We are not saved by works?

[HTacianas]

This is getting off topic but nowhere in scripture does it say that wee have to be baptized to be saved. Look at the last part of the verse. " But he who does not believe will be condemned" it doesn't say "those who do not believe and is not baptized will be condemned" it just says he who does not believe. Again nowhere in scripture does it say that baptism is required for salvation. Scripture says we SHOULD get baptized but it never lists it as a requirement for salvation. Nor does it ever say anything besides faith is a requirement. You could make the argument of works but not baptism or confessing of sins. Those things are extra and a part of faith. Plus works are a part of faith as well as other people have pointed out in this thread.

Your answer begs the question, "why would someone who doesn't believe bother with baptism"?

It says "he who believes and is baptized shall be saved". Baptism is a requirement.

The eunuch said to Phillip, "here is water...", and Philip baptized him. Philip didn't say he need not bother with it.

 

[JLB777]

Paul says that wee are saved by faith and not by works.

The phrase 'by faith", literally means, God commanded someone to do something, and they obeyed Him.


Please keep that in mind.


Secondly, if you have faith for something, then by default you have the hope of obtaining it, which means you do not actually have it yet; you have the substance of the thing you are hoping for.




JLB

 

[Emli]

Your answer begs the question, "why would someone who doesn't believe bother with baptism"?

It says "he who believes and is baptized shall be saved". Baptism is a requirement.

The eunuch said to Phillip, "here is water...", and Philip baptized him. Philip didn't say he need not bother with it.

A lot of people have been baptized but don't have saving faith, because of false doctrines. Eg. church-goers who have prayed the sinner's prayer and have been baptized and go to church once a week, but never surrendered their lives to Jesus, or those who have been baptized as infants but then grew up without faith or as "Christians" who never surrendered their lives to God. A person can be baptized in water without having received the Holy Spirit, and many have been.

 

[HTacianas]

A lot of people have been baptized but don't have saving faith, because of false doctrines. Eg. church-goers who have prayed the sinner's prayer and have been baptized and go to church once a week, but never surrendered their lives to Jesus, or those who have been baptized as infants but then grew up without faith or as "Christians" who never surrendered their lives to God. A person can be baptized in water without having received the Holy Spirit, and many have been.

None of that negates the necessity for baptism.

 

[Neostarwcc]

Your answer begs the question, "why would someone who doesn't believe bother with baptism"?

It says "he who believes and is baptized shall be saved". Baptism is a requirement.

The eunuch said to Phillip, "here is water...", and Philip baptized him. Philip didn't say he need not bother with it.

People bother becoming baptized not to become saved but because they are saved. Baptism is a part of faith but all Mark 16:16 is saying is that those who have faith and are baptized will be saved. If baptism were a requirement for salvation Mark would have made it clear in the second part of the verseby saying " those who do not believe or who are not baptized will be condemned" but no all it says is those who do not believe. Mark is just saying that those who ARE baptized and have faith will be saved too.

 

[Emli]

None of that negates the necessity for baptism.

No, but it does mean that baptism in itself doesn't save, which some people believe. It is irresponsible to put too much emphasis on baptism, though we should all be baptized, but only if we believe and truly give our lives to Christ. Because if we are baptized as if it were a work, a ritual, that won't save us. But if we get baptized because we agree to die to self and receive new life in Christ and then live in the new nature and in the Spirit, then baptism is an act of faith and obedience to Christ. Then we will be saved, because that is the grace through faith that saves us.

 

[Neostarwcc]

The first part of St. Mark 16:16 (which your post is determined to avoid) links baptism to salvation. So do St. John 3:5, Acts 2:38-39, Acts 22:16 and other stress the need for baptism.

My point in mentioning it is that "works" is hardly ever defined in these discussions. But if "works" is defined as any type of action that isn't merely believing in Christ, baptism is a work and Sacred Scripture clearly expresses the necessity of baptism (among other things).

HTacianas is on the right track here.

How does John 3:5 teach baptism as required for salvation? Jesus was talking about our physical and spiritual births not baptism. You also ignored half of my points too. But notice I didn't ignore the first part? The first part says those who are baptized and have faith will be saved but nowhere in Mark was mark teaching that baptism was a requirement for salvation. Nor does it in Acts. Anyway... Were getting off topic.

 

[HTacianas]

People bother becoming baptized not to become saved but because they are saved. Baptism is a part of faith but all Mark 16:16 is saying is that those who have faith and are baptized will be saved. If baptism were a requirement for salvation Mark would have made it clear in the second part of the verseby saying " those who do not believe or who are not baptized will be condemned" but no all it says is those who do not believe. Mark is just saying that those who ARE baptized and have faith will be saved too.

The "biblical" view of salvation is belief, baptism, then chrismation, in that order for the most part.

There is nothing in scripture or any Christian tradition that baptism is not necessary.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Lately I've been wondering if we are being premature in calling ourselves 'saved' since we are still alive. Aren't we supposed to 'finish the race' and not 'turn aside after satan.' I'm learning recently that not everyone accepts the 'once saved always saved' perspective.

The Bible gives different tenses to saved. In one place the tense is past tense, speaking of the moment of initial justification. In other places it's a present or continuing sense speaking of the on going process of our sanctification, and other it's future tense speaking of our glorification upon our death and ultimate salvation..

So it depends on what your talking about what tense you use, whether past present or future...

 

[dqhall]

No, but it does mean that baptism in itself doesn't save, which some people believe. It is irresponsible to put too much emphasis on baptism, though we should all be baptized, but only if we believe and truly give our lives to Christ. Because if we are baptized as if it were a work, a ritual, that won't save us. But if we get baptized because we agree to die to self and receive new life in Christ and then live in the new nature and in the Spirit, then baptism is an act of faith and obedience to Christ. Then we will be saved, because that is the grace through faith that saves us.

There are types of work that are good and types of work that are bad. Work alone is not enough, yet work is a necessity.

2 Thessalonians 3:10 (WEB) For even when we were with you, we commanded you this: “If anyone will not work, don’t let him eat.”

 

[Emli]

There are types of work that are good and types of work that are bad. Work alone is not enough, yet work is a necessity.

2 Thessalonians 3:10 (WEB) For even when we were with you, we commanded you this: “If anyone will not work, don’t let him eat.”

I agree that some works are in a sense a necessity. But that verse isn't talking about doing works for God, or works of the Law. Read the whole chapter. Paul was talking about having a job, working for money and for food, and not being idle and relying on other people. Also see 1 Timothy 5:8 and Ephesians 4:28

 

[zoidar]

Okay so this has always confused me. Maybe someone here can answer my question satisfactorily. In Romans 4:5 and Ephesians 2:8-9 Paul says that wee are saved by faith and not by works. Paul even takes it a step further in Romans 4:5 and says that a person who doesn't work AT ALL. That their faith will be counted for righteousness.

Yet in Matthew 25:31-46 Jesus sends people who do works into heaven and people who don't do works to hell. But wait a minute! Didn't Paul just say that a man who has no works will still go to heaven? Also in James 2:14-26 James says that faith without works is a dead faith. Why the contradiction in the Bible? Wasn't Paul aware that if we had no works that we wouldn't go to heaven? I'm not calling Paul a heretic but I'm calling him wrong. Because what he said doesn't match up with what Jesus says in Matthew 25:31-46! Or... Does it???

This is my understanding on this.

In Rom 2 Paul says:

17 But if you bear the name “Jew” and rely upon the Law ...

The Jews were relying on the letter of the Law, the whole Mosaic Law for salvation.

"13 for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified. 14 For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves"

The gentiles who are born again instinctively do the things of the law, not the whole Mosaic Law, but the heart of the Law, the things Jesus taught us.

"5 But because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, 6 who WILL RENDER TO EACH PERSON ACCORDING TO HIS DEEDS"

If we are born again we are to live according to the heart of the Law, love God above anything else and our neighbour as ourselves, not only in words, but also in deeds.

"25 For indeed circumcision is of value if you practice the Law; but if you are a transgressor of the Law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision. 26 So if the uncircumcised man keeps the requirements of the Law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? 27 And he who is physically uncircumcised, if he keeps the Law, will he not judge you who though having the letter of the Law and circumcision are a transgressor of the Law?"

The one keeping the heart of the Law will judge the one having the whole Mosaic Law and not keeping it.

So when Paul in Rom 4 says: "He who doesn't work at all", I believe he is refering to: "He who doesn't work at all according to the letter of the Law, the Mosaic Law." Instead Paul says we are made righteous by faith, and that faith leads us to keep the heart of the Law.

9 Is this blessing then on the circumcised, or on the uncircumcised also? For we say, “FAITH WAS CREDITED TO ABRAHAM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS.” 10 How then was it credited? While he was circumcised, or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised;

You see Rom 4 is about that you don't have to be circumcised and have the Mosaic Law to be saved. Faith is enough, and for faith to be genuine we are to keep the heart of the Law.

 

[Monna]

We are not saved BY works. We are saved FOR good works. You are created by God for good works. The specific good works that you are to do have also been prepared by God for you. You are not saved by doing them. You are saved by grace alone, with a faith that you receive from God through His "drawing" power, ("no one comes to the Father, unless He draws him") and He did it for a purpose. Remember Jesus said "Without me you can do NOTHING. But with God ALL THINGS are possible." Also there is a principle in salvation that you will never be able to boast that it is in any way due to your doing. God has always taken the initiative. All you ever had you got ultimately from him - so what have you got to give him that is entirely, originally and only your's? In terms of those good works that are there waiting for you, you can refuse - and then it's "your fault," or you can do them in partnership with Him, to HIS glory (not yours), and He will (by grace) let you share in His glory when the appropriate time comes.

Ephesians 2:10
Christian Standard Bible
For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared ahead of time for us to do.

Complete Jewish Bible
For we are of God’s making, created in union with the Messiah Yeshua for a life of good actions already prepared by God for us to do.

 

[Newtheran]

Okay so this has always confused me. Maybe someone here can answer my question satisfactorily. In Romans 4:5 and Ephesians 2:8-9 Paul says that wee are saved by faith and not by works. Paul even takes it a step further in Romans 4:5 and says that a person who doesn't work AT ALL. That their faith will be counted for righteousness.

Yet in Matthew 25:31-46 Jesus sends people who do works into heaven and people who don't do works to hell. But wait a minute! Didn't Paul just say that a man who has no works will still go to heaven? Also in James 2:14-26 James says that faith without works is a dead faith. Why the contradiction in the Bible? Wasn't Paul aware that if we had no works that we wouldn't go to heaven? I'm not calling Paul a heretic but I'm calling him wrong. Because what he said doesn't match up with what Jesus says in Matthew 25:31-46! Or... Does it???

Simple. In Romans 4:5, Paul is talking about those who believe with faith unto salvation (as opposed to doing works to try and earn salvation as is done in all religions not named Christianity). In James, the author is explaining to us how we can identify genuine faith - one that produces works. Our works authenticate our faith and work for our sanctification in Christian discipline, but they don't save us. But simply praying a prayer on a transactional basis without repenting and returning to the life you previously led without ever being about our Father's business is not saving faith either.

Salvation is by grace alone, through faith alone, evidenced by works alone.

Make sense?

 

[PaulCyp1]

Paul was speaking to those hypocrites who spent their time in the synagogue praying as fast as they could in order to cram as many prayers into an hour as they could. Or wearing sack cloth and ashes, and ringing a bell as they walked through the town, so everyone would notice them. These are the kinds of works Paul condemned. He wasn't speaking of the works of Christian charity that Jesus was speaking of when He said "It is not those who say 'Lord, Lord' who will be saved, but those who DO the will of my Father". His will includes works of Christian charity, caring for others, especially those who are less well off materially than we are.

 

[URA]

That Paul said we are not saved "by works" is one of the greatest misconceptions in Christian history.

If we read Paul in context, he does not say we are not saved "by works", he says we are not saved by the works "of the law". He clarifies to the Colossians what those works "of the law" are:

Col 2:20 - Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,
Col 2:21 - (Touch not; taste not; handle not;
Col 2:22 - Which all are to perish with the using after the commandments and doctrines of men?

It is not the "works" of Christianity that Paul opposes, such as acts of charity, which certainly are required, but the ritual works "of the law" that were required under the old covenant, such as the dietary laws and laws of ritual purity.

This is an excellent post, and makes my job easier, because I don't have to say as much if I quote this one!

As James says, faith without works is dead. While Jesus & Paul both say we only need faith, they both specify that works are necessary to keep that faith alive. Do you see where this is going?

Think of it this way, with faith as a free gift: For Christmas this year, I'm getting you a magazine subscription. It's free; I already paid for it. However, to keep getting the magazine, I'll keep paying for it, but you need to fill out the re-subscription card every year. It's still a free gift, but you still need to put in works (re-subscribing), or it will die.

Even if you're believing, baptized, & "saved", you still need to put in the effort to maintain that faith, the pre-paid free gift. Why else would there be verses like Galatians 5:4, "You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace.", and the warning in Hebrews 12:15, "Be careful that no one falls short of the grace of God, so that no root of bitterness will spring up to cause trouble and defile many."?

I think this paragraph from the Catechism of the Catholic Church puts it very well, in terms simpler than what I came up with. It really captures the essence of W + w = S, that is, God's will + our will = Sainthood, our Christian duty of uniting ourselves with God, of a loving God that offers, requests cooperation, but does not force:

2025 We can have merit in God's sight only because of God's free plan to associate man with the work of his grace. Merit is to be ascribed in the first place to the grace of God, and secondly to man's collaboration. Man's merit is due to God.

(More on grace & justification: Catechism of the Catholic Church - Grace and justification)

 

[HTacianas]

This is an excellent post, and makes my job easier, because I don't have to say as much if I quote this one!

As James says, faith without works is dead. While Jesus & Paul both say we only need faith, they both specify that works are necessary to keep that faith alive. Do you see where this is going?

Think of it this way, with faith as a free gift: For Christmas this year, I'm getting you a magazine subscription. It's free; I already paid for it. However, to keep getting the magazine, I'll keep paying for it, but you need to fill out the re-subscription card every year. It's still a free gift, but you still need to put in works (re-subscribing), or it will die.

Even if you're believing, baptized, & "saved", you still need to put in the effort to maintain that faith, the pre-paid free gift. Why else would there be verses like Galatians 5:4, "You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace.", and the warning in Hebrews 12:15, "Be careful that no one falls short of the grace of God, so that no root of bitterness will spring up to cause trouble and defile many."?

I think this paragraph from the Catechism of the Catholic Church puts it very well, in terms simpler than what I came up with. It really captures the essence of W + w = S, that is, God's will + our will = Sainthood, our Christian duty of uniting ourselves with God, of a loving God that offers, requests cooperation, but does not force:

2025 We can have merit in God's sight only because of God's free plan to associate man with the work of his grace. Merit is to be ascribed in the first place to the grace of God, and secondly to man's collaboration. Man's merit is due to God.

(More on grace & justification: Catechism of the Catholic Church - Grace and justification)

From the Confession of Dositheus:

For thus Scripture would be opposed to itself, since it promises the believer salvation through works, yet supposes God to be its sole author, by His sole illuminating grace, which He bestows without preceding works, to show to man the truth of divine things, and to teach him how he may co-operate with it, if he will, and do what is good and acceptable, and so obtain salvation. He takes not away the power to will — to will to obey, or not obey him.

 

[aiki]

Okay so this has always confused me. Maybe someone here can answer my question satisfactorily. In Romans 4:5 and Ephesians 2:8-9 Paul says that wee are saved by faith and not by works. Paul even takes it a step further in Romans 4:5 and says that a person who doesn't work AT ALL. That their faith will be counted for righteousness.

Yet in Matthew 25:31-46 Jesus sends people who do works into heaven and people who don't do works to hell. But wait a minute! Didn't Paul just say that a man who has no works will still go to heaven? Also in James 2:14-26 James says that faith without works is a dead faith. Why the contradiction in the Bible? Wasn't Paul aware that if we had no works that we wouldn't go to heaven? I'm not calling Paul a heretic but I'm calling him wrong. Because what he said doesn't match up with what Jesus says in Matthew 25:31-46! Or... Does it???

An apparent contradiction isn't necessarily a real one. A real contradiction is when someone says that "a" can be both "a" and "non-a" at the same time and in the same way. For example, if I were to say an entirely black ball is also an entirely white ball, I would be guilty of a real contradiction. The ball can't be both entirely black and entirely white at the same time. If, though, I said that the black ball bounced over a cat and my friend Bob said it bounced over a dog, we would only be in apparent, not real, contradiction to one another. The ball could have bounced over both animals at different times or in immediate succession. It isn't a contradiction that I've only remarked on the ball bouncing over the cat and not the dog. If I were to say, though, that the ball only bounced over a cat, then Bob and I would be contradicting one another. Is this the case with the matter of works in Scripture? Does Christ really contradict Paul or vice versa, or is the contradiction you point to only an apparent one? I think the latter is the case. They seem on the surface to be in contradiction, but, really, they are merely emphasizing different aspects of the matter of works and salvation.

I would also point out that we have the words of Christ delivered to us second-hand. We trust that Luke, Matthew, Mark and John were inspired by God to write what they did and wrote accurately their respective Gospels. We trust the same is true concerning Paul's epistles. It is not, then, that Paul's writings are to be compared to Christ's writings but to the writings of other apostles. When someone seeks to pit Paul's words against those of Christ what they are really doing is pitting the truthfulness of apostles against each other. Is there any good reason to think that the apostles to whom the Gospels are attributed wrote with greater honesty and authority than the apostle Paul? The Early Church didn't generally think so. They commonly held Paul's letters equal to the writings of John, Mark, Matthew and Luke. On what good grounds, then, can a Christian today reject their doing so?

Anyway, Paul does not deny that there is a direct relationship between a saving faith in Christ and corresponding works. He does, though, make it clear that works are the inevitable fruit of salvation, not the means of it. Christ said, "By their fruit you shall know them," and Paul said, "The fruit of good works comes only from a tree already rooted in Christ." There is nothing actually contradictory in these statements, however. It is not a contradiction to say an apple tree bears apples and to say also that an apple tree bears apples because it is an apple tree (as opposed to bearing apples in order to be an apple tree). These are different statements about the apple tree but they are not, therefore, opposing statements about it.

Christ's teaching in Matthew 25:31-46 is not so much about how one is saved but about the connection between loving people and loving God. Christ made this point more clearly, I think, in his story about those who are expecting entrance into God's kingdom on Judgment Day but are excluded as those whom Christ never knew. (Matthew 7:21-23) These same people did many good works in Christ's name: exorcism, prophesying, miracles. They are surprised, it seems, to discover that despite their labours in Christ's name, Christ says he never knew them. Why? Why would this be Christ's response to what they've done? Was casting out demons from people a bad thing? No. Was prophesying in Christ's name an evil act? No. Was performing miracles in Christ's name a wrong thing to do? No. So, then, why does Christ say he never knew these people? Don't works save you? If they do, these people should have been saved! The problem isn't that they hadn't done good works but that they had not obeyed the First and Great Commandment (Matthew 22:36-38) which is to love God with all of one's being. Jesus even says that these people had not done the will of the Father in heaven. That is, they had not obeyed the one commandment out of which all other obedience to God's commands is to flow. We know this because the rejected people never once pointed to their love of God, to their obedience to the First and Great Commandment, even though they were trying to justify themselves to Christ on the basis of their good works. It is, I think, this very same point Christ is making in his comments in Matthew 25:31-46. When one is careful to obey the First and Great Commandment, obeying the second great commandment (love your neighbor as yourself) happens naturally and necessarily. Christ, then, is not a teaching on how good works saves a person but on how essential love is to our good works. Such a teaching does not contradict Paul's teaching at all.

The same thing is true of James' words concerning faith and works. He recognizes that saving faith and corresponding works are two sides of the same coin but he does not say that they are the very same side of the coin. There is, of course, no such thing as a one-sided coin. While it is necessary that a coin have two sides, those sides are not identical. Why is this important? Because it permits us to make distinctions concerning the roles and order of saving faith and good works. We can synthesize James' words with Paul's rather than pit them against each other when we acknowledge that faith and works are not identical, though they are closely and inextricably connected. Where James asserts that faith and works are closely and inevitably related, Paul clarifies for us that saving faith gives rise to works. These aren't contradictory statements. James emphasizes relationship in the matter of faith and works and Paul emphasizes the order of that relationship.

 

[concretecamper]

Council of Trent summarizes it well.

If anyone says that man can be justified before God by his own works, whether done by his own natural powers or through the teaching of the law,[110] without divine grace through Jesus Christ, let him be anathema.

If anyone says that divine grace through Christ Jesus is given for this only, that man may be able more easily to live justly and to merit eternal life, as if by free will without grace he is able to do both, though with hardship and difficulty, let him be anathema.

If anyone says that without the predisposing inspiration of the Holy Ghost[111] and without His help, man can believe, hope, love or be repentant as he ought,[112] so that the grace of justification may be bestowed upon him, let him be anathema.

If anyone says that man’s free will moved and aroused by God, by assenting to God’s call and action, in no way cooperates toward disposing and preparing itself to obtain the grace of justification, that it cannot refuse its assent if it wishes, but that, as something inanimate, it does nothing whatever and is merely passive, let him be anathema.

 

[GingerBeer]

Okay so this has always confused me. Maybe someone here can answer my question satisfactorily. In Romans 4:5 and Ephesians 2:8-9 Paul says that wee are saved by faith and not by works. Paul even takes it a step further in Romans 4:5 and says that a person who doesn't work AT ALL. That their faith will be counted for righteousness.

Try reading "faith" as faithfulness and the problem dissolves. We are saved by faithfulness and not by works of the law. Even a person who does no works of the law is saved by faithfulness. It isn't confusing when read that way. And it is evident that Paul intends his readers to be faithful to Jesus Christ's calling in their lives. He intends them to do good, to obey the commandments that Christ gave to his people. Faithfulness doesn't create a list of do and do not activities needed to obtain salvation. Salvation is not about performing a set of requirements. Salvation is about being in union with Jesus Christ and that means loving him and loving your neighbour and doing good in obedience to Christ's commandments.

Yet in Matthew 25:31-46 Jesus sends people who do works into heaven and people who don't do works to hell. But wait a minute! Didn't Paul just say that a man who has no works will still go to heaven? Also in James 2:14-26 James says that faith without works is a dead faith. Why the contradiction in the Bible? Wasn't Paul aware that if we had no works that we wouldn't go to heaven? I'm not calling Paul a heretic but I'm calling him wrong. Because what he said doesn't match up with what Jesus says in Matthew 25:31-46! Or... Does it???