PDA

View Full Version : Question about salvation



lendtay
Aug 4th 2008, 10:33 PM
Is it as simple as believing in Jesus as your savior? What about people who believe this, but don't attend church. Are we doomed ?

Also, if only a very few people will be saved, why try to convert people if its been revealed that only a very few people will enter the kingdom of heaven.

Also, is death a state of non-existence until the judgment day, when God decides who will be granted eternal life.

ingegneriae
Aug 4th 2008, 10:49 PM
Is it as simple as believing in Jesus as your savior? What about people who believe this, but don't attend church. Are we doomed ?

Romans 10:9-13
9 That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved.
11 As the Scripture says, "Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame."[e (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=52&chapter=10&version=31&context=chapter#fen-NIV-28185e)]
12 For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him,
13 for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."[f (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=52&chapter=10&version=31&context=chapter#fen-NIV-28187f)]

In other words, yes, it's enough to believe. Going to church is helpful, but is not absolutely necessary.



Also, if only a very few people will be saved, why try to convert people if its been revealed that only a very few people will enter the kingdom of heaven.
2 Peter 3:9
9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.

Jesus saves many people, not just a few. You can read in Revelation as to the descriptions of the people in heaven and see how many will be saved.



Also, is death a state of non-existence until the judgment day, when God decides who will be granted eternal life.

Well, "non-existence" is not the right word. You're wondering if we'll be conscious or not, aware of what's happening after death. One way to find out is to look at Luke 16:19-31 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2016:19-31;&version=31;).

DeadToSelf
Aug 4th 2008, 10:58 PM
Hi lendtay welcome to the forums...

Well it all starts with believing in JESUS CHRIST as LORD and Savior.

Well lets go from the begining. The only way to be saved is through JESUS CHRIST.

John 14:6 "I am the Way the Truth and the Life and none can come to the FATHER except through ME."

We can then jump to Romans 3:21-31 which talks about how we were justified through the death of JESUS. And the only way that we would be justified was through faith in JESUS CHRIST.

But just going to church wouldn't get you into heaven. I can boldly say that there are alot of people in church that are not going to go to heaven.

Our good deeds will not get us into heaven.
Isaiah 64:6
"For all of us have become like one who is unclean, and all are righteous deeds are like a filty garment..."

So in our own "righteousness" we are not fit for the kingdom of GOD.

So we would not go to heaven just because we go to church or we self righteously call ourselves good.

Matthew 19:17 "Why do you call ME good? There is only one who is good."

Going to church is more for fellowship, not gossip, but to talk to others about the LORD or encouragement etc...

Romans 12:1-2 "Therefore I urge you, bretheren, by the mercies of GOD, to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, acceptable to GOD, which is your spiritual service of worship.2 And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of GOD is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect."

Well it is not so much as a select few are going to be saved. JESUS does say. "Many are called but few are chosen." Matthew 22:14 Also
Matthew 7:13-14
"Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. 14 For the way is narrow that leads to life and there are few who find it."

Also another place where JESUS says that alot of people will not enter into heaven. However, it is not that HE goes and chooses who HE wants to go to heaven.

Romans 2:11 "For there is no partiality with GOD."

Matthew 18:14 "So it is not the will of the FATHER that one of these little ones perish."

Anyone can be saved but it is up to us if we want to give into the will of GOD or if we want to run our life. One leads to life and one leads to death its the person's choice.

Sorry I don't know the answer to your last question.

GOD bless

lendtay
Aug 5th 2008, 12:02 AM
Thanks.

I am still wondering why its so simple as saying "I believe Jesus is my savior". What if God decides to cast them into hell anyway? Will God go back on his word?:confused

Someone in my family believes Jesus was a prophet. Is there a book you would recommend she read, other than the Bible? Thanks.

calidog
Aug 5th 2008, 12:10 AM
Is it as simple as believing in Jesus as your savior? What about people who believe this, but don't attend church. Are we doomed ?


Jesus never said believe on Him and attend church, and you will be saved. What He did say is:
Luk 6:47 Whosoever cometh to me, and heareth my sayings, and doeth them, I will shew you to whom he is like:
Luk 6:48 He is like a man which built an house, and digged deep, and laid the foundation on a rock: and when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently upon that house, and could not shake it: for it was founded upon a rock.
Luk 6:49 But he that heareth, and doeth not, is like a man that without a foundation built an house upon the earth; against which the stream did beat vehemently, and immediately it fell; and the ruin of that house was great.

bestillknowgod
Aug 5th 2008, 12:16 AM
"Is salvation as simple as believing in Jesus as your savior?"

I've come to realize that believing in Jesus means different things to different people. I would say that it depends on what your belief in Jesus does for you. If it has brought you a peace that passes understanding then it's that simple. If you're plagued with doubts and fears then salvation is not as simple as that belief. (I suppose that we could discuss what is salvation and what it is not but that's for another time and place)

Church attendance is not a prerequisite to my salvation, but that's me. I know there are plenty of folks out there who feel it's mandatory.

Rom 14:22 Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth.

So that's where I'm at right now.

John 4:23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.

For me the worship of God has to do with spending time where He dwells (within your heart) not attending a service though that can be very beneficial.

Also, is death a state of non-existence until the judgment day, when God decides who will be granted eternal life?


Another good question and I can only share what I feel. First of all, we are souls who never die. Currently we are enjoying a physical existence on this earth. From the spiritual perspective death is only the end of the physical and really not a big deal like we tend to make it. So maybe we could think of "death" as a state of pure spirit which we may be able to experience in a measure here. I'm sure you've had experiences where you've forgotton your own physical presence - deep meditation or even a spiritual experience where you feel very close to God perhaps.

I wonder if the "judgment day" is really what we tend to think of as well. Somehow I suspect it's not but I'll leave it at that.

ingegneriae
Aug 5th 2008, 12:16 AM
Thanks.

You're welcome :).



I am still wondering why its so simple as saying "I believe Jesus is my savior". What if God decides to cast them into hell anyway? Will God go back on his word?:confused

John 3:16-17
16 "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,[f (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%203&version=31#fen-NIV-26127f)] that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.

I believe that to truly answer your question, the entire book of John is needed. You can read it here: John (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john;&version=31;). Or hey, you could even watch the Gospel of John on youtube: Gospel of John (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xghkpa7IhuU&feature=PlayList&p=479C162DF3C16BBD&index=0).



Someone in my family believes Jesus was a prophet. Is there a book you would recommend she read, other than the Bible? Thanks.

It might be helpful if you told us what her religion is. There are various religions that believe Jesus was only a prophet. Each religion requires its own approach to help them to understand Jesus and Christianity.

calidog
Aug 5th 2008, 12:27 AM
Also, is death a state of non-existence until the judgment day, when God decides who will be granted eternal life.God has left that decision to us, so when we die we will immediately go into eternity, either to be with the Lord, or to await judgment because we have rejected the truth. As you read the bible you will discover many treasures. :spin:

lendtay
Aug 5th 2008, 12:34 AM
It might be helpful if you told us what her religion is. There are various religions that believe Jesus was only a prophet. Each religion requires its own approach to help them to understand Jesus and Christianity.[/quote]

This is my Mom. She was a Christian for many years and reads the Bible. She believes in God. But lately she has been saying that she thinks Jesus was really just a prophet. I have no idea why.
She has a Bible and some Christian books by Billy Graham.
I am wondering if there is another book I could recommend for her. If you know of anything please tell me. I will get the book for her. I need people to pray for her also.

calidog
Aug 5th 2008, 12:43 AM
This is my Mom. She was a Christian for many years and reads the Bible. She believes in God. But lately she has been saying that she thinks Jesus was really just a prophet. I have no idea why.
She has a Bible and some Christian books by Billy Graham.
I am wondering if there is another book I could recommend for her. If you know of anything please tell me. I will get the book for her. I need people to pray for her also.Prayer is a good idea, and mine is on the way.
If she will go back to the gospels, she can begin at the foundation: Jesus was born of a woman by the power of the Holy Spirit, not born of any man as the rest of us and as a prophet. Jesus came from heaven to earth in the form of a man. He came from eternity past, where He was with God.

Have her go back to the gospels beginning with Matthew.

ingegneriae
Aug 5th 2008, 01:14 AM
I'm sorry that your mother believes Jesus is only a prophet. Maybe you could ask her why she feels that he is only a prophet?

Maybe she believes this way because someone from a different religion has influenced her? Or maybe she just has given up on parts of her faith because of some difficulties in her life? Or maybe it's something else. Try to find out her reason for believing the way she does.

Butch5
Aug 5th 2008, 01:14 AM
lendtay---Is it as simple as believing in Jesus as your savior? What about people who believe this, but don't attend church. Are we doomed ?

If you believe you are saved, however it does not end there. You must also repent, confess, be baptized and remain faithful to death in order to be saved in the end.


lendtay---Also, if only a very few people will be saved, why try to convert people if its been revealed that only a very few people will enter the kingdom of heaven.

Jesus told the disciples to go and make disciples of all nations, we don't know how many will be saved.


Also, is death a state of non-existence until the judgment day, when God decides who will be granted eternal life.

No, you will be conscience after death, After death people go to Hades (the intermediate state) until the judgement, during this time they are conscious, as is shown by Jesus parable of Lazarus and the rich man.

Also the book you are looking for is by Josh McDowell, it is call "More than a Carpenter."

lendtay
Aug 5th 2008, 03:43 AM
Thanks for that book recommendation. I am going to purchase it on amazon today.

Butch5
Aug 5th 2008, 05:40 PM
Thanks for that book recommendation. I am going to purchase it on amazon today.

You are welcome. Josh McDowell set out to disprove Christianity, after doing his research he became a Christian.

Firefighter
Aug 5th 2008, 05:49 PM
If you believe you are saved, however it does not end there. You must also repent, confess, be baptized and remain faithful to death in order to be saved in the end.


:o

What!?!? I could have sworn the bible said by grace through faith and NOT by works...

When did the thief on the cross beside Jesus get baptised?

lendtay
Aug 6th 2008, 11:07 PM
I was baptized when I was younger. But I learned later that many people believe you are saved by grace, not by baptism or any works. I know this can be a huge divisive issue with many christian churches.

BroRog
Aug 6th 2008, 11:36 PM
Is it as simple as believing in Jesus as your savior? What about people who believe this, but don't attend church. Are we doomed ?

Also, if only a very few people will be saved, why try to convert people if its been revealed that only a very few people will enter the kingdom of heaven.

Also, is death a state of non-existence until the judgment day, when God decides who will be granted eternal life.

When it comes to salvation, the big picture is very simple. God saves whomever he wants to save. That's why its by grace. As we begin to focus on the details of salvation we learn that it's slightly more complicated, but not by much. As Jesus was wont to point out, it's easy enough that a child can do it. And some children do have faith in Jesus.

In Romans Paul, arguing against those who want to make religion the path to eternal life, points out that God declared Abraham "justified" simply for believing that his descendants were going to be as numerous as the stars above. In this we learn that faith is simply accepting what God says and putting our trust in it.

The New Testament announces that Jesus is the Messiah. In fact, Jesus roams the countryside announcing that the kingdom of God is at hand. He points out that those who accept this simple tenet will find eternal life.

With regard to church, Jesus tells the woman at the well that God desires people who will worship him in spirit and in truth and that a temple doesn't much matter. It was the author of Hebrews who reminded Christians to not avoid meeting together, but even that could be interpreted as getting together in an informal venue to read, study, and discuss the words of the Apostles.

I love Christians of all denominations, I love church, I love baptisms, I love meeting Christians, and I love discussing the Bible on the internet. I would be in church seven days a week if possible. But you seem to be asking, "what is the minimum stuff a Christian must do to be saved." On the one hand, the minimum, is nothing. On the other hand, there is no minimum.

For instance Paul argues in Galatians, or Romans or both (going by memory is dangerous) that we never exhaust our debt to love. We pay our debt to society, we pay our taxes; we give to those to whom we owe money. But we can never give enough love to one another.

With regard to evangelism here is my take. The Apostles didn't coin the word "good news". It was already being used to indicate when the war was going well. As the citizens of a country sent their sons off to war, they desperately wanted to hear news of how the war was going. Were we winning? Were we losing? Was my son alive? At some point in the war, the general would send a messenger back to the folks at home, to say how the war was going. If the report was good, this was "good news."

In this same way, the proper function of an evangelist is to roam the countryside to announce the good news. Jesus likens this to spreading seed. The word is just cast about for anyone to hear and those who are interested will find the message to be "good news" and those who could care less, will not.

Our impression of an evangelist today comes from people like Charles Finey and Billy Graham who tended to push for the decision. But even Billy Graham cast his message far and wide and he didn't know who was going to respond and who wouldn't. The doctrine that God ultimately chooses who will respond and who won't merely puts that choice in the background, behind the scenes, in the mind of God where no one can know except him.

With regard to death, the Bible uses sleep as a metaphor, which would not, in my opinion, indicate non-existence. The metaphor of sleep hints that the person is still alive in some capacity but unable to respond to those of us who are 'awake' so to speak.

Well, we have read some really good answers here. But I wanted to take a crack at the answers if for no other reason than to remind myself of the important things in life.

Thanks for asking.

losthorizon
Aug 7th 2008, 12:03 AM
What!?!? I could have sworn the bible said by grace through faith and NOT by works...


But didn’t Jesus say salvation comes after one first believes and is baptized and that one who *believes not* is damned whether baptized or not baptized?
And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. Mark 16:15-16 (KJV)


When did the thief on the cross beside Jesus get baptised?
Moot point - Jesus saved the thief before He instituted the ordinance of baptism? The thief lived and died under the Old Covenant. The ordinance of baptism is applicable only to those under the New Testament? And we do not know whether the thief was baptized or not – the Book is silent on that matter. It is possible that he was baptized by Johns’ baptism?
And the same John had his raiment of camel's hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his meat was locusts and wild honey. Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan, And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins. Matthew 3:4-6

calidog
Aug 7th 2008, 01:05 AM
Moot point - Jesus saved the thief before He instituted the ordinance of baptism? The thief lived and died under the Old Covenant. The ordinance of baptism is applicable only to those under the New Testament? And we do not know whether the thief was baptized or not – the Book is silent on that matter. It is possible that he was baptized by Johns’ baptism?

It's the same baptism that John baptized Jesus with WATER

Butch5
Aug 7th 2008, 02:13 AM
:o

What!?!? I could have sworn the bible said by grace through faith and NOT by works...

When did the thief on the cross beside Jesus get baptised?


The Bible does say that we are saved by grace through faith and not of works. However you have to define works. If you look at the historical evidence Paul was continually dealing with the Judaizers, who were saying that the Gentile Christians must be circumcised. Circumcision is a work of the law, Paul was telling them that these works will not save them. Paul, in his letters mentions several times the "works of the law." Paul contrasts these works with good works which he mentions in Eph 2:10,

Ephesians 2:10 ( KJV ) 10For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

Notice in verse 10 Paul says "good works" as opposed to "works" in verse 9

I notice you only bolded baptism, is baptism a work, but repentance, confession and remaining faithful aren't? Paul didn't consider baptism a work,


Titus 3:5 ( KJV ) 5Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

Paul says it was NOT by works of righteousness that we have done. How as it then? It was by the washing of regeneration (Baptism) and renewing of the Holy Ghost. So Paul says here that baptism IS NOT a work of our righteousness.

The thief on the cross was saved under the old Covenant. Christ was still alive when the thief was saved.


Hebrews 9:17 ( KJV ) 17For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

Baptism is a requirement of the NT not the OT.

BrckBrln
Aug 7th 2008, 02:20 AM
Baptism is a requirement of the NT not the OT.

Wow, I didn't know God was a God that changed His mind on the most important thing. Well, you learn something new everyday. :rolleyes:

Butch5
Aug 7th 2008, 01:30 PM
Wow, I didn't know God was a God that changed His mind on the most important thing. Well, you learn something new everyday. :rolleyes:

OK let me rephrase the statement. In the OT a person entered into the covenant through circumcision.

BrckBrln
Aug 7th 2008, 01:36 PM
Well just look at the Scriptures. In the OT a person entered into the covenant through circumcision.

But that didn't save them.

lendtay
Aug 7th 2008, 03:38 PM
Which Christian denominations teach that baptism is essential?

Butch5
Aug 7th 2008, 04:29 PM
But that didn't save them.

That was exactly my point. Under th OT it didn't, under the NT it does.

Butch5
Aug 7th 2008, 04:31 PM
Which Christian denominations teach that baptism is essential?

I don't know all of them. I know Chruch of Christ does and some Christian churches do.

BrckBrln
Aug 7th 2008, 06:21 PM
That was exactly my point. Under th OT it didn't, under the NT it does.

Um, no. God would not change the most important thing He ever instituted i.e. salvation.

lendtay
Aug 7th 2008, 06:52 PM
I went to a Bible church, and a Baptist church: they both taught baptism was important act to do, but not essential to salvation.
However, the Church of Christ I went to taught that baptism was absolutely essential.

I am not sure what the Church of England does. I know they baptize a lot of infants, but my husband grew up in that church and wasn't baptized till he was a teenager.

It seems unfair that someone would have faith and believe, but because he didn't get baptized, he wouldn't get salvation. This is something I have a hard time with.

losthorizon
Aug 7th 2008, 10:29 PM
It seems unfair that someone would have faith and believe, but because he didn't get baptized, he wouldn't get salvation. This is something I have a hard time with.


But the begging question is why would one who believes not be immersed in water? The *gospel preached* has always included the command to be baptized in water - "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." (Matt 28:19). After Philip “preached Christ” to the eunuch they came to a “certain water" and the eunuch said, "what hinders me to be baptized?" Upon his "good confession" that "Jesus Christ is the Son of God" he was immersed and came up out of the water rejoicing. This is written for our example.
Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. 36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? 37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. 38 And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him. 39 And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing. Acts 8:35-39

losthorizon
Aug 7th 2008, 10:46 PM
Wow, I didn't know God was a God that changed His mind on the most important thing. Well, you learn something new everyday. :rolleyes:
Did God through Christ fulfill and abrogate the Old Covenant and replace it with the New Covenant - “the new covenant in His blood”? Does this fact negate the Immutability of God? Was not the ordinance of baptism instituted and commanded by Christ in the Great Commission after the Resurrection? It was never given to those who lived and died under the Old Testament - right? ;)
Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. Heb 10:9

BrckBrln
Aug 8th 2008, 12:44 AM
Did God through Christ fulfill and abrogate the Old Covenant and replace it with the New Covenant - “the new covenant in His blood”? Does this fact negate the Immutability of God? Was not the ordinance of baptism instituted and commanded by Christ in the Great Commission after the Resurrection? It was never given to those who lived and died under the Old Testament - right? ;)
Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. Heb 10:9

So what? Salvation has never changed, nor will it either. It would make no sense for God to change it. It's always been faith, not works like circumcision and baptism. Why do you think there's a whole chapter on faith and not baptism?

losthorizon
Aug 8th 2008, 01:27 AM
So what? Salvation has never changed, nor will it either. It would make no sense for God to change it. It's always been faith, not works like circumcision and baptism. Why do you think there's a whole chapter on faith and not baptism?
There are many “chapters” on both faith and baptism in the NT – and God is not the “author fo confusion”. The teachings on baptism do not negate the teachings on faith just as the “chapters” on faith do not in any way negate the essential nature of baptism as you suggest. Baptism, like belief is the “fruit of the faith” not a work of man to "earn" salvation. To obey God in baptism does not condemn one's soul - does it? Baptism and belief go together - biblically. Why would one who believes the gospel of Christ refuse to be baptized as directed in that gospel? You have never answered that question. There is no record of an un-baptized believer in the NT.
He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. (Mark 16)

"These words are very important. The first clause [belief and baptism] opposes the notion that faith alone is sufficient for salvation, without those works which are the fruit of faith" ~ Pulpit Commentary

"...in the latter clause baptism is omitted, because it is not simply the want of baptism, but the contemptuous neglect of it, which makes men guilty of damnation..." ~ Matthew Henry

BrckBrln
Aug 8th 2008, 01:35 AM
There are many “chapters” on both faith and baptism in the NT – and God is not the “author fo confusion”. The teachings on baptism do not negate the teachings on faith just as the “chapters” on faith do not in any way negate the essential nature of baptism as you suggest. Baptism, like belief is the “fruit of the faith” not a work of man to "earn" salvation. To obey God in baptism does not condemn one's soul - does it? Baptism and belief go together - biblically. Why would one who believes the gospel of Christ refuse to be baptized as directed in that gospel? You have never answered that question. There is no record of an un-baptized believer in the NT.

I swear you say the same exact things, almost word for word, every single time this issue comes up. And you said that baptism is not something you do to 'earn' salvation, but I thought that's exactly what you believe. Don't you believe that one has to be baptized in order to be saved? I've never denied baptism, nor have I (or anybody for that matter) ever said that anyone is condemned for being baptized, so that kind of talk needs to stop.

I also agree that belief and baptism do go together, at least, it used to. Baptism is all but removed from belief nowadays, that's why so many believe but haven't been baptized. But the difference is that one saves and one doesn't. And seriously, man, you have to stop using the 'it didn't happen in the NT so it must not happen today' or the 'scripture doesn't have this situation so I can't comment on it' excuse because it really gets old.

losthorizon
Aug 8th 2008, 02:01 AM
I swear you say the same exact things, almost word for word, every single time this issue comes up. And you said that baptism is not something you do to 'earn' salvation, but I thought that's exactly what you believe. Don't you believe that one has to be baptized in order to be saved? I've never denied baptism, nor have I (or anybody for that matter) ever said that anyone is condemned for being baptized, so that kind of talk needs to stop.


Well if your notion is correct – if baptism is a “work of man” to earn salvation then to teach that baptism is essential to the gospel of Christ (as I teach) would put one in danger of teaching error and being condemned – would it not? Are the commands of Jesus essential the moment He commands them? Is baptism *from God* and essential to the gospel of Christ?


Don't you believe that one has to be baptized in order to be saved?
I believe and teach what the Book says and the Book has the baptism in it and no less an authority than Jesus Christ who designed, instituted and commanded baptism says that both belief and baptism come before one shall be saved.


I also agree that belief and baptism do go together, at least, it used to. Baptism is all but removed from belief nowadays, that's why so many believe but haven't been baptized. But the difference is that one saves and one doesn't. And seriously, man, you have to stop using the 'it didn't happen in the NT so it must not happen today' or the 'scripture doesn't have this situation so I can't comment on it' excuse because it really gets old.
It is the blood of Christ that completely and finally saves. Why do you think belief and baptism do not go together today but they went together in the past – what changed - who removed baptism from belief and by whose authority?

BrckBrln
Aug 8th 2008, 02:08 AM
Why do you think belief and baptism do not go together today but they went together in the past – what changed - who removed baptism from belief and by whose authority?

I'm saying that nowadays, not in every case, but a good bit, that when somebody gets saved, the next step isn't always baptism like it should be. Some teach, like I was taught, that baptism is just optional, so the gap between belief and baptism has grown since Bible days. But it's the belief, not the baptism - the effect of believing, that saves you.

As for the other stuff, I don't really care to go over it all again.

losthorizon
Aug 8th 2008, 02:28 AM
I'm saying that nowadays, not in every case, but a good bit, that when somebody gets saved, the next step isn't always baptism like it should be. Some teach, like I was taught, that baptism is just optional, so the gap between belief and baptism has grown since Bible days. But it's the belief, not the baptism - the effect of believing, that saves you.


What Bible version do you use that says “he who believes and is saved shall be baptized"? Do the words of Jesus mean nothing? Is baptism optional or is it required by God?

BrckBrln
Aug 8th 2008, 02:29 AM
What Bible version do you use that says “he who believes and is saved shall be baptized"? Do the words of Jesus mean nothing? Is baptism optional or is it required by God?

It's commanded, just like not sinning or communion is commanded. It's not essential to salvation, like you want it to be. But that's all I have to offer to this thread. I don't mean this to be mean, but your kinda impossible to have a debate with on this issue.

losthorizon
Aug 8th 2008, 02:45 AM
It's commanded, just like not sinning or communion is commanded. It's not essential to salvation, like you want it to be. But that's all I have to offer to this thread. I don't mean this to be mean, but your kinda impossible to have a debate with on this issue.
"Study to show thyself approved to God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." You are almost there. God bless.

Sold Out
Aug 8th 2008, 09:03 PM
It might be helpful if you told us what her religion is. There are various religions that believe Jesus was only a prophet. Each religion requires its own approach to help them to understand Jesus and Christianity.

This is my Mom. She was a Christian for many years and reads the Bible. She believes in God. But lately she has been saying that she thinks Jesus was really just a prophet. I have no idea why.
She has a Bible and some Christian books by Billy Graham.
I am wondering if there is another book I could recommend for her. If you know of anything please tell me. I will get the book for her. I need people to pray for her also.[/
quote]

Another good book (also on CD) is The Case for Christ by Lee Stroebel.

I'm wondering if your mom was recently visited by a Jehovah's Witness or Mormon?

lendtay
Aug 8th 2008, 09:32 PM
Its possible she was visited by a JW, because there are many who go door-walking in her neighborhood.

Sold Out
Aug 8th 2008, 10:34 PM
Its possible she was visited by a JW, because there are many who go door-walking in her neighborhood.

That would explain the 'Jesus was a prophet' idea that she's expressed.

Sandusky
Aug 8th 2008, 10:41 PM
It's commanded, just like not sinning or communion is commanded. It's not essential to salvation, like you want it to be. But that's all I have to offer to this thread. I don't mean this to be mean, but your kinda impossible to have a debate with on this issue.

All I have to go on is what the Bible tells me, and baptism doesn't appear to be optional. If it's commanded, then it is necessary, is the only sane way to think about it. Otherwise, why is it even commanded?

BrckBrln
Aug 8th 2008, 10:47 PM
All I have to go on is what the Bible tells me, and baptism doesn't appear to be optional. If it's commanded, then it is necessary, is the only sane way to think about it. Otherwise, why is it even commanded?

It's not necessary for salvation.

losthorizon
Aug 8th 2008, 11:01 PM
It's not necessary for salvation.
“He that believes and is baptized shall be saved…” It sure sounds like it is an essential part of the gospel of Christ delivered by the Lord. We are “baptized into His death”; only after immersion in water can we correctly say we have been raised with Him to “walk in newness of life”; and it is only in baptism that “our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.” Yep it sure sounds like baptism in water is an important part of the gospel of grace…
Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? 4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. 5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: 6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. Romans 6:3-6 (KJV)

Sandusky
Aug 9th 2008, 05:12 AM
It's not necessary for salvation.

Why is it commanded That's what I was trying to ask, sorry maybe I'm not explaining myself well.

First of all, full disclosure: my Christianity is non-denominational. However, as I've talked about in other posts on this site, many on my family (including one of the women who raised me) belong to a Christian faith tradition which teaches that baptism is indeed for our salvation. And this particular faith tradition, and this teaching on baptism, is very, very old. This has definitely influenced my thinking on this subject. But I bring this up because I don't want this discussion to descend into denomination-bashing or proselytizing of any sort. Agreed? ;)

I believe that the Bible is the infallible, inerrent word of God, instilled with Truth breathed from the Holy Spirit Himself. I would like to have a serious discussion on this topic and try to work out the truth as best I can.

That being said...here are the scriptures in question. (btw, sorry if this has been brought up already, I only read the last page and not the entire thread yet.)

John 3:5 -- Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

1 Pet 3:21 -- Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22<A name=cy> who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers subject to him.

Acts 2:37-38 --Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, "Brethren, what shall we do?" 38 And Peter said to them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. -

Acts 22:16 -- 16And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name.

Any thoughts/feedback?

BrckBrln
Aug 9th 2008, 05:25 AM
Why is it commanded That's what I was trying to ask, sorry maybe I'm not explaining myself well.

First of all, full disclosure: my Christianity is non-denominational. However, as I've talked about in other posts on this site, many on my family (including one of the women who raised me) belong to a Christian faith tradition which teaches that baptism is indeed for our salvation. And this particular faith tradition, and this teaching on baptism, is very, very old. This has definitely influenced my thinking on this subject. But I bring this up because I don't want this discussion to descend into denomination-bashing or proselytizing of any sort. Agreed? ;)

I believe that the Bible is the infallible, inerrent word of God, instilled with Truth breathed from the Holy Spirit Himself. I would like to have a serious discussion on this topic and try to work out the truth as best I can.

That being said...here are the scriptures in question. (btw, sorry if this has been brought up already, I only read the last page and not the entire thread yet.)

John 3:5 -- Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

1 Pet 3:21 -- Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22<A name=cy> who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers subject to him.

Acts 2:37-38 --Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, "Brethren, what shall we do?" 38 And Peter said to them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. -

Acts 22:16 -- 16And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name.

Any thoughts/feedback?

It's commanded just like not sinning, spreading the gospel, communion, being Holy, and what not are commanded. All these things aren't required for a person to gain salvation. These are things we should do if we have saving faith but these good works, or any good works, don't save you.

And all those verses have been dealt with in the numerous baptism threads we've had before.

hisclay
Aug 9th 2008, 05:42 AM
Urban,

Agreed. If Jesus gives salvaton freely, but then takes it back based on works, WE ARE ALL DOOMED!!

Christian dog love
Aug 9th 2008, 08:22 PM
Going to church or not does NOT make you a Christian it is simply a good way for Christians to fellowship there are even people at church who just "go through the motions" so to speak who AREN'T Christians so going to church or not has NO bearing on if you are a Christian. Also while only few people will accually ACCEPT Christ that doesn't mean that God doesn'tg desiore for all to come to know him because he created us in his image(including free will) also no I do not beleive that death is non-exsistence.

Sandusky
Aug 9th 2008, 09:26 PM
It's commanded just like not sinning, spreading the gospel, communion, being Holy, and what not are commanded. All these things aren't required for a person to gain salvation. These are things we should do if we have saving faith but these good works, or any good works, don't save you.

And all those verses have been dealt with in the numerous baptism threads we've had before.

Ok, well...thanks for that info. I'm asking now, again. ;)

lendtay
Aug 10th 2008, 01:02 AM
Going to church or not does NOT make you a Christian it is simply a good way for Christians to fellowship


I agree, I know many good Christians who have a strong relationship with God, who do not, (or rarely) attend church services.

Butch5
Aug 10th 2008, 01:47 AM
Why is it commanded That's what I was trying to ask, sorry maybe I'm not explaining myself well.

First of all, full disclosure: my Christianity is non-denominational. However, as I've talked about in other posts on this site, many on my family (including one of the women who raised me) belong to a Christian faith tradition which teaches that baptism is indeed for our salvation. And this particular faith tradition, and this teaching on baptism, is very, very old. This has definitely influenced my thinking on this subject. But I bring this up because I don't want this discussion to descend into denomination-bashing or proselytizing of any sort. Agreed? ;)

I believe that the Bible is the infallible, inerrent word of God, instilled with Truth breathed from the Holy Spirit Himself. I would like to have a serious discussion on this topic and try to work out the truth as best I can.

That being said...here are the scriptures in question. (btw, sorry if this has been brought up already, I only read the last page and not the entire thread yet.)

John 3:5 -- Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

1 Pet 3:21 -- Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22<A name=cy> who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers subject to him.

Acts 2:37-38 --Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, "Brethren, what shall we do?" 38 And Peter said to them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. -

Acts 22:16 -- 16And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name.

Any thoughts/feedback?

Hi Sandusky,

I used to believe that baptism was just to show obedience, however after studying the Scriptures I have come to the same understanding that you have.
Baptism is most definitely necessary for salvation. In addition to the verses you mentioned here is another very important verse regarding baptism,


Titus 3:5 ( KJV ) 5Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

Here Paul explicitly states that God saved us through baptism.

Also the early church believed that baptism was required for salvation, here are some quotes.

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1

Barnabas 70-130
Further, what says He? “And there was a river flowing on the right, and from it arose beautiful trees; and whosoever shall eat of them shall live for ever.” (Ezek. 47:12) This meaneth, that we indeed descend into the water full of sins and defilement, but come up, bearing fruit in our heart, having the fear [of God] and trust in Jesus in our spirit. “And whosoever shall eat of these shall live for ever,”
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 2
Hermas 150

And I said to him, “I should like to continue my questions.” “Speak on,” said he. And I said, “I heard, sir, some teachers maintain that there is no other repentance than that which takes place, when we descended into the water and received remission of our former sins.” He said to me, “That was sound doctrine which you heard; for that is really the case. For he who has received remission of his sins ought not to sin any more, but to live in purity

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 2
Hermas 150

Accordingly, those also who fell asleep received the seal of the Son of God. For,” he continued, “before a man bears the name of the Son of God he is dead; but when he receives the seal he lays aside his deadness, and obtains life. The seal, then, is the water: they descend into the water dead, and they arise alive.
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1
Justin Martyr 160

Since at our birth we were born without our own knowledge or choice, by our parents coming together, and were brought up in bad habits and wicked training; in order that we may not remain the children of necessity and of ignorance, but may become the children of choice and knowledge, and may obtain in the water the remission of sins formerly committed, there is pronounced over him who chooses to be born again, and has repented of his sins, the name of God the Father and Lord of the universe; he who leads to the laver the person that is to be washed calling him by this name alone.
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1
Justin Martyr 160
But there is no other [way] than this,—to become acquainted with this Christ, to be washed in the fountain spoken of by Isaiah for the remission of sins; and for the rest, to live sinless lives.”

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1
Irenaeus 180 Disciple of Polycarp who was a disciple of the apostle John.
In refuting the Gnostics

And when we come to refute them, we shall show in its fitting-place, that this class of men have been instigated by Satan to a denial of that baptism which is regeneration to God, and thus to a renunciation of the whole [Christian] faith.
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1
Irenaeus 180

“And dipped himself,” says [the Scripture], “seven times in Jordan.” (2 Ki. 5:14) It was not for nothing that Naaman of old, when suffering from leprosy, was purified upon his being baptized, but [it served] as an indication to us. For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions; being spiritually regenerated as new-born babes, even as the Lord has declared: “Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.” (John 3:5)
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 2
Clement of Alexandria 195

Then within the same period John prophesied till the baptism of salvation; and after the birth of Christ, Anna and Simeon.
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 3
Tertullian 195

Happy is our sacrament of water, in that, by washing away the sins of our early blindness, we are set free and admitted into eternal life!
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 3
Tertullian 195

But we, little fishes, after the example of our ΙΧΘΥΣ3III-2-3 Jesus Christ, are born in water,
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 3
Tertullian 195

When, however, the prescript is laid down that “without baptism, salvation is attainable by none” (chiefly on the ground of that declaration of the Lord, who says, “Unless one be born of water, he hath not life” (John 3:5, not fully given)), there arise immediately scrupulous, nay rather audacious, doubts on the part of some,
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 9
Origen 228

Matthew alone adds the words “to repentance,” teaching that the benefit of baptism is connected with the intention of the baptized person; to him who repents it is salutary, but to him who comes to it without repentance it will turn to greater condemnation.

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 9
Origen 228
“by the laver of regeneration,” (Titus 3:5) through which they were born “as new-born babes,
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 6
Pamohilius 309

Of the divine descent of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost which lighted on them who believed. In this we have also the instruction delivered by Peter, and * passages from the prophets on the subject, and * on the passion and resurrection and assumption of Christ, and the gift of the Holy Ghost; also * of the faith of those present, and their salvation by baptism; and, further,* of the unity of spirit pervading the believers and promoting the common good, and of the addition made to their number.

karembli
Aug 13th 2008, 12:52 AM
In Acts 16, when Paul and Silas were in prison and they showed an excellent Christian attitude by NOT escaping when there was an earthquake that opened the doors of the prison, the prison guard asked them, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?"

What was the simple answer? "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved..."

Now Paul taught that BELIEF is what? Belief in the GOSPEL - and that is that Jesus died, was buried, and was resurrected. If we believe that, then we are saved.

Nothing else saves a person. Baptism doesn't save. Church membership doesn't save. Works don't save. FAITH in the Lord Jesus Christ is what saves!

hisclay
Aug 13th 2008, 04:53 AM
In Acts 16, when Paul and Silas were in prison and they showed an excellent Christian attitude by NOT escaping when there was an earthquake that opened the doors of the prison, the prison guard asked them, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?"

What was the simple answer? "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved..."

Now Paul taught that BELIEF is what? Belief in the GOSPEL - and that is that Jesus died, was buried, and was resurrected. If we believe that, then we are saved.

Nothing else saves a person. Baptism doesn't save. Church membership doesn't save. Works don't save. FAITH in the Lord Jesus Christ is what saves!

it seems strange how we tend to mess up the pure love of Jesus by saying, ok Jesus, I know you died on the cross and so on, but come on, believing you died and rose again and have forgiven my sins, thats too easy, theres gotta be more I must do do be saved.

Our journey of Faith started by Faith in Christ but somehow we have difficulty believing it can be that easy.

Its like someone giving you the keys to their car or home and saying here, its yours. And then them saying, oops, I forgot, if you want to keep it you need to do this, and this, and this, and so on.

The fact of the matter is those who have been set free by the love of Jesus are free, period.

karembli
Aug 13th 2008, 02:00 PM
AMEN Hisclay! How true! It is Faith + NOTHING!!!! We are all saved sinners. There is NOTHING we can add to the Free gift of God through Christ Jesus our Lord. He died for us! Do we think we can trump that by adding things to it? Doesn't that denigrade that incredible free gift that we have by FAITH?

Bryan43
Aug 13th 2008, 11:11 PM
wanted to correct a poster here.


I used to believe that baptism was just to show obedience, however after studying the Scriptures I have come to the same understanding that you have.
Baptism is most definitely necessary for salvation. In addition to the verses you mentioned here is another very important verse regarding baptism,



Titus 3:5 ( KJV ) 5Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;


first off I wonder why you did not bold the fact that our salvation is not because of any works we did, which would include water baptism.

secondly. I wonder why you did not highlight the renewing of the holy spirit, which paul shows us who is the one doing the baptising?


Here Paul explicitly states that God saved us through baptism.

No, here paul tells us it is not because any acts of works we do on our own. but the act of God the holy spirit washing us, and renewing us. which is holy spirit baptism, and new birth.

Bryan43
Aug 13th 2008, 11:16 PM
Now Paul taught that BELIEF is what? Belief in the GOSPEL - and that is that Jesus died, was buried, and was resurrected. If we believe that, then we are saved.

Yes, in fact in John 6 Jesus said it was the work of God that we believe in the one he sent. God did all the work. all he asks is our faith.

Faith is the key word. Hebrews tells us faith is not seen. it is a hope.

Paul tells us faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Paul tells titus that our hope, which is eternal life. was promised before time began. And God CAN NOT lie.

do we have faith in all these things? Are we willing to give total humility. totally set aside our pride. and recieve the saving act of Christ on our behalf? Are we willing to admit there is nothing we can do to save ourselves?? ( this is totally against human nature)

do we trust God completely with our eternal lives??

this is total faith in Christ. and this is what saves.

the works as paul said in eph 2: 10 follow.

James states that those who profess salvation, yet have no faith ( or dead faith ) will do not works. which proves their faith was dead.

Hope this helps.

karembli
Aug 18th 2008, 02:34 AM
Yes, in fact in John 6 Jesus said it was the work of God that we believe in the one he sent. God did all the work. all he asks is our faith.

Faith is the key word. Hebrews tells us faith is not seen. it is a hope...



I agree with you Bryan. Or I should say God's WORD agrees with you.

losthorizon
Aug 18th 2008, 04:02 AM
No, here paul tells us it is not because any acts of works we do on our own. but the act of God the holy spirit washing us, and renewing us. which is holy spirit baptism, and new birth.
You are mistaken again – it is when we obey the Lord in baptism (an immersion in water) that the Holy Spirit cleanses our hearts - when we are born of water and the Spirit (the new birth). On the day of Pentecost those 3000 believers asked the important question – what must we do to be saved. Peter didn’t say there is nothing you need to do because you have already believed. He didn’t say you have believed so you are now saved. What he did tell them was now that you have believed you need to do something else to complete your conversion into Christ – why – because their sins had not yet been “remitted” by the blood of Christ. What else did Peter say they must do – he told them they must also “repent” and be “baptized” in water and then (and only then) would their sins be remitted and they would receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. We clearly see there are acts of obedience that take place before our sins are remitted – we must believe, repent and be baptized then comes remission of sins…
Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? 38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. Acts 2:37-38 (KJV)

Butch5
Aug 18th 2008, 12:53 PM
In Acts 16, when Paul and Silas were in prison and they showed an excellent Christian attitude by NOT escaping when there was an earthquake that opened the doors of the prison, the prison guard asked them, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?"

What was the simple answer? "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved..."

Now Paul taught that BELIEF is what? Belief in the GOSPEL - and that is that Jesus died, was buried, and was resurrected. If we believe that, then we are saved.

Nothing else saves a person. Baptism doesn't save. Church membership doesn't save. Works don't save. FAITH in the Lord Jesus Christ is what saves!


Karembli---Now Paul taught that BELIEF is what? Belief in the GOSPEL - and that is that Jesus died, was buried, and was resurrected. If we believe that, then we are saved.

You have to take ALL of Pauls teaching into account not just one statement that He made. Can you prove that that is all that Paul taught as belief? What did Peter teach? Did Peter not teach believe, repent, and be baptized? What about Phillip did He know the gospel? Because after He preached to the eunuch, the eunuch said "here is water what does hinder me from being baptized?" Obviously Phillip taught Baptism in His gospel. If Paul believed that you only needed to believe to be saved, why then, did He say that God saves us through the washing of regeneration?


Titus 3:5 ( KJV ) 5Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

Why did Jesus say unless a man is born of water and of the Spirit He cannot see the kingdom of heaven? Why did Jesus say He who believes and is baptized shall be saved?

Paul also said this,

Romans 6:3-5 ( YLT ) 3are ye ignorant that we, as many as were baptized to Christ Jesus, to his death were baptized? 4we were buried together, then, with him through the baptism to the death, that even as Christ was raised up out of the dead through the glory of the Father, so also we in newness of life might walk. 5For, if we have become planted together to the likeness of his death, so also we shall be of the rising again;


Paul says that as many as were baptized were baptized into the death of Christ. If we are baptized, then as Christ was raised by the Father, we through baptism might walk in newness of life. Now let's look at the word newness,

Thayer’s Greek Definitions

G2538 καινότης kainotēs Thayer Definition: 1) newness 1a) in the new state of life in which the Holy Spirit places us so as to produce a new state which is eternal life

The Complete Word Study Dictionary: New Testament


G2538. καινότης kainotēs; gen. kainotētos, fem. noun from kainos (G2537), new. Renewal, not simply an experience similar to the past, but a qualitatively different one. In the NT used in a moral sense, “in newness of life” (Rom. 6:4), meaning in a qualitatively new life with the indwelling of Christ. See Rom. 7:6. Contrast neos (G3501), temporally new, and also the verb ananeoō (G365), to renew, to have a new or another experience the same as in the past. Syn.: neotēs (G3503), newness, youthfulness; anakainōsis (G342), renewing. Ant.: palaiotēs (G3821), oldness; in the moral sense: the old man, ho palaios anthrōpos (palaios [G3820]; anthrōpos (G444)).

Strong’s Hebrew and Greek Dictionaries

G2538 καινότης kainotēs kahee-not'-ace From G2537; renewal (figuratively):—newness.



From these definitions it is clear that the word newness carries with it the idea of regeneration or being born again. Paul says that this newness comes to us as a direct result of our being buried with Him (Christ) in baptism. Paul goes on to say in verse 5, If we have been planted together in the likeness of His death (baptism), we also shall be of the rising (resurrection). So Paul says that for us to take part in the resurrection we must be planted together with Him (Christ) in the likeness of His death (baptism). How anyone can read these Scriptures and say baptism is not necessary for salvation amazes me. Paul here, clearly says that in order to take part in the resurrection one must be baptized into Christ's death.

Butch5
Aug 18th 2008, 01:29 PM
wanted to correct a poster here.





first off I wonder why you did not bold the fact that our salvation is not because of any works we did, which would include water baptism.

secondly. I wonder why you did not highlight the renewing of the holy spirit, which paul shows us who is the one doing the baptising?



No, here paul tells us it is not because any acts of works we do on our own. but the act of God the holy spirit washing us, and renewing us. which is holy spirit baptism, and new birth.

Before you correct someone you might want to make sure they are wrong.


Bryan43---first off I wonder why you did not bold the fact that our salvation is not because of any works we did, which would include water baptism.


The reason I didn't the reference the works is because that was not what I was speaking of. However since you brought it up. Paul says it is not of works of righteousness that we have done, but by the washing of regeneration. Paul has contrasted the washing of regeneration with our works of righteousness, he says the washing, is not righteous works that we have done.


Bryan43---
secondly. I wonder why you did not highlight the renewing of the holy spirit, which paul shows us who is the one doing the baptising?

You might want to reread the passage, Paul says, by the washing of regeneration AND renewing of the Holy Spirit. The renewing of the Holy Spirit is Spirit baptism. So we have both baptisms mentioned in this verse, water and Spirit.

The Complete Word Study Dictionary: New Testament

G342. ἀνακαίνωσις anakainōsis; gen. ankainōseōs, fem. noun from anakainoō (G341), to renew qualitatively. Therefore, a renewing or a renovation which makes a person different than in the past. Occurs in Rom. 12:2; Titus 3:5 (cf. John 3:5). See also anakainizō (G340), to renew qualitatively. Let's look at the word renewing.

Thayer’s Greek Definitions

G342 ἀνακαίνωσις anakainōsis Thayer Definition: 1) a renewal, renovation, complete change for the better

Strong’s Hebrew and Greek Dictionaries

G342 ἀνακαίνωσις anakainōsis an-ak-ah'ee-no-sis From G341; renovation:—renewing.

We see from this that Paul is saying that God saved us by the washing of regeneration (baptism for the remission of sins) and renewing of the Spirit (Renovation of our spirit). Both of these were used by God to save us.


Bryan43---No, here paul tells us it is not because any acts of works we do on our own. but the act of God the holy spirit washing us, and renewing us. which is holy spirit baptism, and new birth.


Can you supply Scripture that shows our sins are washed away by the Holy Spirit?

Butch5
Aug 18th 2008, 01:35 PM
Yes, in fact in John 6 Jesus said it was the work of God that we believe in the one he sent. God did all the work. all he asks is our faith.

Faith is the key word. Hebrews tells us faith is not seen. it is a hope.

Paul tells us faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Paul tells titus that our hope, which is eternal life. was promised before time began. And God CAN NOT lie.

do we have faith in all these things? Are we willing to give total humility. totally set aside our pride. and recieve the saving act of Christ on our behalf? Are we willing to admit there is nothing we can do to save ourselves?? ( this is totally against human nature)

do we trust God completely with our eternal lives??

this is total faith in Christ. and this is what saves.

the works as paul said in eph 2: 10 follow.

James states that those who profess salvation, yet have no faith ( or dead faith ) will do not works. which proves their faith was dead.

Hope this helps.

You've contradicted yourself here,


Bryan43---Are we willing to give total humility. totally set aside our pride. and recieve the saving act of Christ on our behalf? Are we willing to admit there is nothing we can do to save ourselves??


You say there is nothing we can do to save oursleves, yet you ask are we willing to receive? If we choose to receive, have we not done something?

Bryan43
Aug 18th 2008, 01:50 PM
You've contradicted yourself here,



You say there is nothing we can do to save oursleves, yet you ask are we willing to receive? If we choose to receive, have we not done something?

As I showed in John 6. Christ states our faith in him is not our work. but his work, because it is his work we are placing our faith in.

Faith is trusting someone else to do the work for you, or carry you through. It is not in and of itself a work.

thus there is no contradiction.

Bryan43
Aug 18th 2008, 01:59 PM
The reason I didn't the reference the works is because that was not what I was speaking of. However since you brought it up. Paul says it is not of works of righteousness that we have done, but by the washing of regeneration. Paul has contrasted the washing of regeneration with our works of righteousness, he says the washing, is not righteous works that we have done.

sorry but you can only make this claim by completely removing the rest of the verse.

paul states it is the washing and regeneration of the holy spirit. he claims it is the holy spirit doing the work. Not ourselves. It is a spiritual matter, not a physical one. Not one of which we work to partake in.

unless you want to take credit for the work of God, I suggest you rethink your position.


You might want to reread the passage, Paul says, by the washing of regeneration AND renewing of the Holy Spirit. The renewing of the Holy Spirit is Spirit baptism. So we have both baptisms mentioned in this verse, water and Spirit.

Now your pushing it. And would have to push it quite far to even conclude this rediculous thought.

1 Corinthians 6:11 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=53&chapter=6&verse=11&version=50&context=verse)
And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.

sorry. But Paul makes it quite cler our washing is performed by the holy spirit. it is done by the blood of HCrist. for only the blood can make us clean. and the only way we can recieve the blood is to be baptised into his death, and this can only be performed By God. who is not restrained by time or physics. Only God can take us back to the cross. and immerse us in the blood of Christ. where our sins are washed away.



Can you supply Scripture that shows our sins are washed away by the Holy Spirit?


I just did ;)

Butch5
Aug 18th 2008, 03:50 PM
As I showed in John 6. Christ states our faith in him is not our work. but his work, because it is his work we are placing our faith in.

Faith is trusting someone else to do the work for you, or carry you through. It is not in and of itself a work.

thus there is no contradiction.

I beg to differ, you said are we willing to receive, that is doing something. If you receive, you are doing something. In the same statement you said there is nothing we can do. This is a contradiction.

Bryan43
Aug 18th 2008, 04:13 PM
I beg to differ, you said are we willing to receive, that is doing something. If you receive, you are doing something. In the same statement you said there is nothing we can do. This is a contradiction.


I beg to differ, you said are we willing to receive, that is doing something. If you receive, you are doing something. In the same statement you said there is nothing we can do. This is a contradiction.

for by grace we HAVE BEEN saved through FAITH, not of works, lest any man be puffed up in pride.

if faith is a work. then we are ALL doomed.

Butch5
Aug 18th 2008, 04:18 PM
Bryan43---sorry but you can only make this claim by completely removing the rest of the verse.

paul states it is the washing and regeneration of the holy spirit. he claims it is the holy spirit doing the work. Not ourselves. It is a spiritual matter, not a physical one. Not one of which we work to partake in.

unless you want to take credit for the work of God, I suggest you rethink your position.


If I am incorrect then why did you ignore the evidence I have given?

I suggest you reread the verse. Paul does not say it is washing and regeneration of the the Holy Spirit. He says, God save us by, by what? Two things, the reason for the word and. What are those two things? one is the washing of regeneration and the other is the renewing of the Holy Spirit. Paul separates the washing from the renewing with the and making them two separate events.

Can you please explain what you think the the washing of regeneration is?




Bryan43---Now your pushing it. And would have to push it quite far to even conclude this rediculous thought.

1 Corinthians 6:11 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=53&chapter=6&verse=11&version=50&context=verse)
And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.

sorry. But Paul makes it quite cler our washing is performed by the holy spirit. it is done by the blood of HCrist. for only the blood can make us clean. and the only way we can recieve the blood is to be baptised into his death, and this can only be performed By God. who is not restrained by time or physics. Only God can take us back to the cross. and immerse us in the blood of Christ. where our sins are washed away.



How were they washed? I notice you didn't highlight, "in the name of the Lord Jesus"


Acts 2:38 ( KJV ) 38Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

See, Peter speaks here of the washing in the name of Jesus.

Can you please explain how someone can be washed by the Spirit who has not been water baptized to receive the Spirit ?


Also can you give some evidence other than your opinion, that Titus 3:5 refers to Spiritual washing

Butch5
Aug 18th 2008, 04:22 PM
for by grace we HAVE BEEN saved through FAITH, not of works, lest any man be puffed up in pride.

if faith is a work. then we are ALL doomed.

That's just your misunderstanding of the Scripture. however you have not dealt with the issue. The issue was you statement, in which you said we must be willing to receive, and at the same time we can do nothing. If we receive we are doing something. If we don't have to do anything then you have Calvinistic election.

Bryan43
Aug 18th 2008, 04:33 PM
That's just your misunderstanding of the Scripture. however you have not dealt with the issue. The issue was you statement, in which you said we must be willing to receive, and at the same time we can do nothing. If we receive we are doing something. If we don't have to do anything then you have Calvinistic election.


Sorry paul said not of works. but faith only. unless you wish to call paul a liar.

he also said in eph 1: 13 - 14

Eph 1: 13 - 14 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory.

He makes it clear. first we have to hear the word. then we must chose to believe ( have faith) in the word we hear. or we chose to reject it.

If we chose to believe in it. as he said. we are sealed with the holy spirit, who is our guarantee until the day of the ressurection.

Paul also states in another passage that coinsides with this that faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Faith comes in listening to what someone has to say, and recieving it as truth.

Paul also states in romans that


Rom 10 : 9 - 13 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. For the Scripture says, “?Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.?” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him. For “whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.?”

In niether of these passages is water baptism involved. It is our faith that saves us. Our faith in the words jesus gives. As he also said in John 6

It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life.

The only way to life is through listening to the words of Christ. and all those who have written the words of God through instruction of the Holy Spirit.

to deny the spirits work in washing, renewing ( born again) or even our faith is to deny God.

again. if faith is a work. we are ALL doomed.

as for Calvin. Calvin rejects free will. because he rejects true faith, saying one is forced to believe, or forced to not believe.

God is free will. we must chose to listen to his words. and either trust him. or reject him.

He did all the work. are we willing to accept his work. or turn a blind eye and reject.

losthorizon
Aug 19th 2008, 12:40 AM
Sorry paul said not of works. but faith only.


You're mistaken - belief and baptism are both those works which are the fruit of faith and have nothing whatsoever to do with works of self-righteousness done to “earn” salvation. Both are commanded by God and to obey His commands from the heart is to do His work.
“He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved...” (Mark 16:16)

"These words are very important. The first clause [belief and baptism] opposes the notion that faith alone is sufficient for salvation, without those works which are the fruit of faith" ~ Pulpit Commentary

Butch5
Aug 19th 2008, 01:01 AM
Sorry paul said not of works. but faith only. unless you wish to call paul a liar.

he also said in eph 1: 13 - 14

Eph 1: 13 - 14 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory.

He makes it clear. first we have to hear the word. then we must chose to believe ( have faith) in the word we hear. or we chose to reject it.

If we chose to believe in it. as he said. we are sealed with the holy spirit, who is our guarantee until the day of the ressurection.

Paul also states in another passage that coinsides with this that faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Faith comes in listening to what someone has to say, and recieving it as truth.

Paul also states in romans that


Rom 10 : 9 - 13 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. For the Scripture says, “?Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.?” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him. For “whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.?”

In niether of these passages is water baptism involved. It is our faith that saves us. Our faith in the words jesus gives. As he also said in John 6

It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life.

The only way to life is through listening to the words of Christ. and all those who have written the words of God through instruction of the Holy Spirit.

to deny the spirits work in washing, renewing ( born again) or even our faith is to deny God.

again. if faith is a work. we are ALL doomed.

as for Calvin. Calvin rejects free will. because he rejects true faith, saying one is forced to believe, or forced to not believe.

God is free will. we must chose to listen to his words. and either trust him. or reject him.

He did all the work. are we willing to accept his work. or turn a blind eye and reject.

Please show me where Paul says we are saved by faith alone.

Why don't you take ALL of what Paul and Jesus taught, instead of just the parts that fit your theology? You are correct that Paul did in fact make the statements that you posted above. He also said this,

Romans 6:4-5 ( KJV ) 4Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. 5For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:

Notice verse 5, if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death (baptism), we shall also be raised in the resurrection. Paul says if we are baptized we will be resurrected, he doesn't say if you only believe you will be resurrected. Paul also said,


Galatians 3:26-29 ( KJV ) 26For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. 27For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 28There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. 29And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

You are all children of God through Faith in Christ, and we see that part of that faith is baptism because in the next verse Paul says, as many as have been baptized have put on Christ. This is how we get "in Christ" If you are not baptized, then according to Paul you are not in Christ. Paul also says if you are in Christ you are heir to hte promises, if you are not "in Christ" you are not heir to the promises.

Why don't you take all of Jesus teachings? Jesus said,


Mark 16:15-16 ( KJV ) 15And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 16He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

If it is as you say and we only need faith , why do you suppose that Jesus didn't just say that? Why do you suppose Jesus would say He who believes AND is baptized shall be saved? Is Jesus adding works? Or is it like Paul said, baptism is not a work of our righteousness.

I think you ought to take ALL of the teachings of Paul and Jesus, not just the parts that fit what you believe.

You mentioned Ephesians 1:13, how is a person sealed?

Also you did not explain what you understood the baptism of the Holy Spirit to be.

lendtay
Aug 21st 2008, 01:41 AM
How anyone can read these Scriptures and say baptism is not necessary for salvation amazes me. Paul here, clearly says that in order to take part in the resurrection one must be baptized into Christ's death.



Does baptism have to be total immersion, or can it be sprinkling someone with water?

losthorizon
Aug 21st 2008, 01:48 AM
Does baptism have to be total immersion, or can it be sprinkling someone with water?
Baptism is a burial in water – a burial into His death…
“Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection” Romans 6:3-5.

Butch5
Aug 21st 2008, 02:33 AM
Does baptism have to be total immersion, or can it be sprinkling someone with water?

Hi Lendtay,

While the Scriptures speak of immersion, the early church did allow for other forms of baptism for those who were unable to be immersed. Such as those on their death bed or if there was not a place available to immerse.

BrckBrln
Aug 21st 2008, 02:36 AM
Hi Lendtay,

While the Scriptures speak of immersion, the early church did allow for other forms of baptism for those who were unable to be immersed. Such as those on their death bed or if there was not a place available to immerse.

So should we follow the scriptures or the early church?

losthorizon
Aug 21st 2008, 02:40 AM
So should we follow the scriptures or the early church?
I would vote for Scripture.

BrckBrln
Aug 21st 2008, 02:42 AM
I would vote for Scripture.

Me too. So that would mean that baptism is only by immersion, right? So it still leaves open the death bed scenario. ;)

losthorizon
Aug 21st 2008, 02:46 AM
Me too. So that would mean that baptism is only by immersion, right? So it still leaves open the death bed scenario. ;)
Yes and unfortunately Holy Writ is silent but in all conversions recorded in the NT God allowed the time needed to be immersed in water. :)

BrckBrln
Aug 21st 2008, 02:50 AM
Yes and unfortunately Holy Writ is silent but in all conversions recorded in the NT God allowed the time needed to be immersed in water. :)

Can't argue with that. But how much time will God give a person? :hmm:

losthorizon
Aug 21st 2008, 03:33 AM
Can't argue with that. But how much time will God give a person? :hmm:
Well He is longsuffering but time certainly runs out for some. I think the rule of thumb would be… "Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation" (2 Cor. 6:2)

BrckBrln
Aug 21st 2008, 03:55 AM
Well He is longsuffering but time certainly runs out for some. I think the rule of thumb would be… "Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation" (2 Cor. 6:2)

So I guess some are more lucky than others?

losthorizon
Aug 21st 2008, 04:02 AM
So I guess some are more lucky than others?
I don’t believe in luck when it comes to salvation.

BrckBrln
Aug 21st 2008, 04:06 AM
I don’t believe in luck when it comes to salvation.

Neither do I. But is it really fair for a person to have 30 years to go from believing to being baptized and another person only having a few days?

losthorizon
Aug 21st 2008, 12:28 PM
Neither do I. But is it really fair for a person to have 30 years to go from believing to being baptized and another person only having a few days?
Again – the Bible gives the best answer – in all the conversions recorded in NT baptism came shortly after belief – same day…”now is the accepted time… now is the day of salvation..."

BrckBrln
Aug 21st 2008, 02:24 PM
Again – the Bible gives the best answer – in all the conversions recorded in NT baptism came shortly after belief – same day…”now is the accepted time… now is the day of salvation..."

That's not really an answer though.

lendtay
Aug 21st 2008, 02:27 PM
Hi Lendtay,

While the Scriptures speak of immersion, the early church did allow for other forms of baptism for those who were unable to be immersed. Such as those on their death bed or if there was not a place available to immerse.

That makes sense.
I think Jesus was baptized by being immersed in a river. I think this is also how John the Baptist would baptize people. But in that part of the world, people did not always have access to large bodies of water. They might have had to travel quite a distance to get to a river or lake. I don't think its possible they were always immersed.

Bryan43
Aug 21st 2008, 03:14 PM
Does baptism have to be total immersion, or can it be sprinkling someone with water?

one must look at the origional greek word to see this.

baptizo comes from the greek word bapto, which means to dip.

to sprinkle comes from the greek word rantizo.

so we have three forms,

bapto- to dip
rantizo- to sprinkle
baptizo- to immerse, or completely submerge ( unlike dipping, which would be a partial immersion)

I would recommend doing what God commanded us to do. and not listen to men, who have belittled his baptism and made it something it was never meant to be.

Bryan43
Aug 21st 2008, 03:17 PM
Can't argue with that. But how much time will God give a person? :hmm:

fortunately for God and us, water baptism is not essential for salvation. The thief was never baptised, as he did not have time. no different than a man on his deathbed.

However, the man on his deathbed, if he placed his trust in Christ, has been baptised by God the holy spirit into Christs death, and his body. so he is saved without the need for water.

I do not think God is going to punish him because he did not have a chance to be immersed. My step-sister never had the chance, her medical condition would not allow it. But I know she is in heaven today!

BrckBrln
Aug 21st 2008, 03:19 PM
fortunately for God and us, water baptism is not essential for salvation. The thief was never baptised, as he did not have time. no different than a man on his deathbed.

However, the man on his deathbed, if he placed his trust in Christ, has been baptised by God the holy spirit into Christs death, and his body. so he is saved without the need for water.

I do not think God is going to punish him because he did not have a chance to be immersed. My step-sister never had the chance, her medical condition would not allow it. But I know she is in heaven today!

Yeah, I agree with you.

lendtay
Aug 21st 2008, 05:27 PM
I am wondering how people in that country during biblical times would always have access to large bodies of water. They might have to travel for days to get to a lake or river. I think during biblical times, many people were sprinkled with water instead.

Butch5
Aug 21st 2008, 08:25 PM
I am wondering how people in that country during biblical times would always have access to large bodies of water. They might have to travel for days to get to a lake or river. I think during biblical times, many people were sprinkled with water instead.

Here is the definition of the Greek word for baptized used in Acts 2:38, from three Greek dictionaires.


Strong’s Hebrew and Greek Dictionaries

G907 βαπτίζω baptizō bap-tid'-zo From a derivative of G911; to make whelmed (that is, fully wet); used only (in the New Testament) of ceremonial ablution, especially (technically) of the ordinance of Christian baptism:—baptist, baptize, wash.

Thayer’s Greek Definitions

G907 βαπτίζω baptizō Thayer Definition: 1) to dip repeatedly, to immerse, to submerge (of vessels sunk) 2) to cleanse by dipping or submerging, to wash, to make clean with water, to wash one’s self, bathe 3) to overwhelm Part of Speech: verb

The Complete Word Study Dictionary: New Testament

G907. βαπτίζω baptizō; fut. baptisō, from baptō (G911), to dip. Immerse, submerge for a religious purpose, to overwhelm, saturate, baptize (John 1:25). (I) Washing or ablution was frequently by immersion, indicated by either baptizō or niptō (G3538), to wash. In Mark 7:3, the phrase “wash their hands” is the translation of niptō (G3538), to wash part of the body such as the hands. In Mark 7:4 the verb wash in “except they wash” is baptizomai, to immerse. This indicates that the washing of the hands was done by immersing them in collected water. See Luke 11:38 which refers to washing one’s hands before the meal, with the use of baptizomai, to have the hands baptized. In the Sept.: 2 Kings 5:13, 14 we have louō (G3068), to bathe and baptizomai. See also Lev. 11:25, 28, 40, where plunō (G4150), to wash clothes by dipping, and louō (G3068), to bathe are used. In Num. 19:18, 19, baphō, to dip, and plunō, to wash by dipping are used. (II) To baptize or immerse in or wash with water in token of purification from sin and spiritual pollution (Matt. 3:6, 11; Mark 1:4, 5, 8, 9; Luke 3:7, 12, 16, 21; 7:30; John 1:25, 28; 3:22, 23, 26; 4:1, 2; 10:40; Acts 2:38, 41; 8:12, 13, 36, 38; 9:18; 10:47; 16:15, 33; 18:8; 22:16; 1 Cor. 1:14, 16, 17). In Mark 6:14, “John the baptizing one [ho baptizōn]” (a.t.). In Luke’s writings with a dat. of the instrument or material employed, hudati, the dat. of hudōr (G5204), water, means with water (Luke 3:16; Acts 1:5; 11:16). Elsewhere, however, the prep. en (G1722), in, is used, en hudati, in water (Matt. 3:11; Mark 1:8; John 1:26, 31, 33 (cf. “in the Jordan” [a.t. (Matt. 3:6)]). In Mark 1:9, eis (G1519), into, “into the Jordan” (a.t.).

Butch5
Aug 21st 2008, 08:32 PM
Bryan43---fortunately for God and us, water baptism is not essential for salvation.

Even though Jesus said it is?


Bryan43---The thief was never baptised, as he did not have time.
The thief was saved under the OT covenant, not the New


no different than a man on his deathbed.


Bryan43---I do not think God is going to punish him because he did not have a chance to be immersed.

There's the key, he did not have a chance to be baptized. That is why a person should be baptized immediately upon believing.

Bryan43
Aug 21st 2008, 10:51 PM
since butch opened the door by using greek studies.

this is something you might all enjoy..

the following is taken from weist.. word studies in the greek new testament..
Baptise, baptism, these two words are not native to the english language, therefore do not have any intrinsic meaning of their own. The only rightfull meaning they can have is the one derived from the greek word of which they are the spelling. The verb is spelled Baptizo, from which a slight change in spelling we get our worde baptize, the noun is baptisma, and taking off the last letter we have baptism.

we will study these words first in their classic usage. The word baptizo is related to another greek word bapto. the latter meant to dip, dip under. it was used of the smith tempering the red hot steel. it was also used of the sense of to dip in die, to colour or steep. it was used in the act of dieing the hair, and of glazing earthen vessels. it was used as a proverb in the sense of "steeping someone in crimson". that is giving him a bloddy caxcomb. It meant also to fill by dipping in, to draw. It was used of a ship that dipped, that is sank. Baptiso the related word meant to dip repeatedly. it was used of the act of sinking ships. it meant also to bathe. it was used in the phrase soaked in wine. where the word soaked, is the meaning of baptizo. it is found in the phrase overhead and ears in debt, where the word overhead and ears, are the graphic nature of what the word meant. the word here therefor means completely submerged. our present day english equivilent would be sunk.
A baptes is one who dips or dyes. a baptisis is a dipping, bathing, a washing, a drawing of water. A baptisma is that which is dipped, a baptisteron is a bathing place, a baptistes is one that dips, a dyer, baptos means dipped, dyed. bright colored, drawn like water.
Baptizo is used in the 9th book of the odyssey, where the hissing of the burning eye of the cyclops is compaired to the sound of water where the smith dips ( baptizo) a piece of iron, tempering it. , in the battle of frogs and mice, it is said that a mouse thrust a frog with a reed, and the frogged leaped over the water, dying ( baptizo ) the weater with blood. Euripides uses the word as a ship which goes down in the water and does not come back to the surface. Lucian dreams that he has seen a huge bird shot with a mighty arrow, and as it flies high in the air, it dies ( baptizo) the earth with his blood. in Xenophon's Anabasis, we have the instance where the Greek soldiers placed ( baptizo) the points of their spears in a bowl of blood.
We come now to the usage of these words in the koine greek, giving examples from the papyri, the LXX, and the new testament.
In secular documents of the koine period, moulton and Milligan report the following uses of baptise.. A submerged boat, ceremonial ablusions, a person flooded or overwhelmed in calamities. they say that the word was used in its metaphorical sense even amoung the uneducated of people. . A biblical example of this is found in our Lords speaking of his passion as a baptism ( matt 10: 38), these scholars report the use of bapto as referring to fullers and dyers. the word is used of colored garments, and of wool to be dyed. the word baptisma is found in a question regaurding a new baptism someone is reported to be preaching. This use of the noun is peculiar to the N.T. and to ecclesiastical writers.
In the LXX we have in leviticus 4: 6 the words, and the priest shall dip ( bapto) his finger in the blood, and sprinkle (prosraino) of the blood seven times before the Lord. Here the word Bapto is found juxtaposition to prostriano, a verb closely allied with prozrantizo, baptiso meaning to dip, the latter verb to sprinkle
In the NT we have the rich man asking that lazurus dip ( bapto) his finger in water and cool his tongue. ( luke 16: 24 ). In Heb 9: 10, Baptisma is translated washings and refers to the ceremonial ablusions of Judaism. In Mark 7: 4 Baptisma is used of the ceremonial washings of cups, pots, brazen vessels and tables, Baptisma is used in Matt 3: 7 and baptizo in matt 3: 16 and 1 cor 14 of the rite of water baptism. In Mark 10: 38 our Lord speaks of his sufferings on the cross as the baptisma with which he is to be baptizo.
In these examples we see various uses of the words bapto and baptizo we discover three distinct usages, a mechanical, a ceremonial and a metaphoricle one.
The mechanical usage can be illustrated by the action of the smith dipping the hot iron in water, tempering it, or the dyer dipping the cloth in the dye for the purpose of dying it. these instances of the use of our greek word, give us the following defenition of the word in its mechanical usage. the word refers to the introduction or placing of a person or thing into a new environment or into union with something else, as to alter its condition or its relationship to its previous environment or condition. While the word, we found, had other uses, yet the one that predominated above the others was the mechanical one. Observe how perfectly the meaning is in accord with the usage of the word in rom 6: 3- 4. where the believing sinner is baptized into vital union with Jesus Christ. The believing sinner is introduced or placed in Christ, thus comming into union with him. By that action, he is taken out of his old environment and condition in which he had lived, the first adam, and is placed into a new environment and condition, the last Adam. By this action his condition is changed from that of a lost sinner with a totally depraved nature to that of a saint with a devine nature. His relationship to the law of God is changed from that of a guilty sinner to that of a justified saint. All this is accomplish with the act of the Holy Spirit introducing, or placing us into vital union with Jesus Christ. No ceremony of water baptism ever did that!
The entire context is supernatural in its character. The greek word here should not be transliterated but translated. The translation should read; " as many were introduced (placed ) into Christ jesus, into his death were introduced. therefore we were buried with him through the aformentioned introduction into his death. The same holds true for 1 cor 12: 13; which should be translated " for through the instrumentality of one spirit, we were all placed into one body." It is because we so often associate the english word "baptism" with the rite of water baptism, that we read that ceremony into Romans 6.

Hope this helps

losthorizon
Aug 21st 2008, 11:36 PM
I am wondering how people in that country during biblical times would always have access to large bodies of water. They might have to travel for days to get to a lake or river. I think during biblical times, many people were sprinkled with water instead.
Jews of the first century practiced a ritual washing that required a full body immersion (mikvah) and they had special tanks constructed for this purpose in Jerusalem and elsewhere. There were also pools of water i e- the Pool of Siloam large enough to immerse many believers.
"And as Jesus passed by, He saw a man which was blind from his birth. And his disciples asked Him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?"

Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him. I must work the works of him that sent Me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work. As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.

When He had thus spoken, He spat on the ground, and made clay of the spittle, and He anointed the eyes of the blind man with the clay, And said unto him, Go, wash in the pool of Siloam, which is by interpretation, Sent. He went his way therefore, and washed, and came seeing."

http://www.bibleplaces.com/poolofsiloam.htm

Butch5
Aug 23rd 2008, 03:32 AM
since butch opened the door by using greek studies.

this is something you might all enjoy..

the following is taken from weist.. word studies in the greek new testament..
Baptise, baptism, these two words are not native to the english language, therefore do not have any intrinsic meaning of their own. The only rightfull meaning they can have is the one derived from the greek word of which they are the spelling. The verb is spelled Baptizo, from which a slight change in spelling we get our worde baptize, the noun is baptisma, and taking off the last letter we have baptism.

we will study these words first in their classic usage. The word baptizo is related to another greek word bapto. the latter meant to dip, dip under. it was used of the smith tempering the red hot steel. it was also used of the sense of to dip in die, to colour or steep. it was used in the act of dieing the hair, and of glazing earthen vessels. it was used as a proverb in the sense of "steeping someone in crimson". that is giving him a bloddy caxcomb. It meant also to fill by dipping in, to draw. It was used of a ship that dipped, that is sank. Baptiso the related word meant to dip repeatedly. it was used of the act of sinking ships. it meant also to bathe. it was used in the phrase soaked in wine. where the word soaked, is the meaning of baptizo. it is found in the phrase overhead and ears in debt, where the word overhead and ears, are the graphic nature of what the word meant. the word here therefor means completely submerged. our present day english equivilent would be sunk.
A baptes is one who dips or dyes. a baptisis is a dipping, bathing, a washing, a drawing of water. A baptisma is that which is dipped, a baptisteron is a bathing place, a baptistes is one that dips, a dyer, baptos means dipped, dyed. bright colored, drawn like water.
Baptizo is used in the 9th book of the odyssey, where the hissing of the burning eye of the cyclops is compaired to the sound of water where the smith dips ( baptizo) a piece of iron, tempering it. , in the battle of frogs and mice, it is said that a mouse thrust a frog with a reed, and the frogged leaped over the water, dying ( baptizo ) the weater with blood. Euripides uses the word as a ship which goes down in the water and does not come back to the surface. Lucian dreams that he has seen a huge bird shot with a mighty arrow, and as it flies high in the air, it dies ( baptizo) the earth with his blood. in Xenophon's Anabasis, we have the instance where the Greek soldiers placed ( baptizo) the points of their spears in a bowl of blood.
We come now to the usage of these words in the koine greek, giving examples from the papyri, the LXX, and the new testament.
In secular documents of the koine period, moulton and Milligan report the following uses of baptise.. A submerged boat, ceremonial ablusions, a person flooded or overwhelmed in calamities. they say that the word was used in its metaphorical sense even amoung the uneducated of people. . A biblical example of this is found in our Lords speaking of his passion as a baptism ( matt 10: 38), these scholars report the use of bapto as referring to fullers and dyers. the word is used of colored garments, and of wool to be dyed. the word baptisma is found in a question regaurding a new baptism someone is reported to be preaching. This use of the noun is peculiar to the N.T. and to ecclesiastical writers.
In the LXX we have in leviticus 4: 6 the words, and the priest shall dip ( bapto) his finger in the blood, and sprinkle (prosraino) of the blood seven times before the Lord. Here the word Bapto is found juxtaposition to prostriano, a verb closely allied with prozrantizo, baptiso meaning to dip, the latter verb to sprinkle
In the NT we have the rich man asking that lazurus dip ( bapto) his finger in water and cool his tongue. ( luke 16: 24 ). In Heb 9: 10, Baptisma is translated washings and refers to the ceremonial ablusions of Judaism. In Mark 7: 4 Baptisma is used of the ceremonial washings of cups, pots, brazen vessels and tables, Baptisma is used in Matt 3: 7 and baptizo in matt 3: 16 and 1 cor 14 of the rite of water baptism. In Mark 10: 38 our Lord speaks of his sufferings on the cross as the baptisma with which he is to be baptizo.
In these examples we see various uses of the words bapto and baptizo we discover three distinct usages, a mechanical, a ceremonial and a metaphoricle one.
The mechanical usage can be illustrated by the action of the smith dipping the hot iron in water, tempering it, or the dyer dipping the cloth in the dye for the purpose of dying it. these instances of the use of our greek word, give us the following defenition of the word in its mechanical usage. the word refers to the introduction or placing of a person or thing into a new environment or into union with something else, as to alter its condition or its relationship to its previous environment or condition. While the word, we found, had other uses, yet the one that predominated above the others was the mechanical one. Observe how perfectly the meaning is in accord with the usage of the word in rom 6: 3- 4. where the believing sinner is baptized into vital union with Jesus Christ. The believing sinner is introduced or placed in Christ, thus comming into union with him. By that action, he is taken out of his old environment and condition in which he had lived, the first adam, and is placed into a new environment and condition, the last Adam. By this action his condition is changed from that of a lost sinner with a totally depraved nature to that of a saint with a devine nature. His relationship to the law of God is changed from that of a guilty sinner to that of a justified saint. All this is accomplish with the act of the Holy Spirit introducing, or placing us into vital union with Jesus Christ. No ceremony of water baptism ever did that!
The entire context is supernatural in its character. The greek word here should not be transliterated but translated. The translation should read; " as many were introduced (placed ) into Christ jesus, into his death were introduced. therefore we were buried with him through the aformentioned introduction into his death. The same holds true for 1 cor 12: 13; which should be translated " for through the instrumentality of one spirit, we were all placed into one body." It is because we so often associate the english word "baptism" with the rite of water baptism, that we read that ceremony into Romans 6.

Hope this helps

Here, let me provide some who had a better understanding of Koine Greek than Wiest,

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1

Barnabas 70-130
Further, what says He? “And there was a river flowing on the right, and from it arose beautiful trees; and whosoever shall eat of them shall live for ever.” (Ezek. 47:12) This meaneth, that we indeed descend into the water full of sins and defilement, but come up, bearing fruit in our heart, having the fear [of God] and trust in Jesus in our spirit. “And whosoever shall eat of these shall live for ever,”
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 2
Hermas 150

And I said to him, “I should like to continue my questions.” “Speak on,” said he. And I said, “I heard, sir, some teachers maintain that there is no other repentance than that which takes place, when we descended into the water and received remission of our former sins.” He said to me, “That was sound doctrine which you heard; for that is really the case. For he who has received remission of his sins ought not to sin any more, but to live in purity

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 2
Hermas 150

Accordingly, those also who fell asleep received the seal of the Son of God. For,” he continued, “before a man bears the name of the Son of God he is dead; but when he receives the seal he lays aside his deadness, and obtains life. The seal, then, is the water: they descend into the water dead, and they arise alive.
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1
Justin Martyr 160

Since at our birth we were born without our own knowledge or choice, by our parents coming together, and were brought up in bad habits and wicked training; in order that we may not remain the children of necessity and of ignorance, but may become the children of choice and knowledge, and may obtain in the water the remission of sins formerly committed, there is pronounced over him who chooses to be born again, and has repented of his sins, the name of God the Father and Lord of the universe; he who leads to the laver the person that is to be washed calling him by this name alone.
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1
Justin Martyr 160
But there is no other [way] than this,—to become acquainted with this Christ, to be washed in the fountain spoken of by Isaiah for the remission of sins; and for the rest, to live sinless lives.”

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1
Irenaeus 180 Disciple of Polycarp who was a disciple of the apostle John.
In refuting the Gnostics

And when we come to refute them, we shall show in its fitting-place, that this class of men have been instigated by Satan to a denial of that baptism which is regeneration to God, and thus to a renunciation of the whole [Christian] faith.
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1
Irenaeus 180

“And dipped himself,” says [the Scripture], “seven times in Jordan.” (2 Ki. 5:14) It was not for nothing that Naaman of old, when suffering from leprosy, was purified upon his being baptized, but [it served] as an indication to us. For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions; being spiritually regenerated as new-born babes, even as the Lord has declared: “Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.” (John 3:5)
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 2
Clement of Alexandria 195

Then within the same period John prophesied till the baptism of salvation; and after the birth of Christ, Anna and Simeon.
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 3
Tertullian 195

Happy is our sacrament of water, in that, by washing away the sins of our early blindness, we are set free and admitted into eternal life!
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 3
Tertullian 195

But we, little fishes, after the example of our ΙΧΘΥΣ3III-2-3 Jesus Christ, are born in water,
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 3
Tertullian 195

When, however, the prescript is laid down that “without baptism, salvation is attainable by none” (chiefly on the ground of that declaration of the Lord, who says, “Unless one be born of water, he hath not life” (John 3:5, not fully given)), there arise immediately scrupulous, nay rather audacious, doubts on the part of some,
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 9
Origen 228

Matthew alone adds the words “to repentance,” teaching that the benefit of baptism is connected with the intention of the baptized person; to him who repents it is salutary, but to him who comes to it without repentance it will turn to greater condemnation.

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 9
Origen 228
“by the laver of regeneration,” (Titus 3:5) through which they were born “as new-born babes,
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 6
Pamohilius 309

Of the divine descent of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost which lighted on them who believed. In this we have also the instruction delivered by Peter, and * passages from the prophets on the subject, and * on the passion and resurrection and assumption of Christ, and the gift of the Holy Ghost; also * of the faith of those present, and their salvation by baptism; and, further,* of the unity of spirit pervading the believers and promoting the common good, and of the addition made to their number.

Bryan43
Aug 24th 2008, 12:47 PM
Thanks butch.

I will trust the writers of scripture first.

I will also trust those who have looked at roman secular writtings to see how the words were used in ancient roman literature.

as for those who claim to be early church fathers. well considering the whole time the nt was being written there were divisions. and considering we have nothing but Gods holy inspired word to know who was correct, and who was not..

I must again rely on the HS. and not men who claim they were given truth. and risk falling in the way of the pharisees, who were given directly the words of God, and who were truely from the seed of abraham, yet screwed up their interpretation of the word so poorly they ended up crucifying Christ. and shedding his true blood, of which can ONLY wash away sins.

Butch5
Aug 24th 2008, 09:37 PM
Thanks butch.

I will trust the writers of scripture first.

I will also trust those who have looked at roman secular writtings to see how the words were used in ancient roman literature.

as for those who claim to be early church fathers. well considering the whole time the nt was being written there were divisions. and considering we have nothing but Gods holy inspired word to know who was correct, and who was not..

I must again rely on the HS. and not men who claim they were given truth. and risk falling in the way of the pharisees, who were given directly the words of God, and who were truely from the seed of abraham, yet screwed up their interpretation of the word so poorly they ended up crucifying Christ. and shedding his true blood, of which can ONLY wash away sins.

So you will trust modern day "scholars" Who have to guess at what the SECULAR writers meant when they used the words, as opposed to those who were taught by the apostles. Yes there was division during the time the NT was being written, do you think there is less division today? Are the "scholars" in agreement? There may have been division during that time, however I contend that the division today is multiplied many times, over that which was present in NT times. Here is the crucial point. You are willing to accept modern day teachings derived from secular Greek writers of the NT times, Yet you reject the writings of those who were taught by the Apostles themselves, because they don't fit what you want to believe to be true. You say you will trust the writers of the Scriptures, did Paul intentionally teach His disciples incorrectly? Did John intentionally mislead His disciples? You say you will trust the writers of the NT, but you reject what they taught to their disciples in favor of word interpretations from secular Roman writers. Do you think the secular Roman writers had a better understanding of the Scriptures than those who were taught by the apostles. Do you think the writers of the first century church didn't understand the language that they spoke?

BrckBrln
Aug 25th 2008, 12:15 AM
So you will trust modern day "scholars" Who have to guess at what the SECULAR writers meant when they used the words, as opposed to those who were taught by the apostles. Yes there was division during the time the NT was being written, do you think there is less division today? Are the "scholars" in agreement? There may have been division during that time, however I contend that the division today is multiplied many times, over that which was present in NT times. Here is the crucial point. You are willing to accept modern day teachings derived from secular Greek writers of the NT times, Yet you reject the writings of those who were taught by the Apostles themselves, because they don't fit what you want to believe to be true. You say you will trust the writers of the Scriptures, did Paul intentionally teach His disciples incorrectly? Did John intentionally mislead His disciples? You say you will trust the writers of the NT, but you reject what they taught to their disciples in favor of word interpretations from secular Roman writers. Do you think the secular Roman writers had a better understanding of the Scriptures than those who were taught by the apostles. Do you think the writers of the first century church didn't understand the language that they spoke?

You seem to think that the closer you are to the original source, the more right you are. That the ECF's are more right than modern day scholars. The problem with this, is that we still have the original source, that is, the Bible. So an ECF is not more right than a modern day scholar just because he happened to live 2000 years ago. Just because someone was taught by an Apostle doesn't mean that everything he says is right. I think John Frame was taught by Cornelius Van Til, yet John Frame does not teach everything Van Til taught. You see what I'm saying here?

Butch5
Aug 25th 2008, 01:53 AM
You seem to think that the closer you are to the original source, the more right you are. That the ECF's are more right than modern day scholars. The problem with this, is that we still have the original source, that is, the Bible. So an ECF is not more right than a modern day scholar just because he happened to live 2000 years ago. Just because someone was taught by an Apostle doesn't mean that everything he says is right. I think John Frame was taught by Cornelius Van Til, yet John Frame does not teach everything Van Til taught. You see what I'm saying here?

So, you don't think the closer you get to the source the more pure things become? We've been down this road, how many modern "scholars" speak Koine Greek fluently? How many modern day "scholars" have a thorough understanding of second century culture? How many modern day "scholars" live in the middle east? You reject the ECF's because you don't like what they say, well, that doesn't change the fact that what they taught fits the whole of Scripture, unlike the modern day "scholars" who can't even agree on the simplest matters. If you look at the time of the ECF's you have Christians, when you look at modern day "scholars" you have Calvinists, Armenians, Methodists, Wesleyans, Catholics, Baptists, Lutherans, Church of God, Church of Christ, Christian Church, and so on. So much for the modern day "scholars"

Sorry my friend, but we do not have the original source. The oldest manuscripts date back to about the 400's A.D. Long after the time of the Ante-Nicene Fathers. The Ante-Nicene Fathers had very, very, early copies of the originals, some may have actually read the originals. So the probability that the Ante-Nicene Father had corrupted copies is extremely low, not to mention that some of them were taught by the apostles. However, since the earliest manuscripts that are now available only date to about he 400's A.D. there is more time for corruptions to enter into the texts. So yes the closer we get to the original (the apostles) the greater likelihood of the doctrine being more pure.

BrckBrln
Aug 25th 2008, 02:31 AM
So, you don't think the closer you get to the source the more pure things become? We've been down this road, how many modern "scholars" speak Koine Greek fluently? How many modern day "scholars" have a thorough understanding of second century culture? How many modern day "scholars" live in the middle east? You reject the ECF's because you don't like what they say, well, that doesn't change the fact that what they taught fits the whole of Scripture, unlike the modern day "scholars" who can't even agree on the simplest matters. If you look at the time of the ECF's you have Christians, when you look at modern day "scholars" you have Calvinists, Armenians, Methodists, Wesleyans, Catholics, Baptists, Lutherans, Church of God, Church of Christ, Christian Church, and so on. So much for the modern day "scholars"

Sorry my friend, but we do not have the original source. The oldest manuscripts date back to about the 400's A.D. Long after the time of the Ante-Nicene Fathers. The Ante-Nicene Fathers had very, very, early copies of the originals, some may have actually read the originals. So the probability that the Ante-Nicene Father had corrupted copies is extremely low, not to mention that some of them were taught by the apostles. However, since the earliest manuscripts that are now available only date to about he 400's A.D. there is more time for corruptions to enter into the texts. So yes the closer we get to the original (the apostles) the greater likelihood of the doctrine being more pure.

I don't reject the ECF's, I just don't think they are infallible as you seem to think. And, yes, we do have the original source in the Bible. The truth is found there, not the ECF's. It seems you put more faith in 2000 year old men than the modern day Bible.

Longsufferer
Aug 25th 2008, 10:54 AM
1. “”And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath He reconciled. In the body of His flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in His sight: IF ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and not moved away from the hope of the Gospel…”
(Colossians.1:21-23)
2. “I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine just persons, which need no repentance.”
(Luke.15:7)
3. “For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with Him. For this we say unto you by the Word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent(ie: preceed) them which are asleep. For the Lord Himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.”
(I Thessalonians.4:14-17)

Butch5
Aug 25th 2008, 07:02 PM
I don't reject the ECF's, I just don't think they are infallible as you seem to think. And, yes, we do have the original source in the Bible. The truth is found there, not the ECF's. It seems you put more faith in 2000 year old men than the modern day Bible.

I never said they were infallible. As a matter of fact I have made it clear to the contrary. No, we have copies of the manuscripts, copies that date back no later than the 400's. The Ante-Nicene Fathers were reading copies much, much earlier than that. I do put more faith in 2000 year old men who were taught by the apostles and were eyewitnesses, than I do in the translator and commentators of today. The Scriptures are the source of truth, but let me ask you, which Scriptures? There are many manuscripts and not all of them agree, so which are the correct ones? Just look at the OT we use today and compare it to the OT that the apostles used. I appears to me that you are willing to trust modern day "scholars" who can't agree on anything. It would be like me telling the story of your child hood and saying I understood it better than you did.

BrckBrln
Aug 25th 2008, 07:06 PM
I do put more faith in 2000 year old men who were taught by the apostles and were eyewitnesses than I do in the translators of the modern copies we have today.

So there you go. Isn't there a verse in the Bible that says we shouldn't put our faith in men? Oh, wait, I'm sure that verse has been corrupted. :rolleyes:

Bryan43
Aug 25th 2008, 08:11 PM
So there you go. Isn't there a verse in the Bible that says we shouldn't put our faith in men? Oh, wait, I'm sure that verse has been corrupted. :rolleyes:

lol. I do not think they quite comprehend what they say.

The pharisees made the same mistake of trusting their forfathers and not scripture. in doing so, when the true messiah came, they did not recognise him. because he did not follow the laws put forth by their forfathers. who took the law God gave moses and obliterated it by adding hundreds of laws on top of what God gave.

In fact he mocked them by breaking their laws. and this is why they crucified him. because their faith was in the men who came before them. and not in God himself.

Butch5
Aug 25th 2008, 08:17 PM
So there you go. Isn't there a verse in the Bible that says we shouldn't put our faith in men? Oh, wait, I'm sure that verse has been corrupted. :rolleyes:

I wouldn't be so quick my friend, you are putting your trust in modern translators and commentators (men), unless of course you are fluent in Koine Greek.

I place my faith in Christ, however I will listen to those who were taught by the apostles, when it comes to trying to understand the scriptures. You can listen to the moderns if you choose to, just don't be upset when you don't understand the scriptures. Let's see, from the moderns we have OSAS, we have, the heavenly destiny, we have, the doctrines of Calvinism and Arminianism, we have, Sola Scriptura, we have, the idea that man is incapable of doing anything good, and so on. Yep, have at it you can listen to the moderns, just pick the doctrine you want and have at it. There are doctrines for everyone, just take your pick.

BroRog
Aug 25th 2008, 08:51 PM
I wouldn't be so quick my friend, you are putting your trust in modern translators and commentators (men), unless of course you are fluent in Koine Greek.

I place my faith in Christ, however I will listen to those who were taught by the apostles, when it comes to trying to understand the scriptures. You can listen to the moderns if you choose to, just don't be upset when you don't understand the scriptures. Let's see, from the moderns we have OSAS, we have, the heavenly destiny, we have, the doctrines of Calvinism and Arminianism, we have, Sola Scriptura, we have, the idea that man is incapable of doing anything good, and so on. Yep, have at it you can listen to the moderns, just pick the doctrine you want and have at it. There are doctrines for everyone, just take your pick.

The error of those who place the ECF's above others is obvious when we consider that the Apostles wrote letters of correction to those who predated the ECF's. The idea that the ECF's carry any weight due to their proximity to the Apostles is bogus for this reason.

BrckBrln
Aug 25th 2008, 08:52 PM
I wouldn't be so quick my friend, you are putting your trust in modern translators and commentators (men), unless of course you are fluent in Koine Greek.

I place my faith in Christ, however I will listen to those who were taught by the apostles, when it comes to trying to understand the scriptures. You can listen to the moderns if you choose to, just don't be upset when you don't understand the scriptures. Let's see, from the moderns we have OSAS, we have, the heavenly destiny, we have, the doctrines of Calvinism and Arminianism, we have, Sola Scriptura, we have, the idea that man is incapable of doing anything good, and so on. Yep, have at it you can listen to the moderns, just pick the doctrine you want and have at it. There are doctrines for everyone, just take your pick.

So we modern day Christians can't fully understand the Scriptures unless we are fluent in Koine Greek or unless we accept everything the ECF's say? That's complete bull, my friend.

Butch5
Aug 26th 2008, 04:05 PM
So we modern day Christians can't fully understand the Scriptures unless we are fluent in Koine Greek or unless we accept everything the ECF's say? That's complete bull, my friend.

First of all, I never said we have to understand everything the ECF's said. Second, can you please explain to me the cultural events of the day during the time the NT was being written? Specifically, can you tell me the the geopolitical issues that people were dealing with during this period? What were the major issues of the day? Can you tell me, did Christians think it was OK to use the public baths? Why, or why not? What about Christians interacting with the heathen? How was this viewed? How did they interact with non-Christians? What about religious beliefs? What were the major religious beliefs of the day? The bulk of those being save in the early church were Gentiles, what did they believe before becoming Christians? How did these beliefs affect their understanding of Scripture? What about the Jews? Many were torn between the law and Christ, how did they deal with this? Did this have an effect on their understanding of the Scriptures? What about the secular philosophies of the day? How did these affect peoples understanding of the Scriptures? I could go on and on, if you don't understand what was going on during the time the NT was written then how can you understand the letters that were written? Do you think the NT letters were written to you? They were written to first century Christians, who were dealing with many of the issues that I've mentioned above. If you do not understand these issues how can you understand what Paul, or Peter, etc. was trying to address? That is why the issue of works is so misunderstood, people don't know what was going on when these letters were written. They don't know what issues the writers were dealing with. People think they can pick up the Bible, read it, and interpret it with a 21st century mindset. It was not written to 21st century Christians, it was written to first century Christians, addressing specific problems that they were dealing with. The works issue for instance, in the period when Paul was writing the NT, the Judaizers were telling the Gentile Christians that the needed to be circumcised in addition to faith in Christ. Paul addressing this issue said, no, you are not saved by works, but by faith in Jesus Christ. When Paul said you are not saved by works, he was referring to the work of circumcision, a work of the law. He did not mean that you do absolutely nothing in regards to salvation. However, the 21st century Christian who does not understand the issue that Paul was addressing, picks up the Bible, reads where Paul said, you are not saved by works, interprets it with a 21st century mindset, and says, Oh, I don't do anything at all for salvation, it is completely of God, and therefore if I do anything I am doing works which Paul says can't save me. This is not what Paul was saying, this is a misunderstanding due to the fact that the reader does not understand what the issue is that was being dealt with in the letter.

This is why I said what the Ante-Nicene Fathers wrote is important. They were there, they understood the language, they understood the culture, they understood the issue of the day. When Paul wrote his letters, they understood what the issue was that He was writing about, they know what was going on in the different churches. When John wrote His letters, they knew what the issue was that He was addressing, so they understood His letters. You can't take the Scriptures and interpret them with a 21st century mindset and expect to understand them.

My reference to understanding Greek was not to say we must understand it in order to understand the Scriptures. It was to say, unless you can read Greek, you are relying on modern day "scholars" for you interpretation. Therefore my friend you also are relying on men. I choose to rely on the men that were there during the NT times, you choose to rely on men that live 2000 years later, in a different culture, speak a different language,and live in a different part of the world.

BrckBrln
Aug 26th 2008, 04:43 PM
First of all, I never said we have to understand everything the ECF's said. Second, can you please explain to me the cultural events of the day during the time the NT was being written? Specifically, can you tell me the the geopolitical issues that people were dealing with during this period? What were the major issues of the day? Can you tell me, did Christians think it was OK to use the public baths? Why, or why not? What about Christians interacting with the heathen? How was this viewed? How did they interact with non-Christians? What about religious beliefs? What were the major religious beliefs of the day? The bulk of those being save in the early church were Gentiles, what did they believe before becoming Christians? How did these beliefs affect their understanding of Scripture? What about the Jews? Many were torn between the law and Christ, how did they deal with this? Did this have an effect on their understanding of the Scriptures? What about the secular philosophies of the day? How did these affect peoples understanding of the Scriptures? I could go on and on, if you don't understand what was going on during the time the NT was written then how can you understand the letters that were written? Do you think the NT letters were written to you? They were written to first century Christians, who were dealing with many of the issues that I've mentioned above. If you do not understand these issues how can you understand what Paul, or Peter, etc. was trying to address? That is why the issue of works is so misunderstood, people don't know what was going on when these letters were written. They don't know what issues the writers were dealing with. People think they can pick up the Bible, read it, and interpret it with a 21st century mindset. It was not written to 21st century Christians, it was written to first century Christians, addressing specific problems that they were dealing with. The works issue for instance, in the period when Paul was writing the NT, the Judaizers were telling the Gentile Christians that the needed to be circumcised in addition to faith in Christ. Paul addressing this issue said, no, you are not saved by works, but by faith in Jesus Christ. When Paul said you are not saved by works, he was referring to the work of circumcision, a work of the law. He did not mean that you do absolutely nothing in regards to salvation. However, the 21st century Christian who does not understand the issue that Paul was addressing, picks up the Bible, reads where Paul said, you are not saved by works, interprets it with a 21st century mindset, and says, Oh, I don't do anything at all for salvation, it is completely of God, and therefore if I do anything I am doing works which Paul says can't save me. This is not what Paul was saying, this is a misunderstanding due to the fact that the reader does not understand what the issue is that was being dealt with in the letter.

This is why I said what the Ante-Nicene Fathers wrote is important. They were there, they understood the language, they understood the culture, they understood the issue of the day. When Paul wrote his letters, they understood what the issue was that He was writing about, they know what was going on in the different churches. When John wrote His letters, they knew what the issue was that He was addressing, so they understood His letters. You can't take the Scriptures and interpret them with a 21st century mindset and expect to understand them.

My reference to understanding Greek was not to say we must understand it in order to understand the Scriptures. It was to say, unless you can read Greek, you are relying on modern day "scholars" for you interpretation. Therefore my friend you also are relying on men. I choose to rely on the men that were there during the NT times, you choose to rely on men that live 2000 years later, in a different culture, speak a different language,and live in a different part of the world.

Um...no. It seems like you are saying that unless you understand the culture of the time then you can't understand what the Bible says, which, again, is complete bull. Are you saying that a person in a third world country with only a Bible can't know what it says, even to the point of not getting saved?

An understanding of the culture and languague of the Bible is not essential to gain the truth of the scriptures. The specific letters may have been written to specific people at the time but 'all scripture is profitable' and the Bible was written for all Christians in every time. The Bible is not corrupted and if you think it is, and that the only way to know the truth is to read the ECF's, then you have some serious problems that you need to work out.

Bryan43
Aug 26th 2008, 05:21 PM
Um...no. It seems like you are saying that unless you understand the culture of the time then you can't understand what the Bible says, which, again, is complete bull. Are you saying that a person in a third world country with only a Bible can't know what it says, even to the point of not getting saved?

An understanding of the culture and languague of the Bible is not essential to gain the truth of the scriptures. The specific letters may have been written to specific people at the time but 'all scripture is profitable' and the Bible was written for all Christians in every time. The Bible is not corrupted and if you think it is, and that the only way to know the truth is to read the ECF's, then you have some serious problems that you need to work out.

could not have said it better myself..

lendtay
Aug 26th 2008, 06:35 PM
I think if someone follows the Bible to the best of their understanding, then they are on the path to salvation.

Butch5
Aug 26th 2008, 09:57 PM
Um...no. It seems like you are saying that unless you understand the culture of the time then you can't understand what the Bible says, which, again, is complete bull. Are you saying that a person in a third world country with only a Bible can't know what it says, even to the point of not getting saved?

An understanding of the culture and languague of the Bible is not essential to gain the truth of the scriptures. The specific letters may have been written to specific people at the time but 'all scripture is profitable' and the Bible was written for all Christians in every time. The Bible is not corrupted and if you think it is, and that the only way to know the truth is to read the ECF's, then you have some serious problems that you need to work out.

Dude why don't you ever answer the questions?
I don't have serious problems to work out my friend, it seems you and Brian do. Both of you deny the clear statement of Scripture that says you must be baptized. Since you don't need to understand the the times of the NT, please, either you or Brian feel free to tell me what Paul meant when He wrote of being baptized for the dead. Either of you please tell me how Paul can write, you are not saved by works and how the writer of Hebrews can say that Jesus, being made perfect became eternal salvation for all who OBEY him? How does James say a man is justified by works, while Paul says a man is justified by faith? Since you don't need to understand the times, please explain how we go to Heaven when we die. I'll leave it at these for now.

All Scripture is profitable, but you have to understand it!
If you don't understand what they were addressing you can't understand what they were saying.

You need to study a little history of the modern copies that we have. The original writings were inspired, however you cannot say the copies were. If the copies were inspired then they would all be identical, they are not. You trust modern translations so much let me ask you about this. These are different which is correct?

Modern translation:
Isaiah 53:10 ( KJV ) 10Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.

Septuagint: The Bible the apostles used

10 The Lord also is pleased to purge him from his stroke. If ye can give an offering for sin, your soul shall see a long-lived seed:

The modern version says it pleased the lord to bruise Him, The apostles version says the Lord was pleased to purge Him of the stroke (bruise), Which is it?

Modern Translation:
Isaiah 53:11 ( KJV ) 11He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.

Septuagint: apostles Bible
11 the Lord also is pleased to take away from the travail of his soul, to shew him light, and to form him with understanding; to justify the just one who serves many well; and he shall bear their sins.

The modern translation says the Lord shall see the travail of His soul, the apostles version says the Lord was pleased to take away the travail of His soul. which is it?

Modern Translation:
Isaiah 40:5 ( KJV ) 5And the glory of the LORD shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together: for the mouth of the LORD hath spoken it.

Septuagint:
5And the glory of the Lord shall appear, and all flesh shall see the salvation of God: for the Lord has spoken it.

The modern version says all flesh shall see the glory of the Lord, the apostles version says all flesh shall see the salvation of God. Which is it?

My point isn't to pit Scripture against Scripture, but just to show you that you need to look at what man has translated, before you just accept it.

Bryan43
Aug 27th 2008, 08:44 PM
I don't have serious problems to work out my friend, it seems you and Brian do. Both of you deny the clear statement of Scripture that says you must be baptized.


first off. I do not understand why you have such a condescending attitude.

Second off. niether one of us are dismissing baptism. God said do it. and we did it.

What we are debunking is the fact that water baptism is essential for eternal life. If you want to replace holy spirit baptism with water baptism. it is you who has the issue. and you should take it up with God.

livingwaters
Aug 27th 2008, 09:22 PM
:bounce:Hey Ya'll!!!! Let's praise the God for Jesus. Alleluia~Alleluia~~~

The Lord does want us to enjoy his "free gift" of salvation; so let's do just that!!!!Praise the Lord. Thank you, Jesus for your precious blood that was shed on Calvary. Thank you, Jesus for dying on that tree!!! Thank you, Jesus cause you loved ME!!!!Amen:pp:hug::pp:hug:;):D:):saint:

God Bless!!!:kiss:

MidnightsPaleGlow
Aug 27th 2008, 09:39 PM
Seems like the baptismal regenerationists have attempted to hijack another thread relating to salvation by GRACE ALONE, through FAITH ALONE, in CHRIST ALONE :rolleyes:. Shoot me the baptism verses and I will gladly throw them back at you...

Butch5
Aug 29th 2008, 03:26 AM
first off. I do not understand why you have such a condescending attitude.

Second off. niether one of us are dismissing baptism. God said do it. and we did it.

What we are debunking is the fact that water baptism is essential for eternal life. If you want to replace holy spirit baptism with water baptism. it is you who has the issue. and you should take it up with God.

I don't have a condescending attitude my friend, I would just like for you guys to address the questions instead of dancing around them. I posed 4 questions above, neither you nor BrckBrln have made any attempt to answer them. As with earlier questions that I posed. You continue to make statements, yet you don't back them up with Scripture. Do you think if you keep repeating something that that will make it fact? You are not debunking anything because you have not given an argument in your defense. Please show from Scripture how it is that Peter and Jesus were referring to Spirit baptism and not water baptism.

Butch5
Aug 29th 2008, 03:29 AM
Seems like the baptismal regenerationists have attempted to hijack another thread relating to salvation by GRACE ALONE, through FAITH ALONE, in CHRIST ALONE :rolleyes:. Shoot me the baptism verses and I will gladly throw them back at you...

What, like you think you did in the last discussion? Why don't you present an argument from Scripture that states it is by Grace alone, through Faith alone, in Christ alone?

MidnightsPaleGlow
Aug 29th 2008, 03:43 AM
What, like you think you did in the last discussion? Why don't you present an argument from Scripture that states it is by Grace alone, through Faith alone, in Christ alone?

I have, over, and over, and over, in various posts on this board. YOU just refuse to accept it.

Bryan43
Aug 29th 2008, 10:20 PM
What, like you think you did in the last discussion? Why don't you present an argument from Scripture that states it is by Grace alone, through Faith alone, in Christ alone?

Eph 2:8-9 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.

Grace = faith + 0 works. = faith alone

Grace = unmerited favor. = unearned favor. = no works.

Rom 11: 6 And if by grace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace. But if it is of works, it is no longer grace; otherwise work is no longer work.

If you try to add works to grace. you cancel grace out.

and just in case you, like many, want to insert works of the law only

Romans 4 : 1 - 8 What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.
But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:
"Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven,
And whose sins are covered;
Blessed is the man to whom the Lord shall not impute sin.”

Abraham was before the law.

Eph 1: 13 - 14 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory.

No baptism, no works. Just hearing the word. and actually trusting the word. Do this and you are sealed with the holy spirit until you are ressurected. Can not get any more plain than this!

Rom 10 : 9 - 13 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. For the Scripture says, “?Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.?” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him. For “whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.?”

Again no baptism, no works.

I think God is quite clear about adding works to salvation. In fact Paul wrote about it.

anyone who ADDS to the gospel is to be anathema'd!

MidnightsPaleGlow
Aug 29th 2008, 11:09 PM
Eph 2:8-9 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.

Grace = faith + 0 works. = faith alone

Grace = unmerited favor. = unearned favor. = no works.

Rom 11: 6 And if by grace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace. But if it is of works, it is no longer grace; otherwise work is no longer work.

If you try to add works to grace. you cancel grace out.

and just in case you, like many, want to insert works of the law only

Romans 4 : 1 - 8 What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.
But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:
"Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven,
And whose sins are covered;
Blessed is the man to whom the Lord shall not impute sin.”

Abraham was before the law.

Eph 1: 13 - 14 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory.

No baptism, no works. Just hearing the word. and actually trusting the word. Do this and you are sealed with the holy spirit until you are ressurected. Can not get any more plain than this!

Rom 10 : 9 - 13 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. For the Scripture says, “?Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.?” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him. For “whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.?”

Again no baptism, no works.

I think God is quite clear about adding works to salvation. In fact Paul wrote about it.

anyone who ADDS to the gospel is to be anathema'd!

Amen, I've stressed this over and over, and the party on the receiving end just doesn't seem to get it. So much so that I went from patiently trying to refute it to having to resort to hellfire and damnation to get the message across.

Butch5
Aug 29th 2008, 11:33 PM
I have, over, and over, and over, in various posts on this board. YOU just refuse to accept it.

Maybe that's because it is wrong.

Butch5
Aug 30th 2008, 12:42 AM
Eph 2:8-9 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.

Grace = faith + 0 works. = faith alone

Grace = unmerited favor. = unearned favor. = no works.

Rom 11: 6 And if by grace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace. But if it is of works, it is no longer grace; otherwise work is no longer work.

If you try to add works to grace. you cancel grace out.

and just in case you, like many, want to insert works of the law only

Romans 4 : 1 - 8 What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.
But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:
"Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven,
And whose sins are covered;
Blessed is the man to whom the Lord shall not impute sin.”

Abraham was before the law.

Eph 1: 13 - 14 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory.

No baptism, no works. Just hearing the word. and actually trusting the word. Do this and you are sealed with the holy spirit until you are ressurected. Can not get any more plain than this!

Rom 10 : 9 - 13 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. For the Scripture says, “?Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.?” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him. For “whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.?”

Again no baptism, no works.

I think God is quite clear about adding works to salvation. In fact Paul wrote about it.

anyone who ADDS to the gospel is to be anathema'd!


OK, you've covered the first part, but I see no mention of the rest of the plan of salvation. No one doubts that we are save by grace through faith, however it doesn't end there. Paul also said a lot of other things which you have not addressed. Such as,



Romans 2:2-10 ( KJV ) 2But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things. 3And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God? 4Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? 5But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; 6Who will render to every man according to his deeds: 7To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life: 8But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, 9Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile; 10But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:


Here Paul clearly says that God will judge EVERY man according to his deeds (works). Those who do good, eternal life. Those who do evil. indignation and wrath. How do you fit this Scripture into your faith only theology? Paul clearly says that every man will be judged according to his own deeds. Those who DO GOOD, eternal life, those who DO EVIL, indignation and wrath. How do they fit your theology of no works?

What about what Jesus said?


John 5:25-29 ( KJV ) 25Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live. 26For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; 27And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man. 28Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 29And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.


Does this not show that Paul said the same thing that Jesus said? Jesus clearly says that whether a person goes to Heaven or hell is dependent upon their WORKS. Can you explain this in light of your theology?


What about the writer of Hebrews?


Hebrews 5:8-9 ( KJV ) 8Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered; 9And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;
Again, the writer clearly says, eternal salvation is to those who obey.


What about James?


James 2:20-26 ( KJV ) 20But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? 21Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? 22Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? 23And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. 24Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. 25Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way? 26For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.
This is clear, James says that Abraham was justified by works. Now look closely at what James is saying here, how was Abraham's faith made perfect? He had faith, but prior to the works this faith was not perfect. It was not until he did the works, offered Issac, that his faith was made perfect. And it was not until his faith was perfect, that it was accounted to him for righteousness. So, without works you cannot have a perfect faith, this is clearly what James is saying. Also notice that James clearly says that a man IS NOT justified by faith only. Incidentally this is the only verse in Scripture that talks about faith only.

Now, you have stated how we are saved by grace through faith, I have no problem with that. However I would like to know how you fit these Scriptures into your theology. James clearly says that a saving faith includes works, He clearly says that a man is justified by works and He clearly says that a man IS NOT justified by faith alone.

I look forward to your reply.

Butch5
Aug 30th 2008, 12:44 AM
Amen, I've stressed this over and over, and the party on the receiving end just doesn't seem to get it. So much so that I went from patiently trying to refute it to having to resort to hellfire and damnation to get the message across.


Well, you can give your thoughts on the post to Brian also.

Bryan43
Aug 30th 2008, 03:19 AM
OK, you've covered the first part, but I see no mention of the rest of the plan of salvation. No one doubts that we are save by grace through faith, however it doesn't end there. Paul also said a lot of other things which you have not addressed. Such as,


I am sorry. God can not tell us in one area we are saved this way. then change it up and make it different in others. your logic does not hold paper.

If God said works make grave null and void. he means it. No works of any kind can EVER be added to grace. or else grace is no longer grace.

it gets no clearer than this.

MidnightsPaleGlow
Aug 30th 2008, 10:39 PM
I am sorry. God can not tell us in one area we are saved this way. then change it up and make it different in others. your logic does not hold paper.

If God said works make grave null and void. he means it. No works of any kind can EVER be added to grace. or else grace is no longer grace.

it gets no clearer than this.

Galatians 5:4-6 states it flat out: Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.

Butch5
Aug 30th 2008, 10:56 PM
I am sorry. God can not tell us in one area we are saved this way. then change it up and make it different in others. your logic does not hold paper.

If God said works make grave null and void. he means it. No works of any kind can EVER be added to grace. or else grace is no longer grace.

it gets no clearer than this.

My logic? What logic? I just asked how you fit these Scriptures into your theology. You did not answer. If you are going to be true to the Scriptures you must reconcile these with the verses in Ephesians 2:8-9. Unless you are going to reject these verses in favor of a preconceived theology, such as faith alone. You continue to insist that works cannot be added to grace yet you have not given an explanation of these Scriptures.

You are correct that God would not tell us in one area that we are saved one way and then change it. However if God inspired the writers of the NT, then He said both the things that Paul wrote and the things that James wrote, you have to accept both. Therefore you need to reconcile them. If James writings don't fit into your theology, then you need to change your theology. James said it outright, a man is NOT justified by faith alone.

losthorizon
Aug 30th 2008, 11:07 PM
I am sorry. God can not tell us in one area we are saved this way. then change it up and make it different in others. your logic does not hold paper.

If God said works make grave null and void. he means it. No works of any kind can EVER be added to grace. or else grace is no longer grace.

it gets no clearer than this.
But you are mistaken there are many acts of obedience one must DO in obedience to the gospel of Christ that do not in any way negate God’s grace through faith. Belief is an act of obedience – “without faith is it impossible to please God” - and belief is also a “work” – a “work of God”. You need to re-think your position...
Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent. John 6:29 (KJV)

losthorizon
Aug 30th 2008, 11:10 PM
Galatians 5:4-6 states it flat out: Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.
Are you saying when one obeys from the heart the gospel of Christ he/she is seeking justification through the law of Moses? How exactly does this concept work and where is it taught in the NT? I think you are misapplying the verse you reference.

Butch5
Aug 30th 2008, 11:54 PM
Galatians 5:4-6 states it flat out: Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.

Hello Moonglow,


You did not address the Scriptures that I posted. I know what Paul said, notice He said works of the law, especially mentioning circumcision. However you have not addressed the issue in which James says that faith is made perfect by works. He did not say works procede from faith, He said works make faith perfect, He also said that Abraham was not counted righteous until His faith was made perfect.

MidnightsPaleGlow
Aug 31st 2008, 01:24 AM
Hello Moonglow,


You did not address the Scriptures that I posted. I know what Paul said, notice He said works of the law, especially mentioning circumcision. However you have not addressed the issue in which James says that faith is made perfect by works. He did not say works procede from faith, He said works make faith perfect, He also said that Abraham was not counted righteous until His faith was made perfect.

What happened with Abraham that James is talking about in verse 21-22 was that he was proving his genuine faith in God when he was tested by being commanded to offer up Isaac as a sacrifice. Notice how James in verse 23 states that "Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness." Remember, trials of our faith make us stronger (perfecting). Abraham believed God (faith) and he showed it by offering up Isaac when God commanded him to (work). That faith drove him to obey and set an example before men.

Butch5
Aug 31st 2008, 02:39 AM
What happened with Abraham that James is talking about in verse 21-22 was that he was proving his genuine faith in God when he was tested by being commanded to offer up Isaac as a sacrifice. Notice how James in verse 23 states that "Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness." Remember, trials of our faith make us stronger (perfecting). Abraham believed God (faith) and he showed it by offering up Isaac when God commanded him to (work). That faith drove him to obey and set an example before men.

I know that is what you believe, but that is not what the text says.


James 2:20-26 ( KJV ) 20But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? 21Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? 22Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? 23And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. 24Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. 25Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way? 26For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

It says that Abraham's faith was made perfect BY his works. His faith was not perfect UNTIL it was perfected by his works. Abraham believed God long before He was told to offer Issac as a sacrifice, however notice when his faith was counted for righteousness. It was not until he offered Issac. James says Abraham offered Issac, and this work perfected his faith AND the Scripture was fulfilled, Abraham believed God and it was counted to him as righteousness. Notice when James says the Scripture was fulfilled,it wasn't way back when Abraham first believed God, it was when Abraham perfected His faith by offering Issac. Also take note that James is not dealing with the issue of works of the law as Paul was.

MidnightsPaleGlow
Aug 31st 2008, 04:30 AM
Your "salvation by faith plus works" ideology is almost exactly like that of the RCC, which makes almost the same exact argument you do from the Book of James. The truth is, James chapter 2, in its ENTIRE context, not a few verses that you seem to be taking completely out of context, is showing how GENUINE faith produces RIGHTEOUS action. To see how we're justified BEFORE GOD, read this and read it good: Being justified FREELY by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus (Romans 3:24), then go to James ch. 2 to see how we're justified BEFORE MEN. Then read the entire book of Galatians after you do that to see that a gospel of faith plus anything is a surefire road to eternal damnation.

Faith in Christ+Salvation=Works (the TRUE gospel)

Faith in Christ+Works=Hell

Don't believe me on that second part? These words should be a real kick in the rear end to wake up and drop your dangerous ideology:

Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful [and this is a word you're going to regret for all eternity] WORKS? And then I will profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity (Matt. 7:22-23).

Why? Here's why: But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him who justifieth the ungodly, his FAITH is counted for righteousness (Romans 4:5).

Oops, how ironic that there's some scripture before that that I can tie in to Abraham's justification by FAITH, a faith that showed itself in WORKS: What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found? For if Abraham were JUSTIFIED BY WORKS, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God. For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, AND IT WAS COUNTED UNTO HIM FOR RIGHTEOUSNESS. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace (Romans 4:1-4).

Sounds too good to be true, Abraham, justified by FAITH before God, demonstrated to men by its WORKS, this JUSTIFIED HIM BEFORE MEN, SHOWING THEM, THIS IS A GREAT MAN, then we see that "to him that worketh not but believeth on him who justifieth the ungodly, his FAITH is counted for righteousness (Rom. 4:5).

Abraham, just like we are in this current day and age, was justified by FAITH. Re-read verse 4 again, you work, it isn't grace.

What does Paul have to say about being justified in the flesh? Galatians 3:3-Are ye so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh? This seems to say what you are trying to do, and you're on dangerous ground.

Remember, nothing that we can do can save us from the wrath of a Holy, All-Powerful God. Faith is the sole condition for appeasing his wrath, that's the Gospel of Jesus Christ right there, justification by Grace Alone through Faith Alone in Christ Alone, Faith in Christ PLUS Anything is trying to rely on your own efforts to appease God, which can only lead to hell.

The Book of James was written as a guideline for how someone who claims to be a Christian should behave, they should show it by their works, the product of a genuine, saving faith, which is why he gave the "Abraham example." Otherwise, their faith is more or less not much more than the faith that Satan and his angels have (James 2:19). When Abraham offered Isaac before God, he was demonstrating his faith, when we get baptized in water, we are demonstrating our faith, but none of that bears on our justification before God, it rests solely on the Lord Jesus Christ. Just like James, I believe that if somebody claims to be a Christian, but doesn't seem to be showing it by obeying a simple command like being baptized, or other outward showings, that person probably more or less does not have genuine, saving faith, as their faith isn't producing fruit, and is therefore a faith that is no different from the faith that Satan and his angels have.

Bryan43
Aug 31st 2008, 01:01 PM
But you are mistaken there are many acts of obedience one must DO in obedience to the gospel of Christ that do not in any way negate God’s grace through faith. Belief is an act of obedience – “without faith is it impossible to please God” - and belief is also a “work” – a “work of God”. You need to re-think your position...

Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent. John 6:29 (KJV)


thats the difference. Our faith is Gods work. because he did ALL the work.

anything else is OUR work. and cancells out grace.

grace is unmerited favor. Unearned. We can not earn by our own works. Because did ALL the work. All he asks is for us to trust him.

losthorizon
Aug 31st 2008, 02:19 PM
thats the difference. Our faith is Gods work. because he did ALL the work.

anything else is OUR work. and cancells out grace.

grace is unmerited favor. Unearned. We can not earn by our own works. Because did ALL the work. All he asks is for us to trust him.
You continue to operate under the misconception that acts of obedience are not part and parcel to the gospel of grace. The truth however remains – faith and obedience have always been the way to God - “by faith …Abraham obeyed”. Christians are those who were once the servants of “sin unto death” but they have now placed their faith in Christ through God’s grace when they have “obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered” – ie – obedience to the gospel of Christ is not an option it is essential to becoming a child of God. The NT clearly teaches that only when one obeys the gospel of Christ does that person become a “servants of righteousness.” Without obedience one remains in a state of separation from God – a servant of sin unto death. I would suggest you may want to re-think your position.
Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? 17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. 18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness. 19 I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness. Romans 6:16-19 (KJV)

Butch5
Aug 31st 2008, 11:32 PM
Your "salvation by faith plus works" ideology is almost exactly like that of the RCC, which makes almost the same exact argument you do from the Book of James. The truth is, James chapter 2, in its ENTIRE context, not a few verses that you seem to be taking completely out of context, is showing how GENUINE faith produces RIGHTEOUS action. To see how we're justified BEFORE GOD, read this and read it good: Being justified FREELY by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus (Romans 3:24), then go to James ch. 2 to see how we're justified BEFORE MEN. Then read the entire book of Galatians after you do that to see that a gospel of faith plus anything is a surefire road to eternal damnation.

Faith in Christ+Salvation=Works (the TRUE gospel)

Faith in Christ+Works=Hell

Don't believe me on that second part? These words should be a real kick in the rear end to wake up and drop your dangerous ideology:

Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful [and this is a word you're going to regret for all eternity] WORKS? And then I will profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity (Matt. 7:22-23).

Why? Here's why: But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him who justifieth the ungodly, his FAITH is counted for righteousness (Romans 4:5).

Oops, how ironic that there's some scripture before that that I can tie in to Abraham's justification by FAITH, a faith that showed itself in WORKS: What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found? For if Abraham were JUSTIFIED BY WORKS, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God. For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, AND IT WAS COUNTED UNTO HIM FOR RIGHTEOUSNESS. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace (Romans 4:1-4).

Sounds too good to be true, Abraham, justified by FAITH before God, demonstrated to men by its WORKS, this JUSTIFIED HIM BEFORE MEN, SHOWING THEM, THIS IS A GREAT MAN, then we see that "to him that worketh not but believeth on him who justifieth the ungodly, his FAITH is counted for righteousness (Rom. 4:5).

Abraham, just like we are in this current day and age, was justified by FAITH. Re-read verse 4 again, you work, it isn't grace.

What does Paul have to say about being justified in the flesh? Galatians 3:3-Are ye so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh? This seems to say what you are trying to do, and you're on dangerous ground.

Remember, nothing that we can do can save us from the wrath of a Holy, All-Powerful God. Faith is the sole condition for appeasing his wrath, that's the Gospel of Jesus Christ right there, justification by Grace Alone through Faith Alone in Christ Alone, Faith in Christ PLUS Anything is trying to rely on your own efforts to appease God, which can only lead to hell.

The Book of James was written as a guideline for how someone who claims to be a Christian should behave, they should show it by their works, the product of a genuine, saving faith, which is why he gave the "Abraham example." Otherwise, their faith is more or less not much more than the faith that Satan and his angels have (James 2:19). When Abraham offered Isaac before God, he was demonstrating his faith, when we get baptized in water, we are demonstrating our faith, but none of that bears on our justification before God, it rests solely on the Lord Jesus Christ. Just like James, I believe that if somebody claims to be a Christian, but doesn't seem to be showing it by obeying a simple command like being baptized, or other outward showings, that person probably more or less does not have genuine, saving faith, as their faith isn't producing fruit, and is therefore a faith that is no different from the faith that Satan and his angels have.

Well my friend, you can rant and rave, and run to Romans all you like, however you still have not dealt with the issue of what James said. He did not say works are evidence of faith. He said Abraham's faith was made perfect by his works, and it was not until his faith was made perfect that it was counted for righteousness. James says the Scripture "Abraham believed God and it was counted to Him for righteousness" was fulfilled when Abraham by faith offered Issac (the work which perfected his faith). If you are going to be true to the Scriptures you must reconcile this with the rest of Scripture. Unless as I said in an earlier post, you are going to deny it in favor of a preconceived theology such as "faith alone". Did you not notice, that the only mention in Scripture of faith alone, is the statement of James which says a man is not justified by faith only? How does the James 2 speak of being justified before men? Doesn't it say "the scripture was fulfilled"? Isn't that saying Abraham was justified before God?

MidnightsPaleGlow
Sep 1st 2008, 01:36 AM
Well my friend, you can rant and rave, and run to Romans all you like, however you still have not dealt with the issue of what James said. He did not say works are evidence of faith. He said Abraham's faith was made perfect by his works, and it was not until his faith was made perfect that it was counted for righteousness. James says the Scripture "Abraham believed God and it was counted to Him for righteousness" was fulfilled when Abraham by faith offered Issac (the work which perfected his faith). If you are going to be true to the Scriptures you must reconcile this with the rest of Scripture. Unless as I said in an earlier post, you are going to deny it in favor of a preconceived theology such as "faith alone". Did you not notice, that the only mention in Scripture of faith alone, is the statement of James which says a man is not justified by faith only? How does the James 2 speak of being justified before men? Doesn't it say "the scripture was fulfilled"? Isn't that saying Abraham was justified before God?

The reason I keep running back to Romans is to show that by faith in Jesus Christ ALONE, we are declared justified/righteous in the sight of the Almighty God, and in Galatians 3:26 we are children of God by FAITH in Christ Jesus. How about this? Abraham, when he was still Abram, was justified before God by BELIEVING in him, James quotes Gen. 15:6, then, in Genesis chapter 22 came the testing of his faith when he agreed to offer up Isaac. Our faith gets tested, just look at Job, horrible things happened to him, yet his faith was so strong that God rewarded him in the end. Job, like Abraham before him, was tested to see how strong his faith in God truly was, their "works" showed themselves before men that they had genuine faith. Their faith was "perfected" in trial, and so is ours. A faith that is strong like that of Abraham or Job, shows itself outwardly to others. That is what James Chapter 2 is talking about when it comes to works, so don't tell me that our works justify us before God, our faith does. In fact, our works will be judged and will determine our rewards, as was the case with Abraham and Job, 1 Cor. 3:13-15=Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burnt, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

That means, there are going to be quite alot of Christians who are just going to BARELY escape Hell, but have little reward in Heaven.

Butch5
Sep 1st 2008, 04:27 PM
The reason I keep running back to Romans is to show that by faith in Jesus Christ ALONE, we are declared justified/righteous in the sight of the Almighty God, and in Galatians 3:26 we are children of God by FAITH in Christ Jesus. How about this? Abraham, when he was still Abram, was justified before God by BELIEVING in him, James quotes Gen. 15:6, then, in Genesis chapter 22 came the testing of his faith when he agreed to offer up Isaac. Our faith gets tested, just look at Job, horrible things happened to him, yet his faith was so strong that God rewarded him in the end. Job, like Abraham before him, was tested to see how strong his faith in God truly was, their "works" showed themselves before men that they had genuine faith. Their faith was "perfected" in trial, and so is ours. A faith that is strong like that of Abraham or Job, shows itself outwardly to others. That is what James Chapter 2 is talking about when it comes to works, so don't tell me that our works justify us before God, our faith does. In fact, our works will be judged and will determine our rewards, as was the case with Abraham and Job, 1 Cor. 3:13-15=Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burnt, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

That means, there are going to be quite alot of Christians who are just going to BARELY escape Hell, but have little reward in Heaven.

You continue to deny the plain words of Scripture. I am sorry, I have to disagree with you. I don't see how you think James is addressing the issue of being justified before men. I do agree that the works will justify us before men, I just don't think this is the point James is trying to make. I believe His point is that without the works, faith is not made perfect, and is therefore dead, and dead faith cannot save.

As I said to Brian, when he posted his position, He dealt with the initial part of the plan of salvation. As you have done from Romans, however it does not end there. When the Bible speaks of "you have been saved", it is speaking of this initial step. However the Bible also says "you shall be saved," this is a future reference, and this is what James is referring to. This is the next stage of the plan.

James said,

James 2:14 ( KJV ) 14What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?
OK, so a man says he has faith, he believes, but has no works. Can this faith save him? James goes on to say NO. It cannot save him. This means that faith alone cannot save, it is dead. If it cannot save then works MUST be necessary for salvation, which fits perfectly with the verses that I posted for you and Brian to address, Jesus, Paul , the writer of Hebrews and James all say that a one's destination will be determined by their works.

Look here at what James says,

James 2:18 ( KJV ) 18Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: show me thy faith without thy works, and I will show thee my faith by my works.

This is the exact opposite of what you are saying, James says here show me this faith that you have that does not have works, and I will show you real faith by my works. James says this man's faith, the one who only believes, is not different than the that of the devils,

James 2:19 ( KJV ) 19Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.

Can a faith like this save?
James calls this man vain, who thinks he is saved by belief only.

James 2:20 ( KJV ) 20But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
Look at what this word vain means.
Thayer’s Greek Definitions

G2756 κενός kenos Thayer Definition: 1) empty, vain, devoid of truth 1a) of places, vessels, etc. which contain nothing 1b) of men 1b1) empty handed 1b2) without a gift 1c) metaphorically destitute of spiritual wealth, of one who boasts of his faith as a transcendent possession, yet is without the fruits of faith 1d) metaphorically of endeavours, labours, acts, which result in nothing, vain, fruitless, without effect 1d1) vain of no purpose

The Complete Word Study Dictionary: New Testament

G2756. κενός kenos; fem. kenē, neut. kenon, adj. Empty, hollow. Contrast mataios (G3152), meaninglessness, aimlessness. In 1 Thess. 2:1, it means unaccompanied with the demonstration of Spirit and of power. When used not of things but of persons, it predicates not merely an absence of good, but also, since a vacuum does not exist in man’s moral nature, the presence of evil (James 2:20). (I) With empty hands, having nothing (Mark 12:3; Luke 1:53; 20:10, 11; Sept.: Gen. 31:42; Deut. 15:13). (II) Metaphorically, meaning empty, vain. (A) Fruitless, without usefulness or success (Acts 4:25; 1 Cor. 15:10, 14, 58; 2 Cor. 6:1; Gal. 2:2; Phil. 2:16; 1 Thess. 2:1; 3:5; Sept.: Job 7:6; Jer. 6:29; 18:15). (B) Of that in which there is nothing of truth or reality, false, fallacious, e.g., empty words meaning false words, deceitful (Eph. 5:6; Col. 2:8; Sept.: Ex. 5:9; Hos. 12:1); of persons, meaning empty, foolish (James 2:20). Deriv.: kenodoxos (G2755), self-conceited; kenophōnia (G2757), empty speaking; kenoō (G2758), to be in vain; kenōs (G2761), in vain. Ant.: alēthēs (G227), actual, true to fact; alēthinos (G228), real, genuine; gnēsios (G1103), genuine, sincere; eilikrinēs (G1506), pure, sincere; adolos (G97), without guile.

This is what James calls the man who claims faith only, He goes on to say,

James 2:21-23 ( KJV ) 21Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? 22Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? 23And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.

This is not speaking of being justified before men (although he would be), it says because of the works, his faith was made perfect, and because hie faith was made perfect, he was counted righteous and the Scripture was fulfilled. Abraham had faith in God long before he offered Issac, yet the Scriptures say, this faith was not counted as righteousness until he offered Issac. Just as he said above, the man who has faith with no works, has a faith that cannot save him, unless one is declared rightous he will not be saved.

James 2:24 ( KJV ) 24Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

How much clearer can James be than this? A man is NOT justified by faith only. If a man cannot be justified by faith only then works must be required.

James 2:26 ( KJV ) 26For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

Again, keep in mind we are speaking of the second step in the plan of salvation. Upon inital belief, we are saved by grace through faith, Paul make that clear, now this faith is not yet perfect and in and of itself cannot ultimately alone save us at the end. However if this faith is perfected by the works that are commanded in the gospel, it will become a saving faith, this is clearly what James is saying, this fits perfectly with what Jesus, Paul and the writer of Hebrews say also. Remember Paul is writing to Gentile Christians who were being told by the Judaizers, that they must be circumcised in addition to faith in Christ.Circumcission is a work of the law, Paul says repeatedly in his letters "by the works of the law, no flesh shall be jsutified." James, on hte other hand is dealing with a different issue, the issue James is dealing with is, people claiming that they are saved by faith alone. He makes it clear that a faith without works is a dead faith.

James makes it clear that saving faith is only a faith that has been perfected by works, not a faith that produces good works. However, if you still want to say that faith produces works, James arugment still holds, that without works no one will be saved in the end. While we are initially saved by faith, if that faith does not produce good works, it is not a saving faith. And jsut in case the argument arises that faith MUST produce good works,v let's head that one off at the pass. James says,

James 2:18 ( KJV ) 18Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: show me thy faith without thy works, and I will show thee my faith by my works.

So according to James it is possible for a man to have faith without works.

MidnightsPaleGlow
Sep 1st 2008, 11:18 PM
Know what? You want to keep on believing that your works are a part of your salvation and end up "baptized" in the Lake of Fire? Fine, I've tried to reach you over and over to warn you, out of love, that by adding your own works to the finished work of Christ on the cross, you are putting yourself in terrible risk of not being saved. Just like God in Rom. 1:28 gave those who rejected his revelation concerning himself and instead worshiped idols over to a reprobate mind, I'm giving you over to your works-righteousness beliefs about salvation and will no longer try to warn you any further, I went from being patient to hellfire and damnation in my tone. With that said, I'll be praying that God opens your eyes to the TRUTH that you CANNOT add anything to the finished work of Christ on the cross and expect it to help you in your salvation, meditate on these words:

"There is none righteous, no, not one (Rom. 3:10)."

"But to him that WORKETH NOT, but BELIEVETH on him who justifieth the ungodly, his FAITH is counted for righteousness (Rom. 4:5)."

"But we are all as an unclean thing, And all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags (Is. 64:6)."

I only hope and pray that you repent and put your FULL trust in the Lord (100%, him and NOTHING ELSE) to get you into heaven before it's too late :pray:.

losthorizon
Sep 2nd 2008, 12:07 AM
Know what? You want to keep on believing that your works are a part of your salvation and end up "baptized" in the Lake of Fire? Fine, I've tried to reach you over and over to warn you, out of love, that by adding your own works to the finished work of Christ on the cross, you are putting yourself in terrible risk of not being saved. Just like God in Rom. 1:28 gave those who rejected his revelation concerning himself and instead worshiped idols over to a reprobate mind, I'm giving you over to your works-righteousness beliefs about salvation and will no longer try to warn you any further, I went from being patient to hellfire and damnation in my tone. With that said, I'll be praying that God opens your eyes to the TRUTH that you CANNOT add anything to the finished work of Christ on the cross and expect it to help you in your salvation...


Are you saying if I submit to the command of Jesus to be immersed in water so my sins can be washed away by His blood just as Paul was baptized at the instruction of Ananias I am in danger of being thrown into the Lake of Fire? How exactly does this work?
The Lord said unto me, Arise, and go into Damascus; and there it shall be told thee of all things which are appointed for thee to do…. And one Ananias, a devout man according to the law, having a good report of all the Jews which dwelt there, 13 Came unto me, and stood, and said unto me, Brother Saul, receive thy sight… And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord. (Acts 22)Do you think Paul’s sins were washed away when he obeyed his Lord in baptism - calling on the name of the Lord? Do you think Paul added to the work of Christ on the cross? Do you think Paul will be thrown into the Lake of Fire? Is the ordinance of baptism from God or from man?

Butch5
Sep 2nd 2008, 12:18 AM
Know what? You want to keep on believing that your works are a part of your salvation and end up "baptized" in the Lake of Fire? Fine, I've tried to reach you over and over to warn you, out of love, that by adding your own works to the finished work of Christ on the cross, you are putting yourself in terrible risk of not being saved. Just like God in Rom. 1:28 gave those who rejected his revelation concerning himself and instead worshiped idols over to a reprobate mind, I'm giving you over to your works-righteousness beliefs about salvation and will no longer try to warn you any further, I went from being patient to hellfire and damnation in my tone. With that said, I'll be praying that God opens your eyes to the TRUTH that you CANNOT add anything to the finished work of Christ on the cross and expect it to help you in your salvation, meditate on these words:

"There is none righteous, no, not one (Rom. 3:10)."

"But to him that WORKETH NOT, but BELIEVETH on him who justifieth the ungodly, his FAITH is counted for righteousness (Rom. 4:5)."

"But we are all as an unclean thing, And all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags (Is. 64:6)."

I only hope and pray that you repent and put your FULL trust in the Lord (100%, him and NOTHING ELSE) to get you into heaven before it's too late :pray:.

Again, you do not address the issue. What I have shown is clearly what James is saying, yet it runs counter to what you want to believe so you reject it. In order to be true to Scriptures, you must reconcile all of Scripture, not just the parts that you want. If we are saved by grace through faith, we must also reconcile James statements that a man is not justified by faith only, we cannot just reject what he is saying. As Paul said "all Scripture is inspired." Neither you nor Brian have yet addressed the Scriptures that I posted in the previous post regarding the statements made by Jesus, Paul, the writer of Hebrews, and James, they all made statements that a man's works determine his destiny. If you trace the "faith alone" doctrine back in history, you will see it started with Martin Luther. Before Him no one in the Church taught "faith alone." I really hope you would soften you position to at least consider what James is saying.


What exactly is the finished work of Christ on the Cross?

Bryan43
Sep 2nd 2008, 01:17 AM
Midnight. your wasting your time.

They can not read all of james to understand who james was talking to and what he was trying to say. that is their problem.

James is specifically written to people who are hearers but not doers. whi favor the rich. Who live like the world. Who have absolutely no works that prove they really had true faith. to show what Paul spoke of in eph 2:10, that those who are saved will do works.

instead what they prove is exactly what James said.

I will prove my faith by my works.

your prove your zero, or dead faith by your lack of works.

they can not resolve Pauls words that we are saved by faith alone. so they, like all roman catholics, from where they get their false doctrine, instead say we must follow all of scripture. Not realising we do follow all. But unlike them actually study to see WHO james is talking to and why.

again not worth your time. Already had one thread closed. no need getting another!

MidnightsPaleGlow
Sep 2nd 2008, 01:49 AM
Midnight. your wasting your time.

I know, that's why I'm no longer going to bother with them, and give them over to their works-righteousness beliefs.


They can not read all of james to understand who james was talking to and what he was trying to say. that is their problem.

James is specifically written to people who are hearers but not doers. whi favor the rich. Who live like the world. Who have absolutely no works that prove they really had true faith. to show what Paul spoke of in eph 2:10, that those who are saved will do works.

instead what they prove is exactly what James said.

I will prove my faith by my works.

your prove your zero, or dead faith by your lack of works.

Exactly my friend.


they can not resolve Pauls words that we are saved by faith alone. so they, like all roman catholics, from where they get their false doctrine, instead say we must follow all of scripture. Not realising we do follow all. But unlike them actually study to see WHO james is talking to and why.

again not worth your time. Already had one thread closed. no need getting another!

Amen, that's why I'm no longer going to waste my time on them. Me and you raised enough ruckus here already.

Butch5
Sep 2nd 2008, 01:52 AM
Midnight. your wasting your time.

They can not read all of james to understand who james was talking to and what he was trying to say. that is their problem.

James is specifically written to people who are hearers but not doers. whi favor the rich. Who live like the world. Who have absolutely no works that prove they really had true faith. to show what Paul spoke of in eph 2:10, that those who are saved will do works.

instead what they prove is exactly what James said.

I will prove my faith by my works.

your prove your zero, or dead faith by your lack of works.

they can not resolve Pauls words that we are saved by faith alone. so they, like all roman catholics, from where they get their false doctrine, instead say we must follow all of scripture. Not realising we do follow all. But unlike them actually study to see WHO james is talking to and why.

again not worth your time. Already had one thread closed. no need getting another!

Brian,

You accuse me of not reading James and not studying the Scriptures. Yet I have put forth my full explanation of the Scriptures, I told you, you were correct in your exposition on saved by grace through faith. I told you I agreed with what you said, but that that was not the end. Then I went on to show how the Bible speaks of "will be saved" which is a future reference, I then went on to show how the Bible speaks of a man's destiny being determined by his works, I used Scripture from Jesus, Paul, the writer of Hebrews, and James. Four different NT figures all making statements regarding the necessity of works. I showed How James explained that Abraham's faith was not counted as righteousness until it was perfected by works. Where have I not dealt with all of Scripture?

You say James was written the hearers and not doers of the word. What are hearers? James tells us, they are those who claim to be saved by faith without works. Now, you can claim all day long that faith produces good works, but that is NOT what James is saying. James EXPLICITLY says faith IS perfected by works, not the other way around.

You say I can't resolve Paul's words? I have done so in my explanation. I have NO problem with Paul's statement "we are saved by grace through faith", it fits perfectly into my theology, as does James statement, that a man is justified by his works and not by faith alone. It is you who are rejecting what James wrote.

Here is something for you to think about, there IS NOT A SINGLE VERSE OF SCRIPTURE that says we are saved by FAITH ALONE, not one. The entire doctrine is by inference, yet you accept it. On the other hand we DEFINITELY HAVE SCRIPTURE that says a man IS NOT JUSTIFIED BY FAITH ONLY, and you reject it. So, you accept what is not in the Scriptures and you reject what is in the Scriptures, who has the false doctrine?

Bryan43
Sep 2nd 2008, 04:49 PM
You say I can't resolve Paul's words? I have done so in my explanation. I have NO problem with Paul's statement "we are saved by grace through faith", it fits perfectly into my theology, as does James statement, that a man is justified by his works and not by faith alone. It is you who are rejecting what James wrote.


No you have not. Paul says in eph 2 that one we hear the word of thruth, the gospel of our salvation. and actually trust it, we are sealed with the holy spirit of Promise, who is the guarantee of our eternal life. Not one mention of works. Just hearing, and trusting, faith only.




Here is something for you to think about, there IS NOT A SINGLE VERSE OF SCRIPTURE that says we are saved by FAITH ALONE, not one. The entire doctrine is by inference, yet you accept it. On the other hand we DEFINITELY HAVE SCRIPTURE that says a man IS NOT JUSTIFIED BY FAITH ONLY, and you reject it. So, you accept what is not in the Scriptures and you reject what is in the Scriptures, who has the false doctrine?


For by Grace we have been saved through faith, and that NOT OF OURSELVES, it is the GIFT OF GOD, NOT OF WORKS lest any man be puffed up in Pride

Faith + nothing of ourselves = faith alone.

Faith + no works = faith alone

A gift is not eaned by works, it is given for free, thus the gift can only be had through faith alone, otherwise it is not a gift.

Grace = unmerited or unearned favor. thus grace can not be earned by works. so Grace = faith alone.

As paul said, if it grace there are NO works involved, otherwise Grace is cancelled.

As for James. He spoke to the lasciveous croud. who felt that they could say a few words, and were saved, and did not have to change, they had ) repentance. they had ) faith or a dead faith. thus as James said. Since they had no works to PROVE they had faith. they had ZERO faith and were never saved.

drew
Sep 2nd 2008, 05:04 PM
You accuse me of not reading James and not studying the Scriptures. Yet I have put forth my full explanation of the Scriptures, I told you, you were correct in your exposition on saved by grace through faith. I told you I agreed with what you said, but that that was not the end. Then I went on to show how the Bible speaks of "will be saved" which is a future reference, I then went on to show how the Bible speaks of a man's destiny being determined by his works, I used Scripture from Jesus, Paul, the writer of Hebrews, and James. Four different NT figures all making statements regarding the necessity of works.
I have only read snippets of this thread, but I think I am with you on this issue.

I do not know if you (or others) have brought this up, but Romans 2:6-13 teaches that eternal life is granted based on "good works" This statement by Paul is mysteriously ignored by many or implausible explanations for it are given.

I agree with you that, for Paul, "justification" is a thing that has "tenses - it is not a one time event. When we come to the Scriptures insisting that justification is a one-time event, then we are imposing our own schemes on the text, rather than letting the author tell us what he wants to tell us.

Paul is clear in Romans 2 - there will be a coming judgement at which eternal life will be granted based on the works that are manifest in a person's life.

Am I saying "we" earn our own salvation? No, I am not. Elsewhere in his writings, not least Romans 8, Paul explains that it is the Holy Spirit which produces these works, not us.

And Paul never teaches anywhere that we are not justified by "good works" - He teaches that we are not justified by doing the works of the Law of Moses (the Torah). This is an important distinction to grasp.

Bryan43
Sep 2nd 2008, 05:18 PM
Hey Drew, I have not had a chance to get back with you on the romans thread, been so busy.

However, you must remember, If we have to do any work. no matter what kind of work it is, but any work whatsoever we earn salvation. and it is no longer a gift.

The view that works come through grace, or whatever comes from the roman catholic church. it is not biblical.

paul stated in no certain terms, if you add any work to grace, you cancel grace out. He seperated the two as far as anyone can seperate them.

Works can not come through grace or be added to grace in order to recieve eternal life. period.

drew
Sep 2nd 2008, 05:36 PM
However, you must remember, If we have to do any work. no matter what kind of work it is, but any work whatsoever we earn salvation. and it is no longer a gift.
I am not sure this is really true and this kind of thinking is often stretched to extremes. There will always be those who will argue that even "reaching out your hands to humbly accept the gift of salvation" is a "work". That strikes me as a hyper-literalistic take on the way language is used to express concepts. A gift that is accepted is still "grace" even if we "choose" to accept it. I just do not see how mere humble acceptance can reasonably be seen as a "work".

In any event, I think these 2 things are clear:

1. Paul never denies "justification by good works", he denies justification by doing the works of Torah;

2. Paul affirms that there will indeed be a day when men will be judged by the good works their lives manifest. For those in whom the Spirit is at work, such works will indeed be evident.

Bryan43
Sep 2nd 2008, 07:27 PM
I am not sure this is really true and this kind of thinking is often stretched to extremes. There will always be those who will argue that even "reaching out your hands to humbly accept the gift of salvation" is a "work". That strikes me as a hyper-literalistic take on the way language is used to express concepts. A gift that is accepted is still "grace" even if we "choose" to accept it. I just do not see how mere humble acceptance can reasonably be seen as a "work".

In any event, I think these 2 things are clear:

1. Paul never denies "justification by good works", he denies justification by doing the works of Torah;

2. Paul affirms that there will indeed be a day when men will be judged by the good works their lives manifest. For those in whom the Spirit is at work, such works will indeed be evident.


As for faith being a good work. As Jesus stated, it is the work of God that we believe ( have faith ) in the one he sent.

Faith is standing still and letting someone else work. and trusting them. that is why it is Gods work and not ours.

As for Paul only denying works by the torah. Paul makes it cery clear in eph 2: 8 - 9 that it is Nothing that we do ( works ) which would seperate works of the torah and any other works.

For by grace we have been ( past tense ) saved through faith. and not of our selves. it is the gift of God.

He is saying there is nothing we can do. works of torah or any work for that matter to earn salvation. why? it is a GIFT of God.

a gift is not earned. as paul said. Abraham was not found by works. or else he has something to be proud of. But not before God. He believed ( had faith )

as for works. His works proved his faith was sincere. and he actually had salvation. but were not done to earn salvation.

Butch5
Sep 2nd 2008, 11:03 PM
As for faith being a good work. As Jesus stated, it is the work of God that we believe ( have faith ) in the one he sent.

Faith is standing still and letting someone else work. and trusting them. that is why it is Gods work and not ours.

As for Paul only denying works by the torah. Paul makes it cery clear in eph 2: 8 - 9 that it is Nothing that we do ( works ) which would seperate works of the torah and any other works.

For by grace we have been ( past tense ) saved through faith. and not of our selves. it is the gift of God.

He is saying there is nothing we can do. works of torah or any work for that matter to earn salvation. why? it is a GIFT of God.

a gift is not earned. as paul said. Abraham was not found by works. or else he has something to be proud of. But not before God. He believed ( had faith )

as for works. His works proved his faith was sincere. and he actually had salvation. but were not done to earn salvation.

Brian,

When the men said to Jesus, what must we do to do the works of God, Jesus said, believe on Him who He sent.

Fisrt they asked what works they had to do, why? They were used to doing the works of the law. Jesus said they should believe on Him.

What does it mean to believe on Jesus?

Butch5
Sep 2nd 2008, 11:27 PM
No you have not. Paul says in eph 2 that one we hear the word of thruth, the gospel of our salvation. and actually trust it, we are sealed with the holy spirit of Promise, who is the guarantee of our eternal life. Not one mention of works. Just hearing, and trusting, faith only.




For by Grace we have been saved through faith, and that NOT OF OURSELVES, it is the GIFT OF GOD, NOT OF WORKS lest any man be puffed up in Pride

Faith + nothing of ourselves = faith alone.

Faith + no works = faith alone

A gift is not eaned by works, it is given for free, thus the gift can only be had through faith alone, otherwise it is not a gift.

Grace = unmerited or unearned favor. thus grace can not be earned by works. so Grace = faith alone.

As paul said, if it grace there are NO works involved, otherwise Grace is cancelled.

As for James. He spoke to the lasciveous croud. who felt that they could say a few words, and were saved, and did not have to change, they had ) repentance. they had ) faith or a dead faith. thus as James said. Since they had no works to PROVE they had faith. they had ZERO faith and were never saved.


Brian,

In Ephesians 1 Paul says you were sealed with the Spirit which is the earnest of your inheritance. It is significant that Paul uses the word earnest, it means "down payment." The Spirit is the down payment of the inheritance, NOT the guarantee. There is no guarantee, except continual belief. Now let me ask you, in Ephesians 1, did Paul write a salvation checklist? Is that what this is? Do any of the NT writers give us a salvation checklist? Paul doesn't, so why do you take one or two passages from Paul's writings and suppose that this is the only teaching on salvation? Is Paul's teaching above that of Jesus? Peter? James? Mark?
Jesus said you must believe and be baptized, Peter said you must repent and be baptized, do we not have to follow these teachings? What about Paul? He said other things as I pointed out in a previous post, and as Drew also mentioned, Paul said those who do good will be raised to eternal life, and those who do evil will receive indignation and wrath. Paul said that, How can you say that salvation is by faith alone when Paul himself says a man will be judged according to his deeds?

Now, you can try to make James say whatever you like, but it is crystal clear, James says that Abraham's faith was perfected by his works, not the other way around. James also says as clear as day, a man IS NOT justified by FAITH ONLY. Why do you continue to deny what the Scripture clearly says?

Butch5
Sep 2nd 2008, 11:36 PM
I have only read snippets of this thread, but I think I am with you on this issue.

I do not know if you (or others) have brought this up, but Romans 2:6-13 teaches that eternal life is granted based on "good works" This statement by Paul is mysteriously ignored by many or implausible explanations for it are given.

I agree with you that, for Paul, "justification" is a thing that has "tenses - it is not a one time event. When we come to the Scriptures insisting that justification is a one-time event, then we are imposing our own schemes on the text, rather than letting the author tell us what he wants to tell us.

Paul is clear in Romans 2 - there will be a coming judgement at which eternal life will be granted based on the works that are manifest in a person's life.

Am I saying "we" earn our own salvation? No, I am not. Elsewhere in his writings, not least Romans 8, Paul explains that it is the Holy Spirit which produces these works, not us.

And Paul never teaches anywhere that we are not justified by "good works" - He teaches that we are not justified by doing the works of the Law of Moses (the Torah). This is an important distinction to grasp.


Hi Drew,

Yes the verses in Romans have been mentioned as have the verses in John where Jesus says, the time is coming when those in the grave shall hear the voice of the Son of God, those who have done good to the resurrection of life and those who have done evil to the resurrection of damnation. In addition, Hebrews 5:9 was mentioned which says of Jesus, being made perfect He became eternal salvation to those who obey. It seems Luther's fallacy has spread far and wide.

I have also mentioned many times the fact that Paul is speaking of the works of the law, to no avail. It seems because Paul didn't write works of the law every place He discusses this matter, people interpret works however the please, without regard to the issues that Paul was writing about.

drew
Sep 3rd 2008, 05:36 PM
As for Paul only denying works by the torah. Paul makes it cery clear in eph 2: 8 - 9 that it is Nothing that we do ( works ) which would seperate works of the torah and any other works.
No. Paul does not deny salvation by doing good works in Ephesians 2:8-9. The context clearly shows that he is talking about the works of the Torah here. He is denying that practicing Torah is salvific. You cannot conclude that he means "good works" in general.

I am more than happy to fill in the argument that Paul is focused on Torah here. It is an exceedingly easy case to make if you read verses 11 and following.

drew
Sep 3rd 2008, 05:45 PM
I have also mentioned many times the fact that Paul is speaking of the works of the law, to no avail. It seems because Paul didn't write works of the law every place He discusses this matter, people interpret works however the please, without regard to the issues that Paul was writing about.
I share your views here. In texts like Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:28, and Romans 4:2, it is obvious from context that the "works" are not the general category of "good works" but rather the works of the Torah - the Mosaic Law - especially inasmuch as these works create a "wall" that marks out Jew from Gentile.

I used to believe otherwise - I used to believe that "works" meant "good works". Then someone challenged me to provisionally drop this idea, stand back, and consider the possibility that "works of Torah" made better sense in context. It was immediately obvious that it did.

I politely suggest that, for some, the reformers have attained the status of "infallible" interpreters of the Scriptures. But, I think we all agree that scripture is scripture, and the Westminster Confession is not.

I am coming to believe that Luther and company, while they made valuable contributions, also made some mistakes. And this whole "works" thing is one of them.

Bryan43
Sep 3rd 2008, 06:19 PM
No. Paul does not deny salvation by doing good works in Ephesians 2:8-9. The context clearly shows that he is talking about the works of the Torah here. He is denying that practicing Torah is salvific. You cannot conclude that he means "good works" in general.

Actually it is quite easy. for to say that only the torah is spoken of here is to say that the people in the OT were not saved as we are. The author of hebrews denies this. saying even the the levitical sacrifices never saved anyone.

Not to mention, baptism, as a rite of cleansing is also part of the torah, all who were not jewish would be required to be baptised in order to enter the temple. the church, not being jewish, having to be baptised to enter the church, would then be just continueing the baptismal rite of cleansing. so even using the torah as an excuse in eph 2: 9, and not ALL works would still deny baptism as a means of salvation.

I
share your views here. In texts like Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:28, and Romans 4:2, it is obvious from context that the "works" are not the general category of "good works" but rather the works of the Torah - the Mosaic Law - especially inasmuch as these works create a "wall" that marks out Jew from Gentile

again I share, abraham was saved before the law was given. many were saved before the law were given, including noah and his family.

again I must ask. if works are required for salvation in the nT, what works were required in the OLD? Because the way to salvation is no different for us today than it was for adam and eve.

CanadianSlash
Sep 3rd 2008, 06:34 PM
I'm with brian on this one. Butch is misinterpreting scripture, plain and simple.

James is talking about how those with a strong faith will naturally be doing good works, while those who have a stagnant faith will be lax, and won't necessarily be doing good works.

It does NOT mean that if you don't do good works, then your faith is cancelled out.

Jesus said that a tree is identified by the fruit it yields. Which is, in essence, what James is talking about.

Butch, you're wrong, and you keep spitting out the same verses despite the massive horde of verses everyone gives right back. At this point, trying to correct Butch and also LostHorizon (this whole thing might have something to do with that "philosophical impasse with the board management"...) is the equivalent of doing this: :B

drew
Sep 3rd 2008, 06:49 PM
Butch, you're wrong, and you keep spitting out the same verses despite the massive horde of verses everyone gives right back. At this point, trying to correct Butch and also LostHorizon (this whole thing might have something to do with that "philosophical impasse with the board management"...) is the equivalent of doing this: :B
I believe that Butch is correct. Can you tell me what texts you think speak against his position. And what do you think about Romans 2? I see this text as rather clearly teaching that if there no "good works" - no eternal life:

6God "will give to each person according to what he has done."[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%202&version=31#fen-NIV-27954a)] 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. 8But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. 9There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; 10but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. 11For God does not show favoritism.
12All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous.

CanadianSlash
Sep 3rd 2008, 06:51 PM
I never said we aren't rewarded in heaven for our good works. Far from it. we ARE rewarded in heaven. But our reward in heaven for our good works is different from out GIFT of salvation. It's like the icing on the cake =).

drew
Sep 3rd 2008, 07:11 PM
I never said we aren't rewarded in heaven for our good works. Far from it. we ARE rewarded in heaven. But our reward in heaven for our good works is different from out GIFT of salvation. It's like the icing on the cake =).
But the text of Romans 2 seems pretty clear - Paul is not talking about gifts we get "in Heaven", he is talking about the granting of eternal life itself. Please tell me how you read the following as not stating that the very granting of eternal life is based on good works:

6God "will give to each person according to what he has done."[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%202&version=31#fen-NIV-27954a)] 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life

Bryan43
Sep 3rd 2008, 07:29 PM
6God "will give to each person according to what he has done."[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%202&version=31#fen-NIV-27954a)] 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life


I must ask. does everyone who does this gain eternal life??

drew
Sep 3rd 2008, 07:44 PM
I must ask. does everyone who does this gain eternal life??


Yes. And I think I know what you will ask next, but I'll wait.

Paul's wording in Romans 2 is very clear - eternal life is granted according to what we have done. Why do you not believe it? Do you believe Paul means something else? If so, please explain why his wording seems so clear that eternal life is granted "according to what we have done"?

Or, do you believe that no Christians will be at the Romans 2 judgement? Paul never says this, so why would one insert such a qualifying condition.

CanadianSlash
Sep 3rd 2008, 07:52 PM
But the text of Romans 2 seems pretty clear - Paul is not talking about gifts we get "in Heaven", he is talking about the granting of eternal life itself. Please tell me how you read the following as not stating that the very granting of eternal life is based on good works:

6God "will give to each person according to what he has done."[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%202&version=31#fen-NIV-27954a)] 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life

Well, if we go strictly by that verse, than we don't need faith to get into heaven. We can do away with the entire idea of believing that Christ died on the cross.

Which is why I think it's referencing the acts of the faithful as an indicator of their standing with god, rather than the acts indicating whether or not their salvation is valid.

CanadianSlash
Sep 3rd 2008, 08:08 PM
In Romans it says, "because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight . . . " (Rom. 3:20), and "for we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law," (Rom. 3:28), and "For what does the Scripture say? ‘And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness'" (Rom. 4:3), and "Therefore, having been justified by faith . . . " (Rom. 5:1), and "But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness" (Rom. 4:5).
In James it says, "You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone," (James 2:24) and " . . . so also faith without works is dead," (James 2:26).
Which is it? Are we justified by faith or by works?


Does the Bible Contradict Itself?

It is a fundamental Christian belief that we are justified by faith. Justification means that God declares a sinner to be righteous. He does this by crediting, by reckoning the righteousness of Jesus to the sinner. This is done by faith. That is, when the sinner puts his faith in the sacrifice of Jesus and trusts in Him and not himself for righteousness, then God justifies him. "And Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him as righteousness," (Rom. 4:3). But, if the Bible teaches that we are justified by faith, does it also teach we are justified by works as James seems to say? Do we have a contradiction? The answer is no.



Context is Everything

It is erroneous to take a verse, read it without its context, and then attempt to develop a doctrine from that verse alone. Therefore, let's take a look at the context of James 2:24 which says that a man is justified by works. James chapter 2 has 26 verses: Verses 1-7 instruct us to not show favoritism. Verses 8- 13 are comments on the Law. Verses 14-26 are about the relationship between faith and works.


For simplicity, I've summarized each verse and arranged the section in an outline style.

14 - What use is it if someone says he has faith but no works?
15 - If you see someone in need
16 - and you don't give him what he needs, but say, ‘Go in peace, be
warmed.' What use is that?
17 - therefore faith with no works is dead
18 - therefore, someone says "I will show you my faith by my
works."
19 - you believe in God? Good. The demons do too.
20 - faith without works is useless.
21 - Abraham was justified by works when he offered Isaac
22 - faith was working with his works.
23 - Scripture says, "And Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him as
righteousness"
24 - you see that a man is justified by works, and not by faith alone.
25 - Rahab, was justified by works
26 - faith without works is dead Notice that James begins this section by using the example of someone who says he has faith, verses 14. He then immediately gives an example of what true and false faiths are. He begins with the negative and demonstrates what an empty faith is (verses 15-17). Then he shows that that type of faith isn't much different from the faith of demons (verse 19). Finally, he gives examples of living faith by showing Abraham and Rahab as examples of people who demonstrated their faith by their deeds.
James is examining two kinds of faith: one that leads to godly works and one that does not. One is true, and the other is false. One is dead, the other alive; hence, "Faith without works is dead," (James 2:20).
This is why in the middle of his section on faith and works, he says in verse 19, "You believe that God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder." James says this because the demons believe in God, that is, they have faith, but the faith they have is useless. It does not result in appropriate works. Their faith is only a mental acknowledgment of God's existence.



Ascentia and Fiducia

Two words are worth introducing here: ascentia and fiducia. Ascentia is the mental ascent, the mental acknowledgment of something's existence. The demons acknowledge and believe that God exists. Fiducia is more than mental acknowledgment. It involves a trust in something, a giving over to it, a complete believing and acceptance of something. This is the kind of faith that a Christian has in Christ. A Christian, therefore, has fiducia; that is, he has real faith and trust in Christ, not simply an acknowledgment that He lived on earth at one time. Another way to put this is that there are many people in the world who believed that Jesus lived: ascentia. But they do not believe that He is their savior, the one to be looked to and trusted for the forgiveness of their sins.
Ascentia does not lead to works. Fiducia does. Ascentia is not of the heart. Fiducia is.



What is James Saying?

James is simply saying that if you ‘say' you are a Christian, then there had better be some appropriate works manifested or your faith is false. This sentiment is echoed in 1 John 2:4 which says, "If you say you have come to know Him, yet you do not keep His commandments, then the truth is not in you and you are a liar."
Apparently, there were people who were saying they were Christians, but were not manifesting any of the fruit of Christianity. Can this faith justify? Can the dead ‘faith' that someone has which produces no change in a person and no good works before men and God be a faith that justifies? Absolutely not. It is not merely enough to say you believe in Jesus. You must actually believe and trust in Him. If you actually do, then you will demonstrate that faith by a changed and godly life. If not, then your profession is of no more value than the same profession of demons: "We believe Jesus lived."
Notice that James actually quotes the same verse that Paul uses to support the teaching of justification by faith in Rom. 4:3. James 2:23 says, "and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, ‘and Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness.'" If James was trying to teach a contradictory doctrine of faith and works than the other New Testament writers, then he would not have used Abraham as an example.
Therefore, we are justified by faith. That is, we are made righteous in the eyes of God by faith as is amply demonstrated by Romans. However, that faith, if it is true, will result in deeds appropriate to salvation. After all, didn't God say in Eph. 2:8-10, "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, that no one should boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them."


http://www.carm.org/questions/faithorworks.htm


I hope that answers your questions.

Bryan43
Sep 3rd 2008, 08:33 PM
Yes. And I think I know what you will ask next, but I'll wait.


there is no need to ask anything. By your own admission all the pharisees who rejected Christ and hung him onm the cross would be saved.

historical proof shows these pharisees were the preme of the crop. a neighbor knew he could rely on them for anything. they were people who were said to be righteous, upstanding citizens, who no one could find fault against.

jesus even claimed unless our righteousness exceded that of these men ( which would be next to impossible, if not impossible ) we have no hope.

there will be many people rejected on the last day who were those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality,

the simple fact that the pharisees are rejected proves not everyone who is good will gain eternal life.

second. and a simple truth. if being good could get us to heaven. Christ died in vein.

drew
Sep 3rd 2008, 08:51 PM
Well, if we go strictly by that verse, than we don't need faith to get into heaven. We can do away with the entire idea of believing that Christ died on the cross.
Not true. Taking Romans 2 seriously does not in any sense require one to dispense with faith as being the basis for "getting into heaven" to use a phrase I do not think is really correct. I suspect you see "justification" as a one time event - an either / or type of proposition. Paul does not see it that way. Paul argues basically this: By faith and faith and faith alone we are given the Spirit. The Spirit then ensures that our lives produce the "good works" that will justify us at the Romans 2 judgement.

But you really need to explain why Paul does not mean what he says. Let there be no mistake. Paul, in Romans 2:6-13, clearly and unambiguously states that we are given eternal life according to what we have done.


Which is why I think it's referencing the acts of the faithful as an indicator of their standing with god, rather than the acts indicating whether or not their salvation is valid.
I do not understand the distinction you draw here.

CanadianSlash
Sep 3rd 2008, 08:55 PM
Not true. Taking Romans 2 seriously does not in any sense require one to dispense with faith as being the basis for "getting into heaven" to use a phrase I do not think is really correct. I suspect you see "justification" as a one time event - an either / or type of proposition. Paul does not see it that way. Paul argues basically this: By faith and faith and faith alone we are given the Spirit. The Spirit then ensures that our lives produce the "good works" that will justify us at the Romans 2 judgement.

But you really need to explain why Paul does not mean what he says. Let there be no mistake. Paul, in Romans 2:6-13, clearly and unambiguously states that we are given eternal life according to what we have done.


I do not understand the distinction you draw here.

Which is key to understanding why this belief you and butch hold is wrong. Because there is a distinction. A somewhat fine distinction.

drew
Sep 3rd 2008, 08:58 PM
In Romans it says, "because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight . . . " (Rom. 3:20), and "for we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law," (Rom. 3:28), and "For what does the Scripture say? ‘And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness'" (Rom. 4:3), and "Therefore, having been justified by faith . . . " (Rom. 5:1), and "But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness" (Rom. 4:5).
In James it says, "You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone," (James 2:24) and " . . . so also faith without works is dead," (James 2:26).
Which is it? Are we justified by faith or by works?
This entire question is predicated on misreading Paul when he refers to "works".

In Romans 3:20, Paul is not referring to "good works", he is referring to the Law of Moses - the Torah. I am prepared to defend this claim.

In Romans 3:28, Paul is not referring to "good works", he is referring to the Law of Moses - the Torah. I am prepared to defend this claim.

And so on.

Paul never denies that we are justified by good works - he affirms this very thing in Romans 2, clearly stating that we are indeed justified by the good works that the Holy Spirit produces in our lives.

Paul does, on numerous occasions, deny that we are justified by doing the works of the Law of Moses. This is not a denial of justification by doing good works.

Pick any text you wish that you think shows that Paul denies justification by "good works" and I will be happy to make a case that it means something other than this.

drew
Sep 3rd 2008, 09:03 PM
I think that readers need to be presented with the actual words of Paul from Romans 2:6-7:

6God "will give to each person according to what he has done."[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%202&version=31#fen-NIV-27954a)] 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life

If you showed this text to an english speaking person who brings no doctrinal biases to the text, that person will take Paul as saying:

"Eternal life is given according to the good works one has done"

The text is not saying something other than this. It is simply not saying that the amount of rewards one gets "in heaven" are determined by your good works - it says that the very granting of eternal is in accordance with good works.

One needs to assume that Paul knows how to write and express himself. He says what he means and he means what he says.

drew
Sep 3rd 2008, 09:05 PM
there is no need to ask anything. By your own admission all the pharisees who rejected Christ and hung him onm the cross would be saved.
I never admitted anything of the kind. Show me where I said anything at all like this. I said that those "who persist in doing good" will get eternal life. How do you know that the Pharisees met the unstated standard of exaclty what the "bar" is for doing good.

Bryan43
Sep 3rd 2008, 09:26 PM
How do you know that the Pharisees met the unstated standard of exaclty what the "bar" is for doing good.


Matt 5: 20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.

I will tell you. there is probably not a man on earth today that could make this claim. The pharisees could be seen as people who kept the law from birth. Remember it is the law that tells us what sin is. Not the ten commands. I am talking the whole law. if we would take a count of sin people commited since birth, including every sin. I almost guarantee no one would have Less sin than the pharisees.

As for what the bar is. It is the law. Paul said it was the law that told us what sin was. for before the law no one could be charged with sin. for how could one know coveting is a sin, unless you are told. thou shalt not covet.

The law is the bar. in it, everyone is condemned. Because in it no one but Christ has fullfilled it.

that is why God says there is NON righteous. because the law condemns us all. it was not given to save us. it was given to prove we needed a savior. and it condemns us. The only way we could be set free is to be set free from the penalty of the law. Which is what Christ did when he came.

who are we to say we could do ANYTHING to make up for the wrongs we have commited? A guilty man is condemned until he pays the debt he owes.

Since man owes God perfect righteousness. and since no man has fullfilled this debt. no man can save himself. Because no matter how good you are. you are still guilty. No amount of good works, whether of the law or not. can make up for what we have already been condemned for.

the only way to save yourself is to live up to what God requires. which we have already failed.

The punishment is eternal death ( spiritual )

so you have two choices. live a righteous perfect life. which no man has done. or die spiritually, for all eternity.

the choice is yours.

Christ died for my sins. he died for yours. chose to accpet his payment in fool. or chose to suffer your own..

BroRog
Sep 4th 2008, 12:28 AM
I think that readers need to be presented with the actual words of Paul from Romans 2:6-7:

6God "will give to each person according to what he has done."[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%202&version=31#fen-NIV-27954a)] 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life

If you showed this text to an english speaking person who brings no doctrinal biases to the text, that person will take Paul as saying:

"Eternal life is given according to the good works one has done"

The text is not saying something other than this. It is simply not saying that the amount of rewards one gets "in heaven" are determined by your good works - it says that the very granting of eternal is in accordance with good works.

One needs to assume that Paul knows how to write and express himself. He says what he means and he means what he says.

I think you are on the right track. However, I think Paul would put the emphasis on "seeking glory, honor, and immortality" as the direct basis for eternal life. The judgment will assess both what we did and why we did it. For instance, it's conceivable that someone might do good works in pursuit of something else: self-gratification, blind ambition, the praise of men, feeling good, self-worth, etc. But if the basis of the doing the good is the pursuit of glory, honor, and immortality, this will lead to eternal life.

I think this is his point.

Butch5
Sep 4th 2008, 01:29 AM
Drew---I politely suggest that, for some, the reformers have attained the status of "infallible" interpreters of the Scriptures. But, I think we all agree that scripture is scripture, and the Westminster Confession is not.


I am coming to believe that Luther and company, while they made valuable contributions, also made some mistakes. And this whole "works" thing is one of them.


I agree with both statements!

Butch5
Sep 4th 2008, 01:33 AM
Brian---again I share, abraham was saved before the law was given. many were saved before the law were given, including noah and his family.

How was Abraham saved before the law? Christ had not yet died.


Brian---again I must ask. if works are required for salvation in the nT, what works were required in the OLD? Because the way to salvation is no different for us today than it was for adam and eve.

The works required in the OT are the same as in the NT. Did James not say Abraham's faith was made perfect by His works?

Butch5
Sep 4th 2008, 01:37 AM
I'm with brian on this one. Butch is misinterpreting scripture, plain and simple.

James is talking about how those with a strong faith will naturally be doing good works, while those who have a stagnant faith will be lax, and won't necessarily be doing good works.

It does NOT mean that if you don't do good works, then your faith is cancelled out.

Jesus said that a tree is identified by the fruit it yields. Which is, in essence, what James is talking about.

Butch, you're wrong, and you keep spitting out the same verses despite the massive horde of verses everyone gives right back. At this point, trying to correct Butch and also LostHorizon (this whole thing might have something to do with that "philosophical impasse with the board management"...) is the equivalent of doing this: :B

I keep spitting out the verses because no one has reconciled them them. I have addressed the verses they put forth regarding faith. I notice that you also said I am wrong and you also DID NOT address the verses.

Butch5
Sep 4th 2008, 01:38 AM
I must ask. does everyone who does this gain eternal life??



Those who do this and have faith in Christ do.

Butch5
Sep 4th 2008, 01:42 AM
Well, if we go strictly by that verse, than we don't need faith to get into heaven. We can do away with the entire idea of believing that Christ died on the cross.

Which is why I think it's referencing the acts of the faithful as an indicator of their standing with god, rather than the acts indicating whether or not their salvation is valid.

As I said in a previous post, even if it is a reference to the acts of the faithful, they still do not get eternal life unless the do good. And as a side note, if this is a reference to the faithful, then it shows the fatihful can be lost.

Butch5
Sep 4th 2008, 01:54 AM
In Romans it says, "because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight . . . " (Rom. 3:20), and "for we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law," (Rom. 3:28), and "For what does the Scripture say? ‘And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness'" (Rom. 4:3), and "Therefore, having been justified by faith . . . " (Rom. 5:1), and "But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness" (Rom. 4:5).
In James it says, "You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone," (James 2:24) and " . . . so also faith without works is dead," (James 2:26).
Which is it? Are we justified by faith or by works?



Does the Bible Contradict Itself?



It is a fundamental Christian belief that we are justified by faith. Justification means that God declares a sinner to be righteous. He does this by crediting, by reckoning the righteousness of Jesus to the sinner. This is done by faith. That is, when the sinner puts his faith in the sacrifice of Jesus and trusts in Him and not himself for righteousness, then God justifies him. "And Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him as righteousness," (Rom. 4:3). But, if the Bible teaches that we are justified by faith, does it also teach we are justified by works as James seems to say? Do we have a contradiction? The answer is no.




Context is Everything


It is erroneous to take a verse, read it without its context, and then attempt to develop a doctrine from that verse alone. Therefore, let's take a look at the context of James 2:24 which says that a man is justified by works. James chapter 2 has 26 verses: Verses 1-7 instruct us to not show favoritism. Verses 8- 13 are comments on the Law. Verses 14-26 are about the relationship between faith and works.



For simplicity, I've summarized each verse and arranged the section in an outline style.

14 - What use is it if someone says he has faith but no works?
15 - If you see someone in need
16 - and you don't give him what he needs, but say, ‘Go in peace, be
warmed.' What use is that?
17 - therefore faith with no works is dead
18 - therefore, someone says "I will show you my faith by my
works."
19 - you believe in God? Good. The demons do too.
20 - faith without works is useless.
21 - Abraham was justified by works when he offered Isaac
22 - faith was working with his works.
23 - Scripture says, "And Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him as
righteousness"
24 - you see that a man is justified by works, and not by faith alone.
25 - Rahab, was justified by works
26 - faith without works is dead Notice that James begins this section by using the example of someone who says he has faith, verses 14. He then immediately gives an example of what true and false faiths are. He begins with the negative and demonstrates what an empty faith is (verses 15-17). Then he shows that that type of faith isn't much different from the faith of demons (verse 19). Finally, he gives examples of living faith by showing Abraham and Rahab as examples of people who demonstrated their faith by their deeds.
James is examining two kinds of faith: one that leads to godly works and one that does not. One is true, and the other is false. One is dead, the other alive; hence, "Faith without works is dead," (James 2:20).
This is why in the middle of his section on faith and works, he says in verse 19, "You believe that God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder." James says this because the demons believe in God, that is, they have faith, but the faith they have is useless. It does not result in appropriate works. Their faith is only a mental acknowledgment of God's existence.



Ascentia and Fiducia


Two words are worth introducing here: ascentia and fiducia. Ascentia is the mental ascent, the mental acknowledgment of something's existence. The demons acknowledge and believe that God exists. Fiducia is more than mental acknowledgment. It involves a trust in something, a giving over to it, a complete believing and acceptance of something. This is the kind of faith that a Christian has in Christ. A Christian, therefore, has fiducia; that is, he has real faith and trust in Christ, not simply an acknowledgment that He lived on earth at one time. Another way to put this is that there are many people in the world who believed that Jesus lived: ascentia. But they do not believe that He is their savior, the one to be looked to and trusted for the forgiveness of their sins.

Ascentia does not lead to works. Fiducia does. Ascentia is not of the heart. Fiducia is.



What is James Saying?


James is simply saying that if you ‘say' you are a Christian, then there had better be some appropriate works manifested or your faith is false. This sentiment is echoed in 1 John 2:4 which says, "If you say you have come to know Him, yet you do not keep His commandments, then the truth is not in you and you are a liar."

Apparently, there were people who were saying they were Christians, but were not manifesting any of the fruit of Christianity. Can this faith justify? Can the dead ‘faith' that someone has which produces no change in a person and no good works before men and God be a faith that justifies? Absolutely not. It is not merely enough to say you believe in Jesus. You must actually believe and trust in Him. If you actually do, then you will demonstrate that faith by a changed and godly life. If not, then your profession is of no more value than the same profession of demons: "We believe Jesus lived."
Notice that James actually quotes the same verse that Paul uses to support the teaching of justification by faith in Rom. 4:3. James 2:23 says, "and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, ‘and Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness.'" If James was trying to teach a contradictory doctrine of faith and works than the other New Testament writers, then he would not have used Abraham as an example.
Therefore, we are justified by faith. That is, we are made righteous in the eyes of God by faith as is amply demonstrated by Romans. However, that faith, if it is true, will result in deeds appropriate to salvation. After all, didn't God say in Eph. 2:8-10, "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, that no one should boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them."



http://www.carm.org/questions/faithorworks.htm



I hope that answers your questions.


Dude,

Who's taking a verse out of context? I gave multiple verses and I went through the 2nd chapter of James. I see you went through it too, you make mention that James quotes the same verse that Paul quoted. However I notice you left out one very important part,


James 2:22 ( KJV ) 22Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?

This DOESN'T say Abraham's works were evidence of His faith, It says His faith was made perfect by His works. And what?


James 2:23 ( KJV ) 23And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.

And the Scripture was fulfilled. When was the Scripture fulfilled? When Abraham's FAITH was MADE PERFECT by His WORKS. Abraham was counted righteousnot when He placed His faith in God, but when He had both faith and works.

Butch5
Sep 4th 2008, 02:18 AM
Brian---Matt 5: 20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.

I will tell you. there is probably not a man on earth today that could make this claim. The pharisees could be seen as people who kept the law from birth. Remember it is the law that tells us what sin is. Not the ten commands. I am talking the whole law. if we would take a count of sin people commited since birth, including every sin. I almost guarantee no one would have Less sin than the pharisees.


I think you misunderstand the verses about the Pharisees, Jesus point is that they are NOT righteous. They were hypocrites, they acted like they were pious but were not.

It's not about how many sins you have.


Brian---who are we to say we could do ANYTHING to make up for the wrongs we have commited? A guilty man is condemned until he pays the debt he owes.

And what is that payment? Is it not death? Do we not die? So, we have sinned and we will pay for that sin, in that we will die. Paul said "death passed upon all men for all have sinned."


Brian---Since man owes God perfect righteousness. and since no man has fullfilled this debt. no man can save himself. Because no matter how good you are. you are still guilty. No amount of good works, whether of the law or not. can make up for what we have already been condemned for.

Where does Scripture say we owe God perfect righteousness? That is not what Micah says,

Micah 6:8 ( KJV ) 8He hath showed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?




Brian---Christ died for my sins. he died for yours. chose to accpet his payment in fool. or chose to suffer your own..

What payment Brian?

CanadianSlash
Sep 4th 2008, 03:00 AM
Dude,

Who's taking a verse out of context? I gave multiple verses and I went through the 2nd chapter of James. I see you went through it too, you make mention that James quotes the same verse that Paul quoted. However I notice you left out one very important part,


James 2:22 ( KJV ) 22Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?

This DOESN'T say Abraham's works were evidence of His faith, It says His faith was made perfect by His works. And what?


James 2:23 ( KJV ) 23And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.

And the Scripture was fulfilled. When was the Scripture fulfilled? When Abraham's FAITH was MADE PERFECT by His WORKS. Abraham was counted righteousnot when He placed His faith in God, but when He had both faith and works.

Actually, if one looks at the structure of that James 2:23 verse, it becomes clear that it's referring to Abraham's belief that grants him salvation.

23And [so] the Scripture was fulfilled that says, Abraham believed in (adhered to, trusted in, and relied on) God, and this was accounted to him as righteousness (as conformity to God's will in thought and deed), and he was called God's friend.

This is from the amplified bible. It's a very good translation, and keeps VERY close to the original context. You should take a look at it sometime. But anyways, if you look at the sentence structure, even a basic fifth grade english student could tell you that:

1. Abraham believed in God
and thus
2. He was made righteous.

Very simple indeed.

as for the previous verse:

You see that [his] faith was cooperating with his works, and [his] faith was completed and reached its supreme expression [when he implemented it] by [good] works.

It's obvious that his works was an expression of his faith. You can even see that in the KJV verse you presented. For some reason, you don't see it, however.

EDIT: For your reference, in the amplified bible, parantheses indicate additional phases of meaning included in the original word, phrase or clause of the original language and brackets contain justified clarifying words or comments not actually expressed in the immediate original text.

Butch5
Sep 4th 2008, 03:46 AM
Actually, if one looks at the structure of that James 2:23 verse, it becomes clear that it's referring to Abraham's belief that grants him salvation.

23And [so] the Scripture was fulfilled that says, Abraham believed in (adhered to, trusted in, and relied on) God, and this was accounted to him as righteousness (as conformity to God's will in thought and deed), and he was called God's friend.

This is from the amplified bible. It's a very good translation, and keeps VERY close to the original context. You should take a look at it sometime. But anyways, if you look at the sentence structure, even a basic fifth grade english student could tell you that:

1. Abraham believed in God
and thus
2. He was made righteous.

Very simple indeed.

as for the previous verse:

You see that [his] faith was cooperating with his works, and [his] faith was completed and reached its supreme expression [when he implemented it] by [good] works.

It's obvious that his works was an expression of his faith. You can even see that in the KJV verse you presented. For some reason, you don't see it, however.

EDIT: For your reference, in the amplified bible, parantheses indicate additional phases of meaning included in the original word, phrase or clause of the original language and brackets contain justified clarifying words or comments not actually expressed in the immediate original text.

You didn't address it again, the faith was NOT counted for righteousness UNTIL it was PERFECTED by WORKS. James says this clear as day. You say,

"it is obvious that his works was an expression of his faith"

What is obvious? That IS NOT what James is saying, where do you get that from in his statememt? James said the WORKS perfected the FAITH.

If the works perfected the faith, how can they be the product of it?

CanadianSlash
Sep 4th 2008, 03:52 AM
You didn't address it again, the faith was NOT counted for righteousness UNTIL it was PERFECTED by WORKS. James says this clear as day. You say,

"it is obvious that his works was an expression of his faith"

What is obvious? That IS NOT what James is saying, where do you get that from in his statememt? James said the WORKS perfected the FAITH.

If the works perfected the faith, how can they be the product of it?

By that same token, you ignored and didn't address my post. Quoting it, and then repeating the very thing i refuted does not qualify as addressing it.

If you had taken the time to read my post, you'd understand that the original translation completely refutes what you're saying. Perhaps you skip over it.

BroRog
Sep 4th 2008, 04:14 AM
In Romans, Paul argues that since Abraham was declared "justified" in view of his faith before he submitted to the ritual of circumcision, this proves God is willing to grant justification in view of faith apart from the performance of the ritual aspects of the Mosaic Law.

James accepts this view but argues against those who merely claim to have faith without showing any visible sign that would lend credence to a claim of faith. He reminds his readers about how Abraham's faith led him to obey God, even to the point of offering his son on the alter.

James isn't arguing that we must add works to our faith to gain God's justification. Rather, he argues for justification by a genuine faith, which seeks to obey God.

losthorizon
Sep 4th 2008, 04:28 AM
In Romans, Paul argues that since Abraham was declared "justified" in view of his faith before he submitted to the ritual of circumcision, this proves God is willing to grant justification in view of faith apart from the performance of the ritual aspects of the Mosaic Law.

James accepts this view but argues against those who merely claim to have faith without showing any visible sign that would lend credence to a claim of faith. He reminds his readers about how Abraham's faith led him to obey God, even to the point of offering his son on the alter.

James isn't arguing that we must add works to our faith to gain God's justification. Rather, he argues for justification by a genuine faith, which seeks to obey God.
And obeying the Lord in baptism is not “adding works” to the work of Christ on the cross. Obeying from the heart that form of doctrine delivered is obedience to God “unto righteousness”. The doctrine delivered includes the ordinance of baptism to be submitted to by all who will be His disciples – “he that believes and is baptized shall be saved.”
Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? 17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. 18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness. Romans 6:16-18 (KJV)

MidnightsPaleGlow
Sep 4th 2008, 11:46 AM
Just a thought on Mark 16:16, Baptism of the Holy Spirit could have very well been the baptism that Jesus was talking about, since by one SPIRIT ARE WE ALL "BAPTIZED" into one body (1 Cor. 12:13), and we receive the Spirit by the hearing of faith (Gal. 3:2). The Holy Spirit places us into the body of Christ, and since we're saved by grace through faith apart from any human efforts (Eph. 2:8-9), it is very likely that the Baptism being spoken of in Mark 16:16 was the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, since in Philippians 1:5, Paul mentions "fellowship in the gospel from the first day," obviously implying that when you first believe, you are saved. Acts 10:43-47 is a prime example of how being saved comes before and apart from water baptism. Those hearing the message BELIEVED and were BAPTIZED BY THE HOLY SPIRIT, and then were BAPTIZED IN WATER. Since the Baptism of the Holy Spirit is what places us into the body of Christ as 1 Cor. 12:13 and Gal. 3:2 quite plainly say, it is quite possible that Jesus was talking about the Holy Spirit Baptism in Mark 16:16. The only thing one has to do to be damned is not believe.

I know somebody in this great debate made an excellent point, if somebody is repeatedly giving water baptism the credit for securing their salvation, that person is, in a way, in danger of committing Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, as they're giving something else the credit for the Holy Spirit's work, much like the Pharisees were when they repeatedly gave Satan the credit for what was really the work of the Holy Spirit (Matt. 9:34 and 12:24).

drew
Sep 4th 2008, 01:08 PM
Matt 5: 20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.

I will tell you. there is probably not a man on earth today that could make this claim.
When people are truly born again and are given the Spirit, they will indeed be able to make this claim:

In Romans 10, Paul quotes from Deuteronomy 30, a text about what happens when the covenant is renewed. And Paul sees the work of Jesus as renewing the covenant. Here is the text Paul quotes from Deut 30:

Now what I am commanding you today is not too difficult for you or beyond your reach. 12 It is not up in heaven, so that you have to ask, "Who will ascend into heaven to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?" 13 Nor is it beyond the sea, so that you have to ask, "Who will cross the sea to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?" 14 No, the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart so you may obey it.

This should make it clear. Paul sees the giving of the Holy Spirit as the means by which we are indeed enabled to do "good works". And if this were not evidence enough, how about Romans 8 where Paul fills in his case for how the Spirit enables us to live the kinds of lives - and produce the good works - that we would not otherwise be able to do:

9You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ. 10But if Christ is in you, your body is dead because of sin, yet your spirit is alive because of righteousness. 11And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit, who lives in you.
12Therefore, brothers, we have an obligation—but it is not to the sinful nature, to live according to it. 13For if you live according to the sinful nature, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live,....


As for what the bar is. It is the law.
No, it simply cannot be the "law" as this term is normally used. The Romans 2 judgement lies in the future and the Torah - the Law - as a set of regulations and prescriptions was clearly done away with 2000 years ago. Paul write this in Ephesians 2:

For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations.

There is a sense in which the Torah still applies - it is the "love God and your neighbour sense. But Paul is clear in Romans 2 and Jesus is clear in the gospels. What you do bears on whether you will get eternal life.

drew
Sep 4th 2008, 01:10 PM
I think you are on the right track. However, I think Paul would put the emphasis on "seeking glory, honor, and immortality" as the direct basis for eternal life. The judgment will assess both what we did and why we did it. For instance, it's conceivable that someone might do good works in pursuit of something else: self-gratification, blind ambition, the praise of men, feeling good, self-worth, etc. But if the basis of the doing the good is the pursuit of glory, honor, and immortality, this will lead to eternal life.

I think this is his point.
I can go along with this.

drew
Sep 4th 2008, 01:20 PM
Many people seem to think that if salvation is by faith and faith alone, how can "good works" be the "bar" or "test" one must pass as per Romans 2. So, to be frank, they basically sweep Romans 2 under the rug. But Romans 2 is clear - eternal life is granted based on "good works".

The problem, I suggest, is that people take the judicial model of justification as primary -the model in which, in single courtroom event, a person is declered to be righteous through the substitutionary death of Christ.

However, I think for Paul, the term "justification" is primarily covnental, with the judicial version being secondary. A covenantal perspective on justification is really the question: "Who is a member of the true familty of God?"

This is what Paul is primarily concerned with even though he occasionally uses judicial language. So, under a covenantal scheme, it is entirely logical to have the following:

1. In the present, the true people of God are marked out or identified by nothing other than faith;

2. In the future (e.g. Romans 2 judgement), true people of God are marked out or identified by their good works;

3. These are the same groups of people! - The Holy Spirit ensures that those with true faith will indeed manifest the works needed to pass the Romans 2 judgement.

When people take the judicial model as primary, and ignore the covenantal issues, it is understandable that they see justification as "one time event". But that is clearly not how Paul sees things. He use language that suggests that justification has tenses.

Bryan43
Sep 4th 2008, 01:45 PM
This should make it clear. Paul sees the giving of the Holy Spirit as the means by which we are indeed enabled to do "good works". And if this were not evidence enough, how about Romans 8 where Paul fills in his case for how the Spirit enables us to live the kinds of lives - and produce the good works - that we would not otherwise be able to do:

agree 100 % However, we have to have the holy spirit before any works can be accomplished, otherwise we are unable to do good works, as you so correctly stated.



No, it simply cannot be the "law" as this term is normally used. The Romans 2 judgement lies in the future and the Torah - the Law - as a set of regulations and prescriptions was clearly done away with 2000 years ago. Paul write this in Ephesians 2:

For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations.

There is a sense in which the Torah still applies - it is the "love God and your neighbour sense. But Paul is clear in Romans 2 and Jesus is clear in the gospels. What you do bears on whether you will get eternal life.


as you read above, Jesus abolished the only barrier that stands between God and man, that barrier being the law.

However, even though Christ destroyed it. It still must be applied to you. If you are not Gods child, not born again. your still condemned by the law.



Many people seem to think that if salvation is by faith and faith alone, how can "good works" be the "bar" or "test" one must pass as per Romans 2. So, to be frank, they basically sweep Romans 2 under the rug. But Romans 2 is clear - eternal life is granted based on "good works".


Has nothing to do with throwing under the rug. It has everything to do with making scripture agree with itself. Paul can not say in one passage we are saved by faith alone, then later say we are saved by faith and works.

Romans 2, when taken in its correct context, shows that as you so correctly stated earlier, those who are gods children will strive to do the works romans two says they will.

those who are not born again, do not have the spirit, will not. as you again stated.

thus romans two will be fillfilled. and salvation by faith alone still stands.

Butch5
Sep 4th 2008, 02:07 PM
agree 100 % However, we have to have the holy spirit before any works can be accomplished, otherwise we are unable to do good works, as you so correctly stated.



as you read above, Jesus abolished the only barrier that stands between God and man, that barrier being the law.

However, even though Christ destroyed it. It still must be applied to you. If you are not Gods child, not born again. your still condemned by the law.



Has nothing to do with throwing under the rug. It has everything to do with making scripture agree with itself. Paul can not say in one passage we are saved by faith alone, then later say we are saved by faith and works.

Romans 2, when taken in its correct context, shows that as you so correctly stated earlier, those who are gods children will strive to do the works romans two says they will.

those who are not born again, do not have the spirit, will not. as you again stated.

thus romans two will be fillfilled. and salvation by faith alone still stands.

Brian,

NOWHERE in Scripture does Paul ever say we are saved by FAITH ALONE!!!!!!!!!

drew
Sep 4th 2008, 02:14 PM
Paul can not say in one passage we are saved by faith alone, then later say we are saved by faith and works.
I do not agree with this statement. I realize how deeply entrenched this idea is but it is simply not correct. There is no reason why one has to "choose" between the one or the other.

Suppose that I want to get into Harvard. To get into Harvard, you need at least an average of 90 % in all high school courses. This is effectively "entry to Harvard by works". This is the "Romans 2" of entry into Harvard. Those with > 90 % get in. Those with < 90 % do not.

Suppose that you have a friend who is willing to give you an injection of a magical drug that will transform you into a genius - so that it is guaranteed that you will obtain an average > 90 %/

All you need to do is to place "faith" in this person and put out your arm to receive the injection. Is this an act of grace on the part of this friend? Indeed it is. Do you accept it by faith and faith alone? Yes, you do.

But, of course, you still get into Harvard by scoring > 90 %. I trust the analogy is clear. One is not forced to "choose" between "faith" and "good works" in respect to how we are justified. Justification is simply not a one time event for Paul. He is not thinking primarily in terms of a lawcourt model. He is moving within a covenantal scheme. And it that scheme, the issue is "Who is a true member of the family of God". And in the present, such people are marked out by faith. And at the Romans 2 judgement, they are marked out by works.

But, I agree, the "faith" is what its fundamentally all about in the sense that once true faith is there, good works are guaranteed by the action of the Holy Spirit.

But the Romans 2 text stands - the "admission test" is good works, even if it is faith and faith alone that is behind it all.


Romans 2, when taken in its correct context, shows that as you so correctly stated earlier, those who are gods children will strive to do the works romans two says they will.

those who are not born again, do not have the spirit, will not. as you again stated.

thus romans two will be fillfilled. and salvation by faith alone still stands.
Now this I agree with, and I wonder whether our differences are purely "semantic".

CanadianSlash
Sep 4th 2008, 02:19 PM
Brian,

NOWHERE in Scripture does Paul ever say we are saved by FAITH ALONE!!!!!!!!!

Once again butch, you refuse to acknowledge what has been clearly stated. I will try one last time to correct you in your thinking, as the bible has commanded us to do. If you refuse to read and acknowledge it, that is an error against yourself, by yourself. This will be my last post as it is tiresome arguing with people that refuse to listen to reason, and instead, repeat the same drivel they've been repeating over and over without ever acknowledging the mountain of evidence stacked against them. Here's a final study for you, if you're even willing to read it (Not that you are, since you obviously have your mind made up).

EDIT: Apparently drew finally agrees with what we've been saying. Maybe there was just a misunderstanding.

http://www.biblicaltheology.com/Research/CarterJ01.html

Here's another if that's not enough:

http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5719
Goodbye. :giveup:

drew
Sep 4th 2008, 02:25 PM
Once again butch, you refuse to acknowledge what has been clearly stated. I will try one last time to correct you in your thinking, as the bible has commanded us to do. If you refuse to read and acknowledge it, that is an error against yourself, by yourself. This will be my last post as it is tiresome arguing with people that refuse to listen to reason, and instead, repeat the same drivel they've been repeating over and over without ever acknowledging the mountain of evidence stacked against them. Here's a final study for you, if you're even willing to read it (Not that you are, since you obviously have your mind made up).

http://www.biblicaltheology.com/Research/CarterJ01.html
Goodbye. :giveup:
Does Paul, or does Paul not, mean what he says here:

God will give to each person according to what he has done."[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%202;&version=31;#fen-NIV-27954a)] 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life.

Paul obviously meant something by this: Here is what I think he meant:

God will give to each person according to what he has done." 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life.

Now what do you think he meant?

BroRog
Sep 4th 2008, 02:33 PM
And obeying the Lord in baptism is not “adding works” to the work of Christ on the cross. Obeying from the heart that form of doctrine delivered is obedience to God “unto righteousness”. The doctrine delivered includes the ordinance of baptism to be submitted to by all who will be His disciples – “he that believes and is baptized shall be saved.”
Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? 17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. 18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness. Romans 6:16-18 (KJV)

I don't happen to affirm that baptism is an ordinance, but anyone who does should obey from the heart, as you say.

CanadianSlash
Sep 4th 2008, 02:40 PM
Does Paul, or does Paul not, mean what he says here:

God will give to each person according to what he has done."[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%202;&version=31;#fen-NIV-27954a)] 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life.

Paul obviously meant something by this: Here is what I think he meant:

God will give to each person according to what he has done." 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life.

Now what do you think he meant?

I've already responded to that:


Which is why I think it's referencing the acts of the faithful as an indicator of their standing with god, rather than the acts indicating whether or not their salvation is valid.

BroRog
Sep 4th 2008, 02:45 PM
Many people seem to think that if salvation is by faith and faith alone, how can "good works" be the "bar" or "test" one must pass as per Romans 2. So, to be frank, they basically sweep Romans 2 under the rug. But Romans 2 is clear - eternal life is granted based on "good works".

The problem, I suggest, is that people take the judicial model of justification as primary -the model in which, in single courtroom event, a person is declered to be righteous through the substitutionary death of Christ.

However, I think for Paul, the term "justification" is primarily covnental, with the judicial version being secondary. A covenantal perspective on justification is really the question: "Who is a member of the true familty of God?"

This is what Paul is primarily concerned with even though he occasionally uses judicial language. So, under a covenantal scheme, it is entirely logical to have the following:

1. In the present, the true people of God are marked out or identified by nothing other than faith;

2. In the future (e.g. Romans 2 judgement), true people of God are marked out or identified by their good works;

3. These are the same groups of people! - The Holy Spirit ensures that those with true faith will indeed manifest the works needed to pass the Romans 2 judgement.

When people take the judicial model as primary, and ignore the covenantal issues, it is understandable that they see justification as "one time event". But that is clearly not how Paul sees things. He use language that suggests that justification has tenses.

I agree with your ideas, but again, I believe you will make your point more poignant if you include motive as Paul has done. In the Romans 2 judgment, the people of God are marked out by what they were seeking with these good works. It isn't the good works alone, the faith alone, or even the good works plus faith. The Christian life is an examination of what we truly want and what we truly find valuable.

I am reminded of what Jesus told his disciples, "seek first the kingdom of God and all these others will be added to you." The emphasis is on our priorities. What do we seek first? What do we put first? What is our primary goal? Where is our heart?

Paul is saying that these people were doing good works in pursuit of something. The good works either describe that pursuit or they are secondary to the pursuit. He wants us to focus on the primary motive; what do we want? and what do we find valuable?

Bryan43
Sep 4th 2008, 02:46 PM
do not agree with this statement. I realize how deeply entrenched this idea is but it is simply not correct. There is no reason why one has to "choose" between the one or the other.

Suppose that I want to get into Harvard. To get into Harvard, you need at least an average of 90 % in all high school courses. This is effectively "entry to Harvard by works". This is the "Romans 2" of entry into Harvard. Those with > 90 % get in. Those with < 90 % do not.

I am sorry drew, this is a bad example.

james said if we break even the last of all commands we are found guilty of the whole law. God demands 100 %.. 90 % would not get you in, 99 would not even get you in.

and yes we do have to make a choice. Paul can not tell the ephesian church one thing, then turn around and tell the roman church something contradictory.

it would be like me telling you you do not have to do anything to get into college, just show up. there are zero requirements, just have faith we will let you in.

then tell someone else, he must fullfill all these requirements or he will not get in.

it is a double standard. God does not have any double standards.


now this I agree with, and I wonder whether our differences are purely "semantic".

I hope so. but alot of things you say are either confusing, or I am not hearing your right.

BroRog
Sep 4th 2008, 03:01 PM
I am sorry drew, this is a bad example.

james said if we break even the last of all commands we are found guilty of the whole law. God demands 100 %.. 90 % would not get you in, 99 would not even get you in.

and yes we do have to make a choice. Paul can not tell the ephesian church one thing, then turn around and tell the roman church something contradictory.

it would be like me telling you you do not have to do anything to get into college, just show up. there are zero requirements, just have faith we will let you in.

then tell someone else, he must fullfill all these requirements or he will not get in.

it is a double standard. God does not have any double standards.



I hope so. but alot of things you say are either confusing, or I am not hearing your right.


Bryan, let me offer you an example of the kind of thing Paul has in mind in Romans 2.

One can get the idea that becoming a Christian is merely answering "yes" to the questions on a small test. Do you believe Jesus is Lord? Yes. Do you believe Jesus rose from the dead? Yes. Do you believe Jesus is God incarnate? Yes. Do you believe Jesus was born of a virgin? Yes. and etc.

But Jesus himself challenges us in different ways.

For instance, Jesus said that if we are not willing to forgive others, God will not forgive us. To forgive others isn't merely answering "yes" on a test. Jesus requires me to forgive another person, which requires me to do business with what I believe. If I am unwilling to forgive, (and I acknowledge that forgiveness is not always possible) but if I am unwilling to forgive, this indicates that my heart isn't right. Jesus disciples forgive each other. And if I am unwilling to forgive you, I demonstrate that I want something else more. I like being a disciple of Jesus, but if I won't forgive you, this means I like something else more than I like being a disciple.

This is what Paul means in Romans 2. The things we do express who we are. Am I the kind of person who would forgive another person? Am I a lover of God? If God is willing to love others am I willing to do the same? If God is willing to forgive am I willing to follow his example?

What kind of person am I? What do I want? What do I value?

Who I am is expressed in what I do.

CanadianSlash
Sep 4th 2008, 03:06 PM
Bryan, let me offer you an example of the kind of thing Paul has in mind in Romans 2.

One can get the idea that becoming a Christian is merely answering "yes" to the questions on a small test. Do you believe Jesus is Lord? Yes. Do you believe Jesus rose from the dead? Yes. Do you believe Jesus is God incarnate? Yes. Do you believe Jesus was born of a virgin? Yes. and etc.

But Jesus himself challenges us in different ways.

For instance, Jesus said that if we are not willing to forgive others, God will not forgive us. To forgive others isn't merely answering "yes" on a test. Jesus requires me to forgive another person, which requires me to do business with what I believe. If I am unwilling to forgive, (and I acknowledge that forgiveness is not always possible) but if I am unwilling to forgive, this indicates that my heart isn't right. Jesus disciples forgive each other. And if I am unwilling to forgive you, I demonstrate that I want something else more. I like being a disciple of Jesus, but if I won't forgive you, this means I like something else more than I like being a disciple.

This is what Paul means in Romans 2. The things we do express who we are. Am I the kind of person who would forgive another person? Am I a lover of God? If God is willing to love others am I willing to do the same? If God is willing to forgive am I willing to follow his example?

What kind of person am I? What do I want? What do I value?

Who I am is expressed in what I do.

I think you're arguing for the exact same thing we're arguing for. Those that have been baptized in the holy spirit will persist in doing good, while those that haven't, won't.

drew
Sep 4th 2008, 03:39 PM
Paul is saying that these people were doing good works in pursuit of something. The good works either describe that pursuit or they are secondary to the pursuit. He wants us to focus on the primary motive; what do we want? and what do we find valuable?
I am with you. I think what you are saying is a valuable qualification to add to the position I am claiming that Paul is putting forward.

drew
Sep 4th 2008, 03:51 PM
I am sorry drew, this is a bad example.

james said if we break even the last of all commands we are found guilty of the whole law. God demands 100 %.. 90 % would not get you in, 99 would not even get you in.
I think that the example is fine. James is speaking about the Torah - the Law of Moses, he is not talking about the set of good works that will justify us at the Romans 2 judgement:

If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, "Love your neighbor as yourself,"[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=66&chapter=2&version=31#fen-NIV-30286a)] you are doing right. 9But if you show favoritism, you sin and are convicted by the law as lawbreakers. 10For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it.

The matter of the law is complicated. Clearly, Paul sees that there is a sense in which the Torah is now abolished and would therefore be irrelevant to the coming Romans 2 judgement:

For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations.

So there really is no contradiction between what Paul says in Romans 2 - that we will be given eternal life according to what we have done (I cannot emphasize enough, this is clearly what he says in Romans 2) and what James is saying here - he is pointing out the role of the Torah to show us our need for Jesus.

So we can indeed "get in" with less than 100 %.

This is really complicated issue. We struggle with understanding the sense in which Torah is and isn't abolished and the relation between Torah and the more general category of "good works". If a great mind like Paul struggles with - as he obviously does, it is no surprise that we struggle with it.

I am interested - given your position as I understand it, what do you think that Paul means when he writes this:

6God "will give to each person according to what he has done."[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%202%20;&version=31;#fen-NIV-27954a)] 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life

Butch5
Sep 4th 2008, 05:39 PM
By that same token, you ignored and didn't address my post. Quoting it, and then repeating the very thing i refuted does not qualify as addressing it.

If you had taken the time to read my post, you'd understand that the original translation completely refutes what you're saying. Perhaps you skip over it.

You didn't refute anything, actually you are making my argument for me. I don't know how much of this discussion you have read, but let me bring the conversation back on track. This discussion is NOT about justification, it is about salvation. It is regarding whether or not works save. That being said, you said that the works are evidence of faith. I said in an earlier post either way you look at it, James' argument still stands. If the works are evidence of faith, then you still can't be saved without them. Let me restate what I said earlier. Brian said we are saved by grace through faith, I agreed with this. NO problems here. However, that is not the end of salvation, that is the beginning of the plan, not the entirety of the plan. The Scriptures speak of salvation in different tenses. You were saved by grace through faith, step one. He who endures to the end SHALL BE SAVED. This is a future, tense referring to one's ultimate salvation. Now, how can you be saved in the past tense and shall be saved in the future? Simple, when you are saved( by grace through faith) you are in a relationship with God. There are requirements of this faith, ie obedience, repentance, baptism, etc. If these requirements are not met then one will not be saved (future tense) in the end. This is what "faith only" guys miss. NO one right now is actually saved, you are in a state of salvation, your faith is being counted as righteousness while you are alive. If you continue in the faith you will continue to be counted as righteous, if you DO NOT continue in the faith, you will not continue to be counted as righteous. If you continue in the faith till death, then you will be saved, you will have died being counted as righteous. If you do not continue in the faith, then you will not be saved, having died not being counted as righteous. This is what Jesus means when He says "He who endure to the end shall be saved. Part of that enduring to the end is meeting the requirements or conditions, that are laid down in the Gospel.

This is how Paul can say we have been saved by grace through faith, and then say those who seek honor and glory shall receive eternal life an those who do evil will not. This is how Jesus can make the statement He did, this is how the writer of Hebrews and James can make their statements and all of them be in agreement.

If you look at salvation as a one time event then you have all of the problems that you guys are dealing with.

Butch5
Sep 4th 2008, 06:18 PM
Once again butch, you refuse to acknowledge what has been clearly stated. I will try one last time to correct you in your thinking, as the bible has commanded us to do. If you refuse to read and acknowledge it, that is an error against yourself, by yourself. This will be my last post as it is tiresome arguing with people that refuse to listen to reason, and instead, repeat the same drivel they've been repeating over and over without ever acknowledging the mountain of evidence stacked against them. Here's a final study for you, if you're even willing to read it (Not that you are, since you obviously have your mind made up).

EDIT: Apparently drew finally agrees with what we've been saying. Maybe there was just a misunderstanding.

http://www.biblicaltheology.com/Research/CarterJ01.html

Here's another if that's not enough:

http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5719
Goodbye. :giveup:

First let me say that, on the web page you gave, He addresses the seeming contradiction between Paul and James.

I don't have a problem reconciling Paul and James, you guys do!! You guys are the ones saying James is saying that works are evidence of faith. That is not what He is saying but you must claim this because of your misunderstanding of what Paul is saying. Since you think that Paul is saying man cannot do any works, you must change the meaning of what James is saying. James makes it clear that Abraham's faith was perfected by his works, James also makes it clear that a man is not justified by faith alone. Yet you guys have to change this because you don't understand what Paul was saying. I understand what Paul was saying and therefore I have NO problem reconciling both Paul's and Jame" statements. They harmonize perfectly. You not only have to harmonize James with Paul's statements you also have to harmonize Jesus, the writer of Hebrews, and you even have to harmonize Paul with Paul. Like Brian said Why would Paul say one thing in one place, and the opposite somewhere else? So maybe you should be the one listening to the overwhelming amount of evidence against your position

I refuse to acknowledge what has been clearly stated???? I have yet to see anyone post Scripture that says we are saved by faith alone. If you were going to back out why did you even join the conversation to begin with?

Where is this mountain of evidence? I'd be happy with just one verse.

Then you given me some web page to read, like it means something because it is on the Internet. Who is this guy? How do I know what He says is right? Is it right if it agrees with what I believe?

Come on man, if you are going to interject into the conversation, at least post an argument.

drew
Sep 4th 2008, 06:43 PM
This discussion is NOT about justification, it is about salvation. It is regarding whether on not works save. That being said, you said that the works are evidence of faith. I said in an earlier post either way you look at it, Jame argument still stands. If hte works are evidence of faith, then you still can't be saved without them.
Absolutely correct. One can believe that works are evidence of faith and yet still take Paul (and Jesus for that matter) seriously when they both state that salvation is based on "good works". If you believe, like I do, that true faith will bring the Spirit, who then ensures that the works are there, there is no sense in which one is denying "salvation by faith" by taking Jesus and Paul seriously.

Let's say that by faith, I accept an injection from a doctor who promises that this will cure a fatal illness. The cure is then brought about by the "work" of the drug as it attacks the illness. My "faith" guaranteed my salvation - but it was the action or "work" of the drug that really saved my life. Replace the "drug"" by the Holy Spirit and "being cured" with "getting saved" and I hope the picture is more clear.


The Scriptures speak of salvation in different tenses. You were saved by grace through faith, Step one. He who endures to the end SHALL BE SAVED. This is a future tense referring to one's ultimate salvation. Now how can you be saved in the past tense and shall be saved in the future? Simple, when you are saved( by grace through faith) you are in a relationship with God. There are requirements of this faith, ie obedience, repentance, baptism, etc. If these requirements are not met the one will not be saved (future tense) and the end.
Bingo. I might not have described it exactly this way, and Butch and I might disagree on a related issue I will address below. We need to let Paul be Paul. And he indeed talks about salvation as both having been achieved already and as something that will be achieved. Is that confusing? Well maybe a little. But no one guaranteed that salvation has to follow a model that is exceedingly easy to grasp.

Where Butch and I might disagree is this point: I am inclined to believe that if you place true faith in Jesus in the present, ultimate salvation by "good works" is absolutely guaranteed, since it is really the Spirit that "does the works". Perhaps Butch thinks otherwise, that "we" need to "hang in there and keep working at it".

I am not 100 % convinced that I am right about my position on the issue in the last paragraph - I know of texts which suggest that one can indeed "fall away".

Butch5
Sep 4th 2008, 06:53 PM
Absolutely correct. One can believe that works are evidence of faith and yet still take Paul (and Jesus for that matter) seriously when they both state that salvation is based on "good works". If you believe, like I do, that true faith will bring the Spirit, who then ensures that the works are there, there is no sense in which one is denying "salvation by faith" by taking Jesus and Paul seriously.

Let's say that by faith, I accept an injection from a doctor who promises that this will cure a fatal illness. The cure is then brought about by the "work" of the drug as it attacks the illness. My "faith" guaranteed my salvation - but it was the action or "work" of the drug that really saved my life. Replace the "drug"" by the Holy Spirit and "being cured" with "getting saved" and I hope the picture is more clear.


Bingo. I might not have described it exactly this way, and Butch and I might disagree on a related issue I will address below. We need to let Paul be Paul. And he indeed talks about salvation as both having been achieved already and as something that will be achieved. Is that confusing? Well maybe a little. But no one guaranteed that salvation has to follow a model that is exceedingly easy to grasp.

Where Butch and I might disagree is this point: I am inclined to believe that if you place true faith in Jesus in the present, ultimate salvation by "good works" is absolutely guaranteed, since it is really the Spirit that "does the works". Perhaps Butch thinks otherwise, that "we" need to "hang in there and keep working at it".

I am not 100 % convinced that I am right about my position on the issue in the last paragraph - I know of texts which suggest that one can indeed "fall away".

Hi Drew,

Yes, it seems we do disagree on the last part. I don't believe that it is the Holy Spirit that does the good works. I believe He enables us to do them in that He guides us in the way of righteousness. The Scriptures tell us to do the works, it seems to me it the Spirit did them there is no need to tell us to.

drew
Sep 4th 2008, 07:01 PM
Hi Drew,

Yes, it seems we do disagree on the last part. I don't believe that it is the Holy Spirit that does the good works. I believe He enables us to do them in that He guides us in the way of righteousness. The Scriptures tell us to do the works, it seems to me it the Spirit did them there is no need to tell us to.
I can see the arguments for your position here. This is an exceedingly difficult topic to talk about since we get into all sorts of "philosophical" stuff about the nature of free will and the "boundaries" of self.

I might be willing to consider that we need to be "pro-active" in the sense that we need to continue to "give permission to the Spirit" to remain operative. But I am quite skeptical that the correct way to see this is to "work in one's own power". I realize that this statement is vague and it is hard to see how the Spirit will "do its work" without us "pitching in".

I find this whole area very hard to sort out. You and I agree that, at the future judgement, "good works" will be needed to be saved. And that seems to be the focus of this present discussion. But, assuming that we are right, the further question arises: How much is "me" and how much is the "Spirit". I lean heavily towards the latter, although I really do empathize with what your position seems to be.

Butch5
Sep 4th 2008, 07:31 PM
I can see the arguments for your position here. This is an exceedingly difficult topic to talk about since we get into all sorts of "philosophical" stuff about the nature of free will and the "boundaries" of self.

I might be willing to consider that we need to be "pro-active" in the sense that we need to continue to "give permission to the Spirit" to remain operative. But I am quite skeptical that the correct way to see this is to "work in one's own power". I realize that this statement is vague and it is hard to see how the Spirit will "do its work" without us "pitching in".

I find this whole area very hard to sort out. You and I agree that, at the future judgement, "good works" will be needed to be saved. And that seems to be the focus of this present discussion. But, assuming that we are right, the further question arises: How much is "me" and how much is the "Spirit". I lean heavily towards the latter, although I really do empathize with what your position seems to be.

Hi Drew,

The free will issue is another discussion. I was just in a conversation on another board regarding this issue. I really would like to discuss the issue, however I find that on these boards it is not practical because everyone is just trying to prove others wrong. It is not a learning environment which is a shame because this could be a very good tool. There are so many things in the Scriptures that the church today teaches wrong, but you can't discuss them because as soon as you say the issue is wrong people start screaming. There is another board I go to where they have a learning environment and it is tremendously valuable. I'd like to look at the issue of the atonement from a learning stand point, but you have to argue with everyone. I don't hold to the judicial model of the atonement, I follow the classic view. Here is an example, suppose I owe you $100. There are two way for us to reconcile this debt, one is I can pay you the $100. The other way is, you can forgive the debt, in which case I would pay you nothing. If I pay the debt, then it is paid, it has not been forgiven. If you forgive the debt then it is forgiven, it has not been paid. The two are mutually exclusive. Now, apply this to the judicial model of the atonement. Christians say Jesus paid the price for their sins. If Jesus paid the price for our sins, then the sins were not forgiven, the sins were paid for. Where in Scripture do we see the idea that someone has to pay for our sins? Don't we see throughout the Scriptures God saying, I will forgive their sins? If Jesus paid the debt for our sins, there is nothing for God to forgive.

Bryan43
Sep 4th 2008, 08:32 PM
So we can indeed "get in" with less than 100 %.

if this was the case, there would be no need for God to justify us. no need for God to wash our sins with his blood. No need for Christ to come to earth. No need to say we are all dead in adam, but only through Christ could we be made alive,

and finally no need for God to credit to our account the righteousness of Christ to make us appear perfect in the eyes of God. Because if we could get to heaven under our own righteousness, being by the law, or after the law, then there is no need for Christ. or faith. or grace.

again. grace us unmerited favor. It is not contingent on only works of the law, it means what is given can not be earned in any way.

if we must work to earn grace. then grace is not grace. it then becomes merited favor. and the word in and of itself and its defenition is cancelled.

works of the law mean nothing here. Grace is FREE, and can not be earned by ANYTHING, or else it is NOT GRACE, but is EARNED.

drew
Sep 4th 2008, 09:42 PM
Hello Bryan:

What do you think Paul meant us to understand when he wrote these words. Let's remember, Paul actually went to the effort to dictate these statements. They obviously mean something. Here are the words:

God will give to each person according to what he has done." 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life.

Here is what I think they mean:

God will give to each person according to what he has done. To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life.

What do you think Paul meant us to understand when he dictated these very words?

drew
Sep 4th 2008, 09:45 PM
if we must work to earn grace. then grace is not grace. it then becomes merited favor. and the word in and of itself and its defenition is cancelled.
I have clearly and repeatedly stated that the works which justify us at the Romans 2 position are produced by the Holy Spirit. It is all still grace. So my position is entirely immune to this counterargument.

I think you are stretching the concept of grace too far here. If someone gives someone money, say for an important operation, the act of the recipient "choosing to accept" the gift does not make it any less an act of grace.

Many take this line of argument - claiming that "free will" acceptance of the gift of salvation undermines grace. That position is highly untrue to the concept of grace as the term is generally used.

Butch5
Sep 4th 2008, 10:25 PM
I have clearly and repeatedly stated that the works which justify us at the Romans 2 position are produced by the Holy Spirit. It is all still grace. So my position is entirely immune to this counterargument.

I think you are stretching the concept of grace too far here. If someone gives someone money, say for an important operation, the act of the recipient "choosing to accept" the gift does not make it any less an act of grace.

Many take this line of argument - claiming that "free will" acceptance of the gift of salvation undermines grace. That position is highly untrue to the concept of grace as the term is generally used.

Not only that, but if you look at Romans 5:17, "those who receive abundance of grace," the Greek word for receive is an act of the one receiving. So Paul does not consider the act of receiving to be counter to God's giving of grace.

Butch5
Sep 4th 2008, 10:26 PM
if this was the case, there would be no need for God to justify us. no need for God to wash our sins with his blood. No need for Christ to come to earth. No need to say we are all dead in adam, but only through Christ could we be made alive,

and finally no need for God to credit to our account the righteousness of Christ to make us appear perfect in the eyes of God. Because if we could get to heaven under our own righteousness, being by the law, or after the law, then there is no need for Christ. or faith. or grace.

again. grace us unmerited favor. It is not contingent on only works of the law, it means what is given can not be earned in any way.

if we must work to earn grace. then grace is not grace. it then becomes merited favor. and the word in and of itself and its defenition is cancelled.

works of the law mean nothing here. Grace is FREE, and can not be earned by ANYTHING, or else it is NOT GRACE, but is EARNED.


Bryan, you never answered my question, what exactly is "the finished work of Christ on the cross?"

Bryan43
Sep 4th 2008, 11:13 PM
I have clearly and repeatedly stated that the works which justify us at the Romans 2 position are produced by the Holy Spirit. It is all still grace. So my position is entirely immune to this counterargument.

and you can say it until hell freeses over and it will not make it any more true than it is now.

Any work added to grace makes it not grace. it does not matter.

If I walk 5 miles and allow myself to be immersed in water in 30 degree whether, it is MY WORK. I chose to do it. and to add this to grace, and say it is what gains us salvation is to say my salvation was earned because I did walked 5 miles in sub freezing temperatures and allowed a man to immerse me in 33 degree water. and the hypothermia and pnuemonia I recieved after where just added to my pain and suffering in doing Gods will


See how I just puffed myself up??

Not of works lest ANY MAN SHOULD BE PUFFED UP IN PRIDE.

Butch5
Sep 4th 2008, 11:23 PM
and you can say it until hell freeses over and it will not make it any more true than it is now.

Any work added to grace makes it not grace. it does not matter.

If I walk 5 miles and allow myself to be immersed in water in 30 degree whether, it is MY WORK. I chose to do it. and to add this to grace, and say it is what gains us salvation is to say my salvation was earned because I did walked 5 miles in sub freezing temperatures and allowed a man to immerse me in 33 degree water. and the hypothermia and pnuemonia I recieved after where just added to my pain and suffering in doing Gods will


See how I just puffed myself up??

Not of works lest ANY MAN SHOULD BE PUFFED UP IN PRIDE.

Why don't you use Scripture to support your position once in a while? You keep saying things that are contrary to Scripture like if you say them long enough they will be true.

drew
Sep 5th 2008, 03:30 PM
Hello Bryan:

Will you please provide an answer to post 206. Thanks.

Bryan43
Sep 5th 2008, 03:33 PM
Hello Bryan:

Will you please provide an answer to post 206. Thanks.

I have given the answer. those born again will do the works of God. and they will have eternal life.

however, this does not mean all who are "morally " good in our eyes will get to heaven. God says our works are as filthy rags. so unless the "moral" good we are doing flow from God being in us. they are nothing but filthy rags which will be rejected on the last day

Butch5
Sep 5th 2008, 04:05 PM
I have given the answer. those born again will do the works of God. and they will have eternal life.

however, this does not mean all who are "morally " good in our eyes will get to heaven. God says our works are as filthy rags. so unless the "moral" good we are doing flow from God being in us. they are nothing but filthy rags which will be rejected on the last day

Do you have Scripture that says those who are born again will do good works?

It was Isaiah that said our rigteousness is as filthy rags not God. He was appealing for Israel who had turned to sin and strayed form God.


Isaiah 64:6 ( NKJV ) 6 But we are all like an unclean thing,

And all our righteousnesses are like filthy rags;



We all fade as a leaf,



And our iniquities, like the wind,



Have taken us away.




He is referring to the tribes of Israel, not to every single person who ever lived.

drew
Sep 5th 2008, 04:51 PM
I have given the answer. those born again will do the works of God. and they will have eternal life.
But you appear to be stopping short of what Paul actually writes. And what Paul actually writes is that eternal life is granted according to the good works, not according to something else.

This is the fatal flaw of the position that eternal life is granted on something other than good works.

Readers please take note - people will invariably try to say that Paul is saying something other than what he actually says. Or they will argue that Christians will be excused from the Romans 2 judgement.

But Paul does not offer either of these as alternatives. He is quite clear - eternal life will be granted according to the good works that are manifested in the lives of the believer:

6God "will give to each person according to what he has done."[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%202&version=31#fen-NIV-27954a)] 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. 8But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. 9There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; 10but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. 11For God does not show favoritism.
12All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous.

Paul is so clear here that to say that he means that eternal life will be granted based on something else is to say that Paul was confused here, or mistaken. That is one's right.

But please. Let's not pretend that he is saying that eternal life is granted based on something other than the "good works" that flow forth in the life of the believer.

He is saying precisely this and there is no getting around it.

This, of course, does not, repeat does not, mean that these works are the products of moral self-effort and that therefore we "earn" our justification. They are the work of the Spirit.

Bryan43
Sep 5th 2008, 05:43 PM
This, of course, does not, repeat does not, mean that these works are the products of moral self-effort and that therefore we "earn" our justification. They are the work of the Spirit.


the problem with this philosophy is this.

if one does the works. and continues, they will be saved.

if one does not continue, or happens to fall back, if even for a time, they would in turn be considered not saved ( according to all I know who teach this works based salvation)

thus in the real sense of the word. Their salvation or lack of was dependent on these works. whether you want to call them works of the spirit. or your own works does not even matter. A work is a work is a work as I always say.

and paul says works cancells grace. because then grace becomes earned or merited, and not unearned or unmerited.

Emanate
Sep 5th 2008, 06:16 PM
and paul says works cancells grace. because then grace becomes earned or merited, and not unearned or unmerited.


I would say that a bit differently. Paul did not say that works canvcel grace. Works are evidence of grace.

Bryan43
Sep 5th 2008, 07:21 PM
I would say that a bit differently. Paul did not say that works canvcel grace. Works are evidence of grace.

yes you can say that, because he did. but in this context. the grace gift has already been applied. the person already has eternal life. and his works show it.

The context of my comment was the gift itself. and how we recieve it.

Rom 11: 6 And if by grace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace. But if it is of works, it is no longer grace; otherwise work is no longer work.

again. Works can not save us, in no way in now how. otherwise the grace ( unmerited or free ) gift of eternal life is not grace, but is earned.

Romans 4 : 1 - 8 What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.

again, if you want to try to work your way to grace, no matter how you want to "quantify" these works, you cancell out grace. and incure debt. God is quite clear o0n this matter through Paul..

Do we agree??

Butch5
Sep 5th 2008, 08:22 PM
yes you can say that, because he did. but in this context. the grace gift has already been applied. the person already has eternal life. and his works show it.

The context of my comment was the gift itself. and how we recieve it.

Rom 11: 6 And if by grace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace. But if it is of works, it is no longer grace; otherwise work is no longer work.

again. Works can not save us, in no way in now how. otherwise the grace ( unmerited or free ) gift of eternal life is not grace, but is earned.

Romans 4 : 1 - 8 What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.

again, if you want to try to work your way to grace, no matter how you want to "quantify" these works, you cancell out grace. and incure debt. God is quite clear o0n this matter through Paul..

Do we agree??


Bryan,

I think you are missing one crucial point. Initially you are saved by grace through faith. At this point you are in a state of salvation you are not ultimately saved yet. At this point you are at Ephesian 1:14 which you stated earlier. You have the "earnest," the down payment of the promised salvation, you are sealed with the Holy Spirit. You are marked as a child of God. OK, but you are not yet saved, that happens at the judgement. Between now and then you have to live according to the gospel, this is where the works come in, Jesus said we have things to do while we are waiting for the judgement. One of the things we have to do is remain in Him, we are to bear fruit,

John 15:3-5 ( KJV ) 3Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you. 4Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me. 5I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.

So one of the things we are to do is bear fruit, this is one of the works. What happens if we do not do these works?


John 15:6 ( KJV ) 6If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.

This is what happens if we do not do the works which we are told to do in the gospel. Paul says the same thing.


Colossians 1:21-23 ( KJV ) 21And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled 22In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight: 23If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;

Paul says the will be presented holy and unblameable IF they continue in the faith. He didn't say if they continue to have faith, he said if they continue in THE FAITH. What is the faith? it is the Gospel, it is Jesus command in Matthew 28.


Matthew 28:19-20 ( KJV ) 19Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Teaching them all things whatsoever I have commanded you. What are those "all things"? They are the things Jesus taught them during His ministry. Jesus taught that we must forgive, He said if we do not forgive, God will not forgive us. He said we are to love one another, we are to lay down our lives for others, we are to be baptized, we are to partake of communion and the list goes on. This is what Jesus meant when He said, He that keeps my commands, it is he who loves me. There are many, many more Scriptures that speak of the conditional nature of salvation. You are correct about being saved (initially) by grace through faith, but that is only the beginning of the ride. That is getting on the bus, we still have the long ride ahead and that is where the works are. This is what James is talking about when he says that Abraham's faith was perfected by works. Abraham had faith in God, for a long time, however it was not until he obeyed God, when God told him to offer Issac on the altar, that God counted Abraham's faith as righteousness. That is why James says a man is not justified by faith only. Because if we have faith and never any works we will not be justified, and therefore not saved It is at the judgement that we will be saved, until then we are in a state of salvation and must do the good works that we were created for.

In order to understand this you must understand that James and Paul are addressing two different issues. You can't take one and reject the other, if they don't mesh then you have out figure out why. Your understanding of Paul in Ephesians cannot be correct because it contradicts, Paul himself, It contradicts Jesus, the writer of Hebrews, and it contradicts James. You have to understand this cannot be, you cannot have one Scripture correct and all of these others, Jesus, Paul, James, and the writer of Hebrews be wrong.

I hope this helps.


Jesus said, he who endures til the end shall be saved

Emanate
Sep 5th 2008, 08:36 PM
yes you can say that, because he did. but in this context. the grace gift has already been applied. the person already has eternal life. and his works show it.

The context of my comment was the gift itself. and how we recieve it.

Rom 11: 6 And if by grace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace. But if it is of works, it is no longer grace; otherwise work is no longer work.

again. Works can not save us, in no way in now how. otherwise the grace ( unmerited or free ) gift of eternal life is not grace, but is earned.

Romans 4 : 1 - 8 What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.

again, if you want to try to work your way to grace, no matter how you want to "quantify" these works, you cancell out grace. and incure debt. God is quite clear o0n this matter through Paul..

Do we agree??


Agreed. Many people have trouble reconciling grace and works. But it is really that simple.

Paul Pienaar
Sep 8th 2008, 05:16 PM
It sure seems like 'Babylon' in this thread.

How come the Christians can't come to an agreement on what it takes to be saved?

Honestly......stand back and have a look at the arguing in this thread.

Bryan43
Sep 9th 2008, 08:23 PM
It sure seems like 'Babylon' in this thread.

How come the Christians can't come to an agreement on what it takes to be saved?

Honestly......stand back and have a look at the arguing in this thread.

basically you have the pharisees ( work out your own salvation through works and good deeds )

and the faith only crowd.

unfortunately.. just like the pharisees ( unless they repented ) are doomed. so are all those who follow after there mistake.

as Jesus said. many will come to me and say, Lord did we not do all these great "works" in your name.

Jesus will reply, depart for I never knew you.

there is only one Gospel. and it should be prudent to make sure anyone reading the thread understands truth.

unlike other doctrines like the rapture. which we should not argue. but can have some good conversation.. ( I hope )

MidnightsPaleGlow
Sep 9th 2008, 09:14 PM
basically you have the pharisees ( work out your own salvation through works and good deeds )

and the faith only crowd.

unfortunately.. just like the pharisees ( unless they repented ) are doomed. so are all those who follow after there mistake.

as Jesus said. many will come to me and say, Lord did we not do all these great "works" in your name.

Jesus will reply, depart for I never knew you.

there is only one Gospel. and it should be prudent to make sure anyone reading the thread understands truth.

unlike other doctrines like the rapture. which we should not argue. but can have some good conversation.. ( I hope )

I strongly agree with you on this once again my friend, I'll be praying for those who don't get it that you CAN NOT ADD anything to the finished work of Christ on the cross.

Butch5
Sep 9th 2008, 11:34 PM
I strongly agree with you on this once again my friend, I'll be praying for those who don't get it that you CAN NOT ADD anything to the finished work of Christ on the cross.

Please tell me since Bryan won't, what is Christ's finished work on the cross?

MidnightsPaleGlow
Sep 10th 2008, 12:07 AM
Please tell me since Bryan won't, what is Christ's finished work on the cross?

His death/burial and subsequent resurrection, paid our sin debt in full. All we have to do is accept that payment entirely by faith and nothing else. There's nothing else that we can do, he did it all, it's a free gift, all you have to do is accept it. If you had to do anything else in addition, it would no longer be a gift.

Bryan43
Sep 10th 2008, 12:15 AM
Please tell me since Bryan won't, what is Christ's finished work on the cross?

first off butch. I stopped arguing with you because I have shown you verse after verse ( which you claim I have never done ) that shows your wrong.

I refuse to argue with someone who is hard headed. and will not listen to reason.

anyone who wishes can look at the past verses to see all the verses you claim I did not give.

this question has also been answered. Chriust said IT IS FINISHED> it is the WEORK OF SALVATION. the REDEEMING BLOOD. the DEBT PAID ON FULL.

in the next three days jesus went to paradise and took it to heaven with him. why? Because Gods work was done. the thing that those people put their trust in. and awaited for was now done, so Jesus could take them with hinm. where as before the work was not yet completed.

The work is done. No work can be added. if works must be added. no one in the OT is saved. because they have yet to do the works required to finish salvation.

Jesus is the same yesterday today and tomorrow.

His salvation is the same yesterday today and tomorrow. King david was saved the same way we are saved. there is no difference.

He awaited his salvation. Mine is complete. Only because he awaitied Christ. In my case, Christ already came.

if you can not see this. this is your problem. not ours!

Butch5
Sep 10th 2008, 01:17 AM
Bryan---first off butch. I stopped arguing with you because I have shown you verse after verse ( which you claim I have never done ) that shows your wrong.

When did I claim you have not shown the verses? What I said was, you have not shown me Scripture that says we are saved by faith alone.


Bryan---I refuse to argue with someone who is hard headed. and will not listen to reason.

I listen to reason, if you present a reasonable argument, I will listen to it. When you presented your argument about faith, did I listen? Yes, and said that I agreed with you. When I said that was the first step but there was more you just ignored it. So who is hard headed and will not listen to reason? From the beginning of this conversation I have asked you to present Scripture that says we are saved by faith alone, you have not presented a single verse, yet I have presented Scripture that says a man is NOT justified by faith alone and you ignored that. Who will not listen to reason? You claim I will not listen to reason, is it because I do not agree with you? You have not proven your argument. To repeat the same verses over and over does not make your argument, unless those verses support your argument.


Bryan---anyone who wishes can look at the past verses to see all the verses you claim I did not give.

Again, it is the Scripture that says we are saved by "faith alone" that you have not provided.


Bryan---this question has also been answered. Chriust said IT IS FINISHED> it is the WEORK OF SALVATION. the REDEEMING BLOOD. the DEBT PAID ON FULL.


Can you be a little more specific as to what actually happened?


Bryan---in the next three days jesus went to paradise and took it to heaven with him. why? Because Gods work was done. the thing that those people put their trust in. and awaited for was now done, so Jesus could take them with hinm. where as before the work was not yet completed.

Jesus took those in paradise to heaven with Him?


Acts 1:10-11 ( KJV ) 10And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; 11Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

It appears that Jesus went to heaven alone.


Bryan---The work is done. No work can be added. if works must be added. no one in the OT is saved. because they have yet to do the works required to finish salvation.


James 2:21 ( KJV ) 21Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?


Bryan---Jesus is the same yesterday today and tomorrow.

His salvation is the same yesterday today and tomorrow. King david was saved the same way we are saved. there is no difference.


King David has not yet been saved. Peter said this in Acts 2,


Acts 2:34-35 ( KJV ) 34For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, 35Until I make thy foes thy footstool.

According to Peter, when He preached at Pentecost, David was still in Paradise.


Bryan---He awaited his salvation. Mine is complete. Only because he awaitied Christ. In my case, Christ already came.

if you can not see this. this is your problem. not ours!


Your salvation is complete?


1 Thessalonians 5:8 ( KJV ) 8But let us, who are of the day, be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love; and for an helmet, the hope of salvation.


Titus 1:2 ( KJV ) 2In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;

That's funny Paul didn't think his was complete until death.

MidnightsPaleGlow
Sep 10th 2008, 02:35 AM
Looks like this whole debate has hit a brick wall, AGAIN. :rolleyes:

Bryan43
Sep 10th 2008, 05:03 PM
Looks like this whole debate has hit a brick wall, AGAIN. :rolleyes:

yep it is called a hard heart. I gave him all the verses he needed. he refused to look. than comes back saying I did not.

The pharisees had this problem. unable to see Christ, who told them all their good deeds meant nothing.

we see the same thing all through history, in th OT, the new, and even until today.

the same lie, Satan sure has got his wish.. all he has to do is play on man's pride. because pride says we have to do something to earn it. we have to help ourselves. there is NO way just a faith in the work of Christ would help us. this goes beyond human thinking, it can't be true.

straight and narrow is the way, and FEW there are that chose it.

Sad :(

MidnightsPaleGlow
Sep 10th 2008, 08:47 PM
yep it is called a hard heart. I gave him all the verses he needed. he refused to look. than comes back saying I did not.

That's true, we showed him plenty of "faith alone" verses and yet he keeps telling us we didn't, when we quite plainly and out in the open did.


The pharisees had this problem. unable to see Christ, who told them all their good deeds meant nothing.

The story of the Pharisee and the Publican is a perfect demonstration of this. The Pharisee boasted of all he did, while the Publican pleaded with God for mercy, and he was justified by that simple act. Kinda ties into Eph. 2:8-9 I think.


we see the same thing all through history, in th OT, the new, and even until today.

the same lie, Satan sure has got his wish.. all he has to do is play on man's pride. because pride says we have to do something to earn it. we have to help ourselves. there is NO way just a faith in the work of Christ would help us. this goes beyond human thinking, it can't be true.

straight and narrow is the way, and FEW there are that chose it.

Sad :(

Indeed.

DeafPosttrib
Sep 10th 2008, 10:00 PM
Bryan,

I ask you, why there so FEW find in the narrow gate? What the reason why there are so FEW found it?

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

Butch5
Sep 11th 2008, 02:09 PM
MidnightsPaleGlow---That's true, we showed him plenty of "faith alone" verses and yet he keeps telling us we didn't, when we quite plainly and out in the open did.


Sorry my friend, you did not show any verses that say faith alone. What you showed were verses that say we are saved by faith. To say we are saved by faith does not mean that is the ONLY thing that saves us. You and Bryan don't seem to want to acknowledge the other verses. Paul says in the Scriptures, we are saved by hope, So I guess that means we don't need faith because there is no mention of faith in this verse. All we have to do is hope and nothing else because that would be adding to salvation right? Peter says we are saved by baptism, again no mention of faith, so I guess all we have to do is be baptized, nothing else because that would be adding to salvation. So now the question becomes who do we believe, Peter or Paul? According to you guys they can't both be right, so one of the Scriptures must be wrong, which is it? Is it faith? Is it hope? Is it baptism, or is it all of them. You guys won't admit that it is all of them so you must then conclude that some of the Scripture is wrong. You have no other option, if you are saved by faith alone then Peter's statement in 1 Peter is wrong, as is Paul's statement that we are saved by hope.

What you guys don't take into account, is what is already known by Paul's readers and what Paul understands. Paul taught many of these people personally, He already knows that they know what it means to be a Christian, and what is required. He is only dealing with specific issues, He IS NOT telling them how to be saved, they are already saved. He is telling them that what the Judaizers are teaching them is wrong.
Just as if I said, I came into town in a carriage. Would you assume that I got into a carriage and it just started rolling down the road? Or would you assume that there was a horse to pull it? Of coarse there was a horse to pull it. So if my friend came up to you tomorrow and said, yes, Butch came into town by horse, would he be lying or would it mean that I had been very specific when I said I came into town in a carriage? None of the NT writers made a list of what is necessary for salvation, so that you would be able to check it off. You have to take all of their writings, look at everything they said and then you can see what is necessary for salvation. Paul said we are saved by faith, He said we are saved by hope, Peter said we are saved by baptism. If you say we are saved by faith alone, then you must say these other Scriptures are wrong!




MidnightsPaleGlow---The story of the Pharisee and the Publican is a perfect demonstration of this. The Pharisee boasted of all he did, while the Publican pleaded with God for mercy, and he was justified by that simple act. Kinda ties into Eph. 2:8-9 I think.

Yes he did, but did he remain justified until he died?



Indeed.[/quote]

Butch5
Sep 11th 2008, 02:16 PM
yep it is called a hard heart. I gave him all the verses he needed. he refused to look. than comes back saying I did not.

The pharisees had this problem. unable to see Christ, who told them all their good deeds meant nothing.

we see the same thing all through history, in th OT, the new, and even until today.

the same lie, Satan sure has got his wish.. all he has to do is play on man's pride. because pride says we have to do something to earn it. we have to help ourselves. there is NO way just a faith in the work of Christ would help us. this goes beyond human thinking, it can't be true.

straight and narrow is the way, and FEW there are that chose it.

Sad :(

Yes, it is called a hard heart and I hope you can soften it. You have denied the plain meaning of Scripture in order to cling to your man made doctrine, of faith alone. As I told you earlier, look into the history of your doctrine, see if anyone in the church ever understood Paul to be saying faith alone was necessary for salvation, until Martin Luther came up with the idea. Martin Luther is the father of the faith alone doctrine, which came about at the beginning of the reformation. I doubt you'll look into for fear that I am correct, which would leave you in a place of decision.

Bryan43
Sep 11th 2008, 04:08 PM
Bryan,

I ask you, why there so FEW find in the narrow gate? What the reason why there are so FEW found it?

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

I think this thread show why. or one of the reasons why.

if we go all the way back to cain and abel.

we see abel. doing as God commanded, in faith. sacrificing a innocent lamb.

on the other hand we see abel. giving of his works and labor. no to humankind, it would be easy to think that Cain did a good thing, I mean he did give back what God had blessed him with. yet we see God totally rejected it. why? Because it was human good. and God had a reason for the animal sacrifice. he was teaching right then about what the Christ would do. an innocent slain for the sins of the people.

also see even before. God killed another animal and covered the nakedness of Adam and his wife. aagin we see how Christ. being slain covers the sin of the people.

look at religion from that time forward. Most religious are fool of ceremonies and sacriments performed by people who think these deeds will gain them good standing with God. and God will just let them into heaven.

Look at pegan religions since. ceremonial washings. confessions to priests. offering gifts to God.

It has been satans's lie since day one to attempt to replace Gods work with mans work. and all he has to do is convince us that we must work or do certain deeds in order to gain salvation, and as paul said in galations, the gospel is distorted to a different gospel. however, is not a replacement gospel. it looks alot alike, it resembles the true, but in fact it is false.

It is against human reasoning to think one can step aside to let anyone help them, let alone God. to think we can stand back and let God do ALL the work. and not give something back ourselves to earn his salvation goes against reason, and against human nature.

this is why so few find the correct path. Few will just stand still. and place their faith in the work of Christ. many will eaither not believe at all, or attempt to add their own works to the equation. Much like cains work. our works will be rejected.

hope this helps

Bryan43
Sep 11th 2008, 04:12 PM
Yes, it is called a hard heart and I hope you can soften it. You have denied the plain meaning of Scripture in order to cling to your man made doctrine, of faith alone. As I told you earlier, look into the history of your doctrine, see if anyone in the church ever understood Paul to be saying faith alone was necessary for salvation, until Martin Luther came up with the idea. Martin Luther is the father of the faith alone doctrine, which came about at the beginning of the reformation. I doubt you'll look into for fear that I am correct, which would leave you in a place of decision.


As I told you before. I do not look at history. I look at Gods word. And Gods word specifically speaks of faith alone for eternal life. works for rewards when we get to heaven.

if you can not see that. again. that is your problem, and I pray you soften your heart!

Butch5
Sep 11th 2008, 06:33 PM
I think this thread show why. or one of the reasons why.

if we go all the way back to cain and abel.

we see abel. doing as God commanded, in faith. sacrificing a innocent lamb.

on the other hand we see abel. giving of his works and labor. no to humankind, it would be easy to think that Cain did a good thing, I mean he did give back what God had blessed him with. yet we see God totally rejected it. why? Because it was human good. and God had a reason for the animal sacrifice. he was teaching right then about what the Christ would do. an innocent slain for the sins of the people.

also see even before. God killed another animal and covered the nakedness of Adam and his wife. aagin we see how Christ. being slain covers the sin of the people.

look at religion from that time forward. Most religious are fool of ceremonies and sacriments performed by people who think these deeds will gain them good standing with God. and God will just let them into heaven.

Look at pegan religions since. ceremonial washings. confessions to priests. offering gifts to God.

It has been satans's lie since day one to attempt to replace Gods work with mans work. and all he has to do is convince us that we must work or do certain deeds in order to gain salvation, and as paul said in galations, the gospel is distorted to a different gospel. however, is not a replacement gospel. it looks alot alike, it resembles the true, but in fact it is false.

It is against human reasoning to think one can step aside to let anyone help them, let alone God. to think we can stand back and let God do ALL the work. and not give something back ourselves to earn his salvation goes against reason, and against human nature.

this is why so few find the correct path. Few will just stand still. and place their faith in the work of Christ. many will eaither not believe at all, or attempt to add their own works to the equation. Much like cains work. our works will be rejected.

hope this helps

As you have said many times, they were saved the same way we are.


Genesis 4:3-7 ( KJV ) 3And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD. 4And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering: 5But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell.



6And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen? 7If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.



You see right from the beginning God said, "If you do well you will be accepted." He didn't say If Christ does well and you do nothing, He said if you do well. The same thing James said, the same thing Paul said, the same thing Jesus said, the same thing the writer of Hebrews said, Cain did not obey God and that is why he was not accepted, God clearly says if you do well you will be accepted. So Cain was not accepted because of what he did (his works).Yet you will continue to deny these writers in order to hold to your "faith only" doctrine. If you will not believe the Scriptures then I guess there is no point in discussing it.

Butch5
Sep 11th 2008, 06:53 PM
As I told you before. I do not look at history. I look at Gods word. And Gods word specifically speaks of faith alone for eternal life. works for rewards when we get to heaven.

if you can not see that. again. that is your problem, and I pray you soften your heart!

No my friend, you are looking at a translation of God's word. A translation that was heavily influenced by the reformers, that is why I told you to look at the history of your doctrine. No one, in the history of Orthodox Christianity, taught your faith only doctrine until Martin Luther, in the 1500's. So there was 1400 years of Christianity before Martin Luther began to teach this doctrine. It seems really odd that of all of the Christians who lived over those 1400 years, NOBODY understood the true teaching of Scripture until Martin Luther came along, and then it was one man who understood it. I mean not even the men who were taught by the apostles understood the Scriptures????? Did Timothy, and Barnabas, and Clement of Rome, Apollos, did none of these men understand the Scriptures that Paul taught them? Martin Luther was the first to understand the Scriptures?????? If this is the case why do you suppose that Paul would hand over the church to men who didn't understand the Scriptures and doctrines He was teaching? So the question arises, if Paul was teaching faith alone, why did no one understand what He was teaching? Why in all of the journeys and thousands of people that Paul preached to, did no one understand what He was preaching? Why for the first 1400 years of Christianity did no one understand what Paul taught? Let me suggest and answer, maybe, just maybe, Martin Luther was wrong!!!!!

Bryan43
Sep 11th 2008, 07:21 PM
As you have said many times, they were saved the same way we are.


Genesis 4:3-7 ( KJV ) 3And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD. 4And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering: 5But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell.



6And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen? 7If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.





You see right from the beginning God said, "If you do well you will be accepted." He didn't say If Christ does well and you do nothing, He said if you do well. The same thing James said, the same thing Paul said, the same thing Jesus said, the same thing the writer of Hebrews said, Cain did not obey God and that is why he was not accepted, God clearly says if you do well you will be accepted. So Cain was not accepted because of what he did (his works).Yet you will continue to deny these writers in order to hold to your "faith only" doctrine. If you will not believe the Scriptures then I guess there is no point in discussing it.



So. when was abel baptised in water. since this is the topic of discussion..

if they were saved the same way we are. where is their baptism.

and secondly. as I have told you 100 times. If you have faith. YOU WILL DO WORK, work is an outpooring of faith. it is proof you have real faith.

this is why James said if you have no works. you have a daed or ZERO faith.


No my friend, you are looking at a translation of God's word

If I did not also study with the greek and hebrew. you might be correct. But I do. thus your whole argument is based on a false precept.

Butch5
Sep 11th 2008, 07:31 PM
Bryan--- So. when was abel baptised in water. since this is the topic of discussion..

if they were saved the same way we are. where is their baptism.

and secondly. as I have told you 100 times. If you have faith. YOU WILL DO WORK, work is an outpooring of faith. it is proof you have real faith.

this is why James said if you have no works. you have a daed or ZERO faith.


You didn't address the Scripture about Cain and Abel, God told Cain "if you do well will you not be accepted?"

No my friend, James says that the works make the faith perfect, therefore they cannot be the product of the faith. Without the works the faith is dead, therefore it is the works that give life to the faith.



Bryan---If I did not also study with the greek and hebrew. you might be correct. But I do. thus your whole argument is based on a false precept.

No my friend, even if you read the Greek and Hebrew, you are reading copies, you are not reading the orignals.

Bryan43
Sep 12th 2008, 01:19 PM
No my friend, even if you read the Greek and Hebrew, you are reading copies, you are not reading the orignals.


if this is the case so are you.



You didn't address the Scripture about Cain and Abel, God told Cain "if you do well will you not be accepted?"


i have adressed it 1000 times. if you can not see it that is your own blind eyes, and closed ears. ( remember what Christ said about seeing you do not see, hearing you do not hear?)

again. If he had faith. he would have had works ( he would do well ) because of his faith.

the fact he had NO FAITH ( dead faith ) was proven by the fact he had no works ( did not do well )

how many times does someone have to spell it out for you??

Butch5
Sep 12th 2008, 07:53 PM
if this is the case so are you.


i have adressed it 1000 times. if you can not see it that is your own blind eyes, and closed ears. ( remember what Christ said about seeing you do not see, hearing you do not hear?)

again. If he had faith. he would have had works ( he would do well ) because of his faith.

the fact he had NO FAITH ( dead faith ) was proven by the fact he had no works ( did not do well )

how many times does someone have to spell it out for you??

When Jesus said He who has an ear let him hear, He was saying that to the Jews, only the ones that God had chosen to give to Christ during His earthly ministry could hear and understand.

Dude, read what it says, God did not say to Cain if you have faith, will you not be accepted? He said if you do well, will you not be accepted? There is no mention of faith here.

Bryan43
Sep 12th 2008, 10:18 PM
When Jesus said He who has an ear let him hear, He was saying that to the Jews, only the ones that God had chosen to give to Christ during His earthly ministry could hear and understand.

Dude, read what it says, God did not say to Cain if you have faith, will you not be accepted? He said if you do well, will you not be accepted? There is no mention of faith here.

Do you like twisting things?? The bible was given to everyone. Jesus was just talking to jews?? Is not his message for everyone??

You have NOT countered my point. if cain had true faith, he would have done the work. his lack of doing the work proves he did not have faith

Butch5
Sep 12th 2008, 11:01 PM
Bryan--- Do you like twisting things?? The bible was given to everyone. Jesus was just talking to Jews?? Is not his message for
everyone??


Twisting things?


Matthew 15:24 ( KJV ) 24But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.



Matthew 10:5-7 ( KJV ) 5These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: 6But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. 7And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.


Bryan---You have NOT countered my point. if cain had true faith, he would have done the work. his lack of doing the work proves he did not have faith

There's nothing to counter. This Scripture doesn't speak of faith, it speaks of works, and it says Cain was not accepted because of his works. You say he had no faith, yet you have no evidence of this. He had faith enough to bring an offering to God. He was rejected because he brought the wrong offering. Had he brought the right one he would have been accepted. But in stead he let pride get in his way and refused to bring the correct offering.