Salvation Components [Note: 'Page is best viewed in widest window, w/"smaller" font size.]
Everyone knows that to be "saved" (go to Heaven after you die), one must believe Christ paid for all one's sins (i.e., Acts 16:31). Yet there is much confusion over how salvation is constructed. Briefly, salvation is constructed based on an eternity-past LOVE contract among the Members of the Trinity. To Express Their Love For Each Other. We are the happy beneficiaries of that Love, and therefore all we need 'do' is consent. Beneficiaries cannot ever be forced to receive an inheritance, which Salvation essentially is. So the Beneficiary must have the right to REJECT the contract. So, if you never believe in the Payor of the Contract, Jesus the Christ, then you have rejected your inheritance and won't get it. He paid for your sins, and that payment is reserved to be spent on you to make you compatible with God, so you can live with Him forever. You accept it by 'doing' Acts 16:31: believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and in that instant you are forever saved. (That's a corrected translation of the Greek tenses, versus English Bibles.) But you can refuse it. So to refuse it, don't EVER 'do' that verse, nor any others like it (John 3:16, Eph2:8-9, Eph1:13, Rom10:9, Gal 2:16, etc).
Most refuse. Not a good choice, for then you've refused a Perfect Gift from a Perfect God. So you go to hell for that. No middle Ground. It's not about sin, but about rejecting the Gift: John 16:9. As far as I can tell from Bible, you can still change your mind even IN hell -- but everyone there is too addicted to hating, to want to change his mind, Luke 16:20ff. So if you reject down here, you'll be too addicted to rejection. For it's pretty evil to reject the God Who made your soul at birth, Gen2:7. So that evil is addictive. So it's not about sin, but about the addiction to rejection.
The contract itself is in Isaiah 53:10-12, but it's not wholly translated in published Bibles. The full translation is in two places; quickest is DDNA4.htm, you'll see it right away; if you want to know some underlying exegesis, try the the last screen of Isa53.htm; a fuller contextual and exegetical view of this Love Contract is in Isa53trans.htm (which translates all of Isa52:13-54:1, which is the 'true' chapter size in the original, God-breathed texts). The entire DDNA webseries (Divine DNA) is based on this contract, and is quite long. Its header webpage is DDNA.htm.
Please note: what follows is not in chronological order, but the logical order of the Plan of Salvation (which was later executed in time). This chart is but one way to parse the principal components of salvation, and is not all-inclusive, nor are all the applicable verses referenced. It is only provided to help people get a better sense of the Bible's technical terms (like Atonement, Expiation, Propitiation, Reconciliation, Redemption, etc).;
The chart focuses on Which Agent does the Work. The explanation below the chart is surprisingly good, and covers terms the Bible itself uses to communicate the components.
|
Why do people become confused about what salvation means? God's Love is not like human love; human love you can lose. God's Love you cannot lose. God loves the people in hell, and even Satan, just as much as He loves Christ, the Holy Spirit, and Himself. For Absolute Love never varies based on the object. Only Justice varies with the object, since we are all different, and Justice must insure Consistent, Competent FAIRNESS. A thing is only fair if matched to the justice requirements and needs of the object. So only God can truly be fair, since only God can know enough to BE Fair. Omniscience insures He knows Everything, so no incompetence is possible.Almost every time you see the word "love" in the Bible, it's mistranslated. Should read "Divine Love", not merely Love. God's Love is Absolute, so is not emotional. Not changeable. Love loves to be competent, and hence always operates within JUSTICE. Folks are extremely uncomfortable with the idea that God has to execute Justice. They don't understand that His Love means absolutely nothing, if He can't be Perfectly Righteous. What seems like cold-Judge thinking is in fact the Absoluteness of Love. Your flaws don't dent God's Love. Your attractive qualities don't influence His Love for you either. So you CANNOT EVER LOSE His Love. But if you reject His Love, Justice requires you receive different judicial treatment. But the Love is still there. God's Head Sovereign Integrity IS His Love. Virtue is the backbone of Love, and Righteousness/Justice is the attitude of Virtue, and Love loves Virtue because Virtue is Competent. God is all ONE, here: His Attributes aren't divided. So Justice is Love, too. Absolutely. So, the Bible's own vocabulary is legal: very precisely defined. As you read, notice how LOVE is in fact the result. What greater way to express Love, than via legal commitments? So: let's review what the principal Bible terms mean. Use 1Jn1:9 NOW, or else stop reading, for you will understand nothing apart from naming any known sins to God. Here goes... "Atonement" in the Bible ONLY has a toward-God meaning. In the OT, the Ark was a symbol of the future Christ being the "Atonement" for sin: Yom Kippur, which means "Day of Atonement", is the annual Jewish holiday celebrated then and now to reference this fact. To "atone" means to pay a penalty for sin committed. The person to whom this penalty must be paid is the person who was wronged: here, God. To pay the penalty, one must pay for MORE than just the cost of the damage, but also the cost of the restoration of the object (here, man), and ALSO (very important), the cost of what 'best-use' (i.e., "seven-fold") the recipient could have received from the object were it not damaged.What the recipient does with that payment is solely up to the recipient.It is usually up to the recipient to say what is sufficient payment.Thus this Biblical definition has been a long-standing principle of Jewish law, and is behind most of the laws on restitution/reparation in many cultures.
"Expiation", by contrast, is the RESULT of atonement: the person guilty is deemed to have expiated (satisfied) the restitution/penalty/reparation due. It is a judicial term, just as "Atonement" is, but is the judicial status of the person guilty AFTER "Atonement" has been accomplished. So "expiation" is both a result of "Atonement", and "Propitiation".IT IS MERELY A JUDICIAL STATUS. So, in our case, our damaged condition remains (total depravity, unsaved, still in Adam, still subject to physical death, still separated from God, etc). But we are no longer held guilty for the damage. THIS FACT IS CRITICAL: it explains why NO one goes to Hell for sins. (If you look up the "Great White Throne Judgement" in Revelation, you'll notice people there are judged for their works..not for their sins. ["Works", when not qualified by an adjective or adjectival phrase (or syntactical sarcasm), means "good deeds", in the Bible.] "Reconciliation" is another legal term in the Bible, and it means "come to peace terms" (war/conflict between the parties is resolved). So, many English Bibles use the word "peace" to translate it, like in Isa 53. Even so, don't forget the legal meaning, "Reconciliation". The very word means voluntary consent by the parties in the reconciliation. Absent consent, there is no reconciliation, irrespective of any payment issues. Why? Because the agreement means a relationship is being created or healed. All relationships have legal ramifications. This one, most of all.
Again, you'll find many versions of this ancient Biblical legal principle of reconciliation in virtually every culture. War reparations. Damages. Divorce settlements. Dowries. All of these are financial or juridical ways of reconciling the parties, and ALL of them depend on consent. The common concept of "bail", even, which is a mere surety (which the accused can refuse), is a 'child' of the reconciliation principle. So-called "class action" lawsuits also have the same requirement -- after the suit is settled, those in the suit must individually consent to receive their portion of the settlement. So, if they do not, they STILL are able to "war" with the other party in the suit. Even more commonly, the concept of inheritance: the recipient must CONSENT to receive any bequest or other testamentary property, for it to be received. Until then, the testamentary property remains escrowed or otherwise separated from the recipient for whom it was intended. No one can force the recipient to take it. The recipient must be "reconciled" to the settlement, see. Until then, the issue between the recipient and the other legal party is unresolved, and a status of separation/war exists between them. So, regarding salvation, the issue is, do you, the accused, agree to be reconciled to God? (i.e., 2Cor5:20b) Yet also, in a happier way: do you, a potential heir, agree to be reconciled to your inheritance settlement in Christ? (Heb9) Either way you want to look at it, "Reconciliation" means YOU AGREE to Christ paying on your behalf. Your ONE-TIME CONSENT is required, for "peace" to exist between God, and you. That's the only way you can GET the Salvation Deposit, as it were, which Christ made on your behalf, about 2000 years ago. Reconciliation is a prerequisite for any of the funds to be used toward the restoration of our damage. Because we had no role in atonement, propitiation, or expiation: it was all done apart from our consent. Further, the damage still exists; all that has happened is that we CAN be justifiably reconcilied to God. However, at this point, our consent is required , because we are in a state of voluntary hostility to God, so long as we do not believe in His Son. Faith in Christ means the person agrees to the "terms of peace". (The "L" in the "TULIPS?" website explains this issue in more detail.) The party, us, who is hostile, at war, is obviously completely absent merit. Agreement profits us, not God. God has already been paid. We pay nothing, nor can we..that was why Atonement (etc.) was needed for us in the first place. It's merely a question of whether we admit defeat. If we don't, then we cannot be credited with the funds on deposit, as it were, since we don't accept the substitionary payment on our behalf (in USA, this is akin to "electing against the will" in estate law). So, if we REJECT these peace terms, we must then come up with our own atonements: the GWTJ reveals that all our "works" are not enough to compare with His Payment on the Cross, and THAT is why we go to Hell: "concerning sin, because they have never believed in Me" (John 16:9). [Note: "never" is a better translation of the Greek "ouk" with the indicative mood of the verb, since "ouk" is FAR more emphatic than the English "not". If you shouted "NOT!" in English, you could maybe translate "ouk" as "not" -- but "never" conveys the same idea as the shouted English "NOT!" 1Pet1:8 has a similar construction, as do many other passages. The Greek word "me" (prounounced "may") has a meaning akin to the weaker, English "not": Peter makes clever use of that fact, in 1Pet1:8. Good interpretation of that verse depends on knowing the difference between these two negative Greek particles. Peter uses BOTH of them to stress how he found the believers' faith amazing, despite their never having seen Him. Clearly implicit in that statement, because 'ouk' is used, is Peter's self-examination -- for Peter HAD seen Him. Peter uses the second, weaker "not" to implicitly stress how they WILL see Him..forever.] |
"Redemption" in the Bible is used to free something or someone from enslavement or other commitment/bondage. "Ransom" refers to the payment itself, and "redemption" refers to the RESULT of the ransom's efficacious payment. For example, in the OT, a person could "redeem" a first-born animal or person from the various dedication-laws otherwise applicable, via "ransom" payment (aka "redemption price"). The recipient thus received the value for the animal/person, so the animal/person was freed (or free to return to its prior owner). So, in our case, the "ransom" is owed God the Father, who is the Head of the Godhead, so He has the first rights. Christ paid our redemption price. (See "redemption", "redeem", and "ransom" verses: 1Tim2:3-6 shows this ransom was paid for all mankind. By the way, "all" in the Greek plural, when it stands alone, means "all without exception": as usual, English translations chop off so much of the Greek meaning, the reader is left confused.) No one who is unreconciled can receive the previously-paid benefit of redemption, for (as we saw above), no one is acceptably-reconciled without his consent. Redemption is an agreement between God the Father and Christ, NOT between God and man, because Christ, not man, is the Sole Redeemer. This contract is recorded in Isa53:10-12. It is because this Agreement is between THEM that you cannot EVER lose your salvation, once you've believed in Christ. A greater, more Absolute Guarantee cannot exist, than when you get something based on someone ELSE's consent. Staggeringly Beautiful, Absolute Love, Romans 5:8. Because Redemption is an agreement between God the Father and Christ, those are the parties to the Agreement. Man is not a party to the Agreement, so cannot claim any rights in it. It is God the Father's Sovereign right to extend the offer to man to believe in His Son, and it is the Godhead who unilaterally effectuate the redemption. This condition is NOT man's choice, but God's choice. Thus you know why God had to "elect" in eternity-past, else no one could be saved. Isa53.htm and Isa53trans.htm have better translations of the text than you'll find in the published translations, because some of the Hebrew text that is missing, is in the Greek OT which the Lord and the apostles used (called the LXX). It will be easier to see the contract provisions in those webpages. Frankly, every glossary word in this webpage is legally 'covered' in that contract.
Regeneration is the actual application of the salvation funds in Christ to the person (per Isa53:12's Hebrew) , making him "a new creature" (2Cor5:17 and other passages). The characteristics of the new creature made by God the Father and God the Holy Spirit are PERMANENT. That is why salvation cannot be lost. Technically, the person is OWNED by Christ (again, Isa53:12), so the delivery of salvation is treated as FOR Christ; again, since the Redemption Contract was based on Him, not on us. So it never compromises Justice that we receive this so-great salvation. It's legally done to and for and through Him. |
|
Hopefully, you have gained enough understanding from the above explanation to at least turn over the concepts in your soul and see their "fit". You can easily verify that the descriptions above are accurate, by consulting a rabbi or a pastor regarding the Old Testament's definitions. You could probably review the words in the Bible yourself (especially, if you use 1Jn1:9 repeatedly), and see how these concepts do fit together.
The fact that Satan rules this world and 'loses' us when we are saved is merely the fact that God legally recaptures His Own Property: what Satan legally stole via Adam. Think of corporate proxy fights, and you'll see how "legally stole" is neither an oxymoron nor is it due recompense, if legal recapture takes place: in fact, the Angelic Conflict is a type of proxy fight -- do we want God, or Satan? Salvation is a result of total payment for SIN. The entire Bible is meaningless (or, a collection of witty aphorisms), else. More properly, a civil war occurred which occasioned man's creation, and the world was the "booty"; but per Trial terms those who begin in Satan's kingdom have the right to believe in Christ, since the Trial issue is who rules man the better. Again, "Thinking" series (beginning with LordvSatan1.htm) is devoted to this topic; however a shorter summary of it is in "Our Diplomatic Brief", a link section within DueDisclosure.htm (you'll see the link 'building' when the page uploads, so you can easily click on the link). Another common misconception is that God, Who needs nothing, doesn't need to be paid for sins, either. All faiths but (most of) Christianity are actually founded on this chopped-off idea. This idea is chopped off, because while it does recognize God's total Independence, it doesn't recognize the JUSTICE of paying one owed something. Doesn't matter if the one owed doesn't need the payment. The heart of Justice is this: so-and-so did something wrong, and must pay a price which is equivalent to the value of the wrong done plus the opportunity loss for what the rightful owner could have had from the property. The wrong done is the criterion, and no other factor, i.e., how 'rich' the one wronged might be, is allowed relevance. Obviously, if God, Who is Omnipotent, can't insure Justice be done to Himself, then His Love is unreliable -- even, hellish. For, such a 'god' would be either incompetent, or a masochist -- or both. That is why only the Christ accounts for a Perfect God. All other versions of 'god' incompletely account for the Justice Due Perfect God: He should be perfectly paid for any offenses He 'sees' at His Own Level. A third common misconception is that somehow what Christ paid can be nullified or is otherwise incomplete. Many Christian sects make Christ's payment sound like a way to get salvation at a discount price: as if He did some of the paying, and man pays some. Or variantly, as if He did all the paying but man can forfeit salvation under certain conditions (some heinous sin, or lack of repentance). Yet another variation: if the observed behavior in person "A" doesn't meet the observer's standards, or if "A" doesn't think he is a Christian, the observer considers the person to never-have-believed.
|