such thing as a covenant made by God ALONE to mankind, instead it is a covenant between God and man.

Note these:
Made by....
Involve ....parties

If there's no such thing as a covenant MADE by God alone, then the question to you is this: Did both God and man sit down together to draw out the terms of such covenant(s)?

trustman:
[size=6pt][/size]
Note these:
Made by....
Involve ....parties

If there's no such thing as a covenant MADE by God alone, then the question to you is this: Did both God and man sit down together to draw out the terms of such covenant(s)?

covenants always involve two parties, they don't need to sit on a round table and banter on the terms, all the terms may be proposed by one party, but agreed by all.

The covenant of promise with abraham is a good example, God propose all the terms and promises and abraham agreed.

It is always between two parties. God usually draws the terms, and he alway establish his covenant with men.

Ubenedictus:


All the covenants in scripture involve two parties and the new covenant is not an exception.

There is no such thing as a covenant made by God ALONE to mankind, instead it is a covenant between God and man.

God and who? God alone made the covenant. Don't forget the lamb was slain even before the world began. The unconditional covenant of Abraham NEVER included gentiles as a nation.

“Not that we are adequate in ourselves to consider anything as coming from ourselves, but our adequacy is from God, who also made us adequate as servants of a new covenant, not of the letter, but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life” (2 Corinthians 3.5-6).

Ubenedictus:


covenants always involve two parties, they don't need to sit on a round table and banter on the terms, all the terms may be proposed by one party, but agreed by all.

The covenant of promise with abraham is a good example, God propose all the terms and promises and abraham agreed.

It is always between two parties. God usually draws the terms, and he alway establish his covenant with men.

This clarifies the position then that God ALONE draws the terms of the covenants: He then brings in man to get involved in the covenants.

trustman:
[size=6pt][/size]
Note these:
Made by....
Involve ....parties

If there's no such thing as a covenant MADE by God alone, then the question to you is this: Did both God and man sit down together to draw out the terms of such covenant(s)?

Good.. The covenant WAS MADE BY GOD ALONE. The onus is on ubenedictus to prove it wrong from scriptures.

Bidam:
God and who? God alone made the covenant. Don't forget the lamb was slain even before the world began. The unconditional covenant of Abraham NEVER included gentiles as a nation.

“Not that we are adequate in ourselves to consider anything as coming from ourselves, but our adequacy is from God, who also made us adequate as servants of a new covenant, not of the letter, but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life” (2 Corinthians 3.5-6).

i always laugh when people decide to throw passages around.

This is what scripture says about the new covenant.

Heb 8
8 For he finds fault with them when he says: "Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, 9 not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt. For they did not continue in my covenant, and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord. 10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws into their minds, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 11 And they shall not teach, each one his neighbor and each one his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest. 12 For I will be merciful toward their iniquities, and I will remember their sins no more." 13
In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.


Kindly read well and read again, God makes a covenant WITH man, two parties, he doesn't make is alone by himself with himself for man. He makes it with man not just for man.
If you wish to define a covenant as a contract like Calvin did then it is certainly between God and man two parties.


If you wish to define it as the establishment of kinship, or a family bond as catholics sometimes do it is still between two parties God and man.

Compare that passage with what you wrote below

salvation is a covenant made by God ALONE to mankind, no party is involved,

who can you say no party is involved when scriptures clearly show two parties first God who makes a covenant with man.


Infact the new covenant is more interesting and efficacious because God became man, the blood shed was that of a spotless man not an animal. Jesus become the representative of humanity and all who by faith identify with him become part of the covenant.

It has always been God making a covenant WITH man, two parties.

A blind argument really. Trustman has answered you. Guess you do not understand my write up. God making the covenant alone means God never consulted Man for the terms of the covenant.

Ubenedictus:


i always laugh when people decide to throw passages around.

This is what scripture says about the new covenant.

Heb 8
8 For he finds fault with them when he says: "Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, 9 not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt. For they did not continue in my covenant, and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord. 10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws into their minds, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 11 And they shall not teach, each one his neighbor and each one his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest. 12 For I will be merciful toward their iniquities, and I will remember their sins no more." 13
In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.


Kindly read well and read again, God makes a covenant WITH man, two parties, he doesn't make is alone by himself with himself for man. He makes it with man not just for man.
If you wish to define a covenant as a contract like Calvin did then it is certainly between God and man two parties.


If you wish to define it as the establishment of kinship, or a family bond as catholics sometimes do it is still between two parties God and man.

Compare that passage with what you wrote below



who can you say no party is involved when scriptures clearly show two parties first God who makes a covenant with man.


Infact the new covenant is more interesting and efficacious because God became man, the blood shed was that of a spotless man not an animal. Jesus become the representative of humanity and all who by faith identify with him become part of the covenant.

It has always been God making a covenant WITH man, two parties.

Bidam:
A blind argument really. Trustman has answered you. Guess you do not understand my write up. God making the covenant alone means God never consulted Man for the terms of the covenant.

you are trying to dodge the fact that you previously claim that there are parties involved in a covenant.

Ubenedictus:


you are trying to dodge the fact that you previously claim that there are parties involved in a covenant.

God alone made the covenant....No party is involved when he made the covenant. Are you satisfied?

Bidam:
God alone made the covenant....No party is involved when he made the covenant. Are you satisfied?

oh yeah!
I don hear, No parties were involved in the covenant.

Weldone.

Ubenedictus:


oh yeah!
I don hear, No parties were involved in the covenant.

Weldone.

Yeah..i understand why your eyes are veiled with works. Man is NOT involved in salvation and justification. It is freely given. Or is there a string attached to something that is freely given?

Ubenedictus:


you are trying to dodge the fact that you previously claim that there are parties involved in a covenant.

And this post shows very clearly why we must take context very seriously.
I can understand your argument only because I have read your previous posts.

italo:
Bidam, ichuka, 5solas and others...

Who are those Gentiles Paul says will be cut off if they dont continue in kindness in Romans 11?

Are they Christians or unbelievers?

I believe that the gentiles being referred to are believers. I have never thought otherwise.
However, it does not necessarily follow that the verse teaches that a believer can lose salvation,especially since this sentiment is not expressed but is a conclusion you arrived at.
Taking in the context of the whole chapter and of the whole book, such a conclusion is untenable.
The issue as to how we are saved has been addressed earlier on in the book, nothing was said as to how we can lose salvation (because such a thing does not exist!).
In chapter three Paul showed that because man was so sinful , he does not seek God and he cannot be justified by doing what the law required. He can only be saved by putting his faith in Christ. In chapter four, such a man is accounted righteous as a result. In chapter five, he declares that if a man gets saved when he was an enemy of God, how much safer would he be when he is now God's friend! Towards the end of the chapter, he declares that,'' But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:
'' (5:20) and not ,''where sin arises, the spirit departs'' as some dream.
In chapter 6:1, he reiterates the idea that the grace of God abounds towards us when we sin, but must we sin because of this (knowing God's hatred for sin?). He does not even imply a loss of salvation as a consequence for sin, but rather he exhorts that we can do far better than continue in sin.
In chapter seven, he tells us that even though we have been saved and our hearts transformed,the Spirit living in us; yet we are still subject to temptations and will still sin because of the fight between our flesh and spirit.
In chapter eight, he reiterates the point that we are saved because what we could not do (keeping the law (commandments)) has been done for us by the death of Christ. In 8:18, he declares

" For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us ".

He is of course referring to believers. If they can lose salvation, this verse would be so false. According to him, we are saved and are waiting for our adoption, that is, the redemption of our bodies (8:23). What can beat the assurance of salvation he then goes to establish in 8:28-39.

'' 28 And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.

29 ¶ For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

31 ¶ What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us?

32 He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?

33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth.

34 Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.

35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or unclothedness, or peril, or sword?

36 As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.

37 Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us.

38 For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,

39 Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord."

Try reconciling the above with the notion that a believer can lose salvation!

Having established the security of those saved, he goes on to lament the fate of the Israelites who were chosen as a nation (his own people) and wondered why so few of them were saved compared to the gentiles. He goes further to console himself that even though that was the case , the word of God had not failed. He then set forth the doctrine of election! Indeed he repeated it! People do not save themselves! God does!
God chooses whom He would save! There is such a thing as Predestination! He had said it before in 8:28-30. He proved that even amongst Israel as a nation, not everyone was chosen. Those who are children of God are children of the promise (9:8 ) How can children of the promise (those whom God chose to save) lose salvation/end up lost?
9:16,

" So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy."

He has mercy on whom He would have mercy and damns whom he would. And for all these, it is testified in the same chapter that there is no unrighteousness in Him. The Psalmist says,

"Whatsoever the LORD pleased, that did he in heaven, and in earth, in the seas, and all deep places."

(Psalm 135:6.)

"But our God is in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased"

(Psalm 115:3)

"And all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing: and he doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?"

(Dan 4:35)

There are "vessels of wrath fitted for destruction" and "vessels of mercies afore prepared unto glory,".

The vessels of mercies will be glorified as stated in 8:30 and would be called the children of the living God (9:26).
How can these be lost/end up lost?
The ''remnants'' (''elects'') would be saved because it is their "portion" (appointed end) and this is the doing of the Lord (9:29). Not their doing! This knocks out the notion of freewill flat!
So why were much of the Jews unsaved? Revelation! Jesus has not revealed the Father to them!
Matt.11:25-27.

25 ¶ At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.

26 Even so, Father: for so it seemed good in thy sight.

27 All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.

Compare this with 9:30-33.

They wanted to be saved by works - keeping the laws (commandments) and they never got it, but the gentiles which did not seek to be saved by doing good works (keeping the commandments) were now saved because of their faith! How can this be? GRACE! Unmerited favour! That was the cause.
Continuing his lamentation for Israel, he gives the reason why much of them are unsaved,(10:4 puts an end as to whether a believer can lose salvation,once a person has Him, the deed is done!), he explains that they are two ways to be righteous - one is by keeping the laws (commandments), the other is by faith in Christ. Ironically , he says the former does not avail,does not count, does not save and unfortunately, this is the one they have and keep chasing after. The second however is what counts , the gentiles did not even seek to be righteous through this way, but God revealed it to them, leaving the Israelites blinded. He goes on to say to get saved was easy! Simply to put ones faith, hope of ever being able to get to heaven on Christ. In the book of Hebrew, he explains why this is so by extolling the virtues of Christ and how everything about His sacrifice was better than the old way of trying to be saved by keeping the laws (commandments).
But the snag is that the word of God has to be preached and God must find the lost (10:20). We don't truly find God, rather He finds us.

" But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? "

(Gal. 4:9)
This brings us to chapter 11. He explains that God has not cast away the Israelites even though it seemed to be the case. To prove this he mentions the case of the remnants God had during the time of Elijah's persecution, that Elijah was not even aware of! He goes on to say that at the present time, there is also a remnant according to the election of grace. Here we go again! Even though most of the Israelites were not saved, yet some, a ''remnant'' were, by grace.
If it is by grace,then it is not of works, if it is of works, then it is not by grace! (11:5,6) What a profound statement! Asserted four times as it were! That even the deaf itself would hear. And no one who hears this would assert that verse 22 implies that salvation can be lost. On what basis? Definitely not on the basis of works. On unbelief? What constitutes unbelief? Can unbelief exist without evil works? Faith is not man's only work as some think, man does no work in his salvation.
I should end here, but how can I leave out chapter 12:1,2 which exhorts believers to live holy lives because of God's mercies towards them. If they could be lost it makes more sense to give hell as a reason. So also chapter 13 where he appeals to believers to obey authorities.
To sum up, context is all important and if one ignores it, he can even come up with the teaching that not only can believers save themselves, they can even save others! And Paul would be cited to prove it:

11:14 If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them.